Gender, Science and Innovation: New Perspectives 2019951880, 9781786438973, 9781786438966

Citation preview

Gender, Science and Innovation New Perspectives

Edited by

Helen Lawton Smith Birkbeck, University of London, UK

Colette Henry Head, Department of Business Studies, Dundalk Institute of Technology, Republic of Ireland and Adjunct Professor of Entrepreneurship, UiT – The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway

Henry Etzkowitz President, Triple Helix Association

Alexandra Poulovassilis Department of Computer Science and Information Systems, Birkbeck, University of London, UK

Cheltenham, UK • Northampton, MA, USA

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 3

13/12/2019 15:47

© Helen Lawton Smith, Colette Henry, Henry Etzkowitz and Alexandra Poulovassilis 2020 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical or photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission of the publisher. Published by Edward Elgar Publishing Limited The Lypiatts 15 Lansdown Road Cheltenham Glos GL50 2JA UK Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc. William Pratt House 9 Dewey Court Northampton Massachusetts 01060 USA

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Control Number: 2019951880 This book is available electronically in the Business subject collection DOI 10.4337/9781786438973

ISBN 978 1 78643 896 6 (cased) ISBN 978 1 78643 897 3 (eBook)

02

Typeset by Servis Filmsetting Ltd, Stockport, Cheshire

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 4

13/12/2019 15:47

Contents ix xvii xx

List of contributors Foreword by Sally Hardy Acknowledgements   1 Introduction: pipeline break Henry Etzkowitz, Helen Lawton Smith, Colette Henry and Alexandra Poulovassilis

1

PART I  GENDER CULTURES AND INSTITUTIONS   2 Being an early career academic: is there space for gender equality in the neoliberal university? Viviana Meschitti

16

  3 Becoming a professor requires saying ‘No’: merging equality and quality agendas in a Norwegian gender balance project Rebecca Lund

35

  4 The National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE programme: issues for senior compared to junior academic women scientists Sue Rosser

58

  5 Using the embedded case study approach to analyse the leaky pipeline phenomenon in academic careers Silvia Cervia

82

  6 Feminization of the medical profession Rita Biancheri

106

  7 Resistance to women in academic medicine Laurel D. Edmunds

128

PART II  NETWORKING, MENTORING AND SUPPORT   8 Networking, gender and academia: an ecosystems approach Colette Henry, Helen Lawton Smith, Viviana Meschitti, Lene Foss and Pauric McGowan

146

­v

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 5

13/12/2019 15:47

vi

Gender, science and innovation

  9 Academic support for female entrepreneurs: the positive lasting effects of learning networks Aisling O’Neill and Bill O’Gorman

168

10 Gender perspective in mentoring relationships: a case study of GENOVATE@UNINA Ilenia Picardi and Maria Carmela Agodi

189

11 Gender and international collaborations in science and technology community building and policy agenda setting: an integrated analytical approach Connie L. McNeely and Katie Seely-Gant

215

PART III ENTREPRENEURSHIP, INNOVATION, COMMERCIALIZATION 12 Gender differences in the commercialisation of research: a study in UK universities Helen Lawton Smith, Viviana Meschitti, Jeanne Le Roux, Mark Panton, Ning Baines, Alexandra Poulovassilis and Colette Henry 13 Unfolding the factors affecting female scientists’ intentions in ­spin-off creation: a Central European case study Sándor Huszár, Szabolcs Prónay and Norbert Buzás

242

261

14 Gender diversity in R&D teams and its impact on firm openness282 Lisa Messina, Gary Chapman and Nola Hewitt-Dundas 15 The entrepreneurial intention in female university students: an Italian case Alessandra Micozzi and Francesca Micozzi 16 Gender, race and entrepreneurship in the United States Cheryl B. Leggon 17 Trends and determinants of women in patenting in the United States Sharmistha Bagchi-Sen and Peter Rogerson 18 AUTM Women Inventors Committee: working to close the gender gap in university patenting Kathleen Sohar, Forough Ghahramani, Jennifer Gottwald, Linda Kawano and Jennifer Shockro

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 6

305 328

348

361

13/12/2019 15:47



Contents ­vii

19 Gender equity and equality: resistance and advance in academic science and innovation Henry Etzkowitz, Carol Kemelgor and Leila Maria Kehl

380

Index

405

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 7

13/12/2019 15:47

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 8

13/12/2019 15:47

Contributors Maria Carmela Agodi is Professor of Sociology at the University of Naples Federico II (UNINA), Italy. She was Chair of the Research Network on Women’s and Gender Studies (2011‒2017) within the European Sociological Association (ESA) and a member of the ESA Executive Committee. Since 2012 she has been co-editor of the ESA book series (Routledge). In the ESA she is currently Chair of the Council of National Associations. Between 2015 and 2017 she worked on the EU FP7 GENOVATE Project (Transforming Organizational Culture for Gender Equality in Research and Innovation) at UNINA, where she is currently in charge of the Evaluation studies area of the Gender Observatory on University and Research. Sharmistha Bagchi-Sen is Professor in the Department of Geography at the State University of New York at Buffalo (SUNY-Buffalo), USA. Her research career has focused on urban and economic geography topics. She served as the Editor-in-Chief of the Professional Geographer (2005‒2010). She is an Associate Editor of the  Journal of Applied Geography.  Since 2001 her research has been supported by several grants from the National Science Foundation of the United States.  She served as a Director of SUNY-Buffalo’s Gender Institute and was a Fellow of the American Council on Education (2006‒2007) at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). Ning Baines is a Lecturer in Marketing, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK. Her research interests lie in the field of new product and service development and innovation, specifically in university spin-off and startup contexts. She  has been involved in many research activities, such as projects funded by the European Commission, the British Academy, the Leverhulme Trust and the Oxfordshire Economic Observatory. Rita Biancheri is Associate Professor in the Sociology of Cultural and Communicative Processes at the Department of Political Science of the University of Pisa, Italy. Her primary research interests lie in university education and family and occupational dynamics from a gender perspective. She has published a number of monographs and articles on these subjects. In recent years, her studies have focused on the health sector and ­ix

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 9

13/12/2019 15:47

x

Gender, science and innovation

she has coordinated multidisciplinary research groups on safety in the workplace. She was the lead scientist at the University of Pisa, Italy, in the European TRIGGER Project. Norbert Buzás is the Head of the Department of Health Economics at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Szeged, Hungary. He also serves as Head of the Knowledge Management Research Center of the university. He worked as the intellectual property director of a biotech company for six years and director of professional operations at the largest private Hungarian business acceleration company. He was the Funding Director of the Directorate of Innovation Management and Technology Transfer at the University of Szeged. His research interests lie in the field of technology innovation, with a focus on responsible innovation, science-tobusiness marketing, co-creation and behavioural economics in healthcare. Silvia Cervia is Assistant Professor in the Sociology of Cultural and Communicative Processes at the Department of Political Science of the University of Pisa, Italy. She was a member of the Core Team of the European TRIGGER Project. Her research focuses on gender issues, female participation in science and governance and on the exclusion dynamics in education processes. The results of her research have been published in national and international journals and in a number of collaborative publications. Gary Chapman is a Senior Lecturer at the Leicester Castle Business School, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK. His research focuses around the concept of behavioural additionality and innovation policy, and has appeared in journals such as Research Policy and Technovation. Laurel D. Edmunds is Senior Research Fellow in the Radcliffe Department of Medicine, Medical Sciences Division at the University of Oxford, UK. She has spent more than 20 years working in a variety of research environments: medical, academia, consultancy and new product design. Much of her research has focused on obesity, particularly in children, including systematic reviews and qualitative research. More recently she has focused on gender equality, especially in academic medicine, and the expansion of biotechnology and translational medicine. Henry Etzkowitz is President of the International Triple Helix Institute in Silicon Valley, USA; quondam Lecturer at Stanford University, USA; and Visiting Professor, Birkbeck, University of London, UK. He is a co-author of Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science (Cambridge University Press, 2000). A forthcoming book is Gender Dynamics of Science and Technology (also with Cambridge University Press).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 10

13/12/2019 15:47



Contributors ­xi

Lene Foss is Professor of Entrepreneurship and Innovation and Programme Director of Master of Science in Business Creation and Entrepreneurship at UiT ‒ The Arctic University of Norway. Her research concentrates on gender in entrepreneurship and innovation, academic entrepreneurship, and responsible research and innovation. Foss is Editorial Consultant for the  International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship. She currently serves on the  international research board of the journal Small Business Management. Foss holds board membership at the Institute for Small Business and Entrepreneurship (UK) and the University Industry Innovation Network (Netherlands). Forough Ghahramani is a transformative leader in higher education, a technologist and an entrepreneur.  She is Associate Director of Rutgers Discovery Informatics Institute (RDI2) at Rutgers, State University of New Jersey, USA. Jennifer Gottwald is a Senior Licensing Manager at the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF), USA, where she has worked since 2002. WARF manages the patenting and licensing of the University of Wisconsin –Madison (UW). She is responsible for the licensing of a portfolio of life science research tool and biotechnology intellectual properties, including green technologies. She is a founder of the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) Women Inventors Committee. Colette Henry  is Head of the Department of Business Studies  and Director of the EMeRGe Research Group  at Dundalk Institute of Technology, Republic of Ireland. She is also  Adjunct Professor of Entrepreneurship at UiT ‒ The Arctic University of Norway. Professor Henry has published widely on entrepreneurship education, programme evaluation and gender. She is a fellow of the Higher Education Academy, the Institute for Small Business and Entrepreneurship (ISBE)  and  the Academy of Social Sciences, all in the UK. She holds the Sten K. Johnson European Entrepreneurship Education Award, and the Diana International Trailblazer award for her research on entrepreneurship and gender. Nola Hewitt-Dundas is Head of Queen’s Management School and Professor of Innovation Management and Policy at Queen’s University Belfast, UK. Her research focuses on the dynamics of entrepreneurial and innovation ecosystems, technology transfer and evaluation of intervention to support university commercialization efforts. She has extensive consultancy experience with organizations including NESTA, the European Union and the World Bank.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 11

13/12/2019 15:47

xii

Gender, science and innovation

Sándor Huszár is an Assistant Lecturer at the Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, and at the Knowledge Management Research Center, University of Szeged, Hungary; and former marketing manager of the Directorate for Research, Development and Innovation (technology transfer office) at the University of Szeged. His research interest focuses on commercialization channels of research and development activities, and on researchers’ motivation and expectations in connection with the technology transfer process. Linda Kawano has worked with early stage innovations in academic and commercial contexts for more than three decades. As Principal of GroupOptima, USA, she advises clients on asset management and conducts communication workshops for scientists. Her work with the Association of University Technology Managers dates back to 1990. Leila Maria Kehl is a voluntary researcher working at Plug & Play as an International and Government Relations Associate. She establishes partnerships with governments worldwide and engages with start-ups to help them accelerate their business. After completing her innovation management and entrepreneurship master’s programme at Birkbeck, University of London, UK, she moved to California in the USA where she contributed to various research projects led by the Triple  Helix Institute. Carol Kemelgor, LCSW, is a psychotherapist and psychoanalyst in private practice in New York.  Her research on women in science and interpersonal relationships in academic research labs has been illuminated by contemporary psychoanalytic theory.  She has conducted over 350 in-depth interviews with women in science in academia and is a co-author (with H. Etzkowitz and B. Uzzi) of Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science (Cambridge University Press, 2000). In addition she has written numerous journal articles about this subject. Helen Lawton Smith is Professor of Entrepreneurship, Birkbeck, University of London, UK. She was the UK Principal Investigator on the UU TRIGGER project (2014–2017). Her research includes entrepreneurship and innovation with a special focus on universities and regional economic development. She was the first Chair of the Regional Studies Association Equalities and Diversities Committee in the UK. Cheryl B. Leggon is an Associate Professor in the School of Public Policy at the Georgia Institute of Technology, USA. Her research underscores the criticality of disaggregating data by race/ethnicity and gender to develop policy, programmes and practices that enhance the quality of  science

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 12

13/12/2019 15:47



Contributors ­xiii

and engineering work forces. She was elected a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), and of Sigma Xi. Jeanne Le Roux is an internationally experienced entrepreneur, associate lecturer, mentor and executive coach. Her specialities are people management, entrepreneurship and people innovation. She is a member of the TRIGGER team. She has also been a member of the Steering Committee of the Tech Talent Charter which outlines a series of key measures which aim to encourage organizations to think differently to encourage and support a more diverse tech workforce. Professionally she helps start-ups get their people management right. Rebecca Lund is an Academy of Finland Postdoctoral Researcher at the Institute of Gender Studies, Faculty  of Social Science, Tampere University, Finland. Her research interests are within the fields of institutional ethnography, gender and intersectionality in academia, epistemic disobedience, epistemic injustice in academic knowledge production, the sociology of neoliberalism, and feminist love studies. She is also the Chief Editor of NORA: Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Studies. Pauric  McGowan  is Professor of Entrepreneurship and Business Development at the Ulster University Business School, UK. He has published more than 60 research publications and research case studies. He is a member of the Ulster University Business School’s Research Institute and a Distinguished Business Fellow of the Ulster University in recognition of his work at the interface between the business practitioner community and the university. He is a Fellow of the Marketing Institute of Ireland; and Fellow of the Higher Education Association and a Fellow of the Institute for Small Business and Entrepreneurship (ISBE) in the UK. Connie L. McNeely is a sociologist and Professor of Public Policy at George Mason University, USA, where she also is a Director of the Center for Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy, and Senior Research Fellow in the Center for Education Policy and Evaluation. Her research interests include science and technology policy, cultural analysis, globalization and international development, complex organizations and institutional analysis, comparative education, stratification and inequality, and social theory. Viviana Meschitti is a Senior Lecturer in Management at the University of Huddersfield, UK. She is active in the field of organization studies. She has previously worked at Birkbeck, University of London, UK, on the TRIGGER project, with a focus on investigating gender differences along career pathways. She has longstanding experience in designing and implementing mentoring programmes to support early career researchers and

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 13

13/12/2019 15:47

xiv

Gender, science and innovation

academics. Her work has been published in Studies in Higher Education, Journal of Research in Gender Studies and Scientometrics. Lisa Messina is a Lecturer in Management at Queen’s Management School, Queen’s University Belfast, UK. Her research interests are in the fields of entrepreneurship, international business and innovation. In particular, her research focuses on the born global phenomenon in the context of university spin-out companies,  entrepreneurial orientation, social capital and open innovation. Alessandra Micozzi is an Assistant Professor in Business Administration and Business Organization, ECampus University, Italy. She was formerly a postdoctoral researcher at the Center of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Italy. She is Senior Researcher on the Women Entrepreneurship committee, Chamber of Commerce, Ancona. She is Working Packages (WP) Leader in the European Project CHETCH (China and Europe Taking Care of Healthcare Solutions). Francesca Micozzi is a Research Fellow at the Centre for Innovation and Entrepreneurship at the Università Politecnica delle Marche, Italy. She is a contract lecturer in economics in business in Bachelor degree programmes. Her research interests include entrepreneurship, academic entrepreneurship, entrepreneurship education, high-tech industries and technology transfer. Bill O’Gorman is Director for Research, Centre Enterprise Development and Regional Economy (CEDRE), School of Business, Waterford Institute of Technology, Republic of Ireland. His fields of research are entrepreneurial regions, regional development and entrepreneurship. Prior to joining academia in 1999, he was Managing Director of his own electronics subcontract business, and before that amassed more than 20 years’ industry experience working at senior management and executive levels. He is also a Director of a number of enterprise support agencies, and serves on government fora for the development of enterprise policy and entrepreneurship education. Aisling O’Neill is manager of the ArcLabs Research and Innovation Centre, Waterford Institute of Technology, Republic of Ireland. Aisling has many years of research experience examining ecosystems of research and innovation, incubator best practice, and learning network development. Her research interests include entrepreneurship, female entrepreneurship, innovation, regional development and networks. Aisling was President of the Network Ireland Waterford branch for 2017 and 2018, an organization supporting the personal and professional development of women.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 14

13/12/2019 15:47



Contributors ­xv

Mark Panton worked as a Research Assistant on the TRIGGER project. His doctoral research focused on the use of sport stadiums in urban regeneration projects and he has recently co-authored a graphic book based on his thesis, together with a number of academic articles. He has worked in advertising, as a solicitor and is now a Lecturer at Birkbeck, University of London, UK. He has also been involved with a number of not-forprofit organizations, including as the Secretary of the Dulwich Hamlet Supporters’ Trust, UK. Ilenia Picardi is Assistant Professor in Sociology at the University of Naples Federico II (UNINA), Italy. Between 2013 to 2017, she was the project manager of the GENOVATE Project (FP7) for the UNINA research unit. Her research activity focuses on science and technology studies, mainly on issues related to the social impact of techno-science, environmental sustainability, intersectionality in scientific research and academia. Currently she is in charge of the Gender Studies in Science and Technology area at the Gender Observatory on University and Research at the same university. Alexandra Poulovassilis is Professor of Computer Science at the School of Business, Economics and Informatics (BEI), Birkbeck, University of London, UK; Director of the Birkbeck Knowledge Lab; and Deputy Dean with a research enhancement remit in the School of BEI. Her research is in the design of specialist data and knowledge bases to support learning communities, and the development of search, analysis and visualization tools for such resources, working in collaborative interdisciplinary projects with domain experts from education, the arts, social sciences and sciences. The goal of such research is to effectively support communities in capturing, organizing, discovering and sharing knowledge. Szabolcs Prónay is an Associate Professor at the Institute of Business Studies of the Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, and former marketing manager of the Directorate for Research, Development and Innovation (technology transfer office) at the University of Szeged, Hungary. He works as a marketing consultant for several business and management consulting firms. He is a founding member of the Innovation Club at the university. His research interests includes consumer behaviour, knowledge management and science to business (S2B) marketing. Peter Rogerson is SUNY Distinguished Professor of Geography at the State University of New York at Buffalo (SUNY-Buffalo), USA. His interests are in the areas of population geography, spatial analysis and spatial statistics. He is the author of Statistical Methods  for Geography

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 15

13/12/2019 15:47

xvi

Gender, science and innovation

and a co-author of  Statistical Detection and Surveillance of Geographic Clusters. Sue Rosser is the Special Advisor for Research Development and External Partnerships for the California State University System Office of the Chancellor, USA, after serving from 2009–2016 as Provost at San Francisco State University, USA. From 1999 to 2009 she was the Dean at Georgia Tech, USA and held the endowed Ivan Allen Dean’s Chair of Liberal Arts and Technology. She is the author of 14 books and more than 130 journal articles on theoretical and applied aspects of women, science, health and technology. Katie Seely-Gant is a Policy Fellow and Research Associate at George Mason University, USA, in the Schar School for Policy and Government. She previously served as a research analyst at the Energetics Technology Center, USA. Her research interests include science and technology workforce and career pathways, computational methods, programme evaluation, diversity and inclusion in technical workforces, international and domestic teams, and mentoring. Jennifer Shockro is Assistant Director for Technology Transfer at the California Institute of Technology, USA. She works closely with faculty and researchers to provide advice on start-ups, patenting, licensing and other intellectual property issues. Prior to joining the Caltech Office of Technology Transfer and Corporate Partnerships she worked for ten years as an engineer with lasers, optical and flight systems, and computer design. She is a registered United States patent agent. Kathleen Sohar is the Director for the Collaboratory for Women Innovators at UF Innovate, University of Florida, USA. She was an early employee at two technology start-ups and has extensive experience within incubation and commercialization sectors. She is a past Chair of the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) Women Inventors Committee and a co-founder of the Empowering Women in Technology Startups Program (EWITS).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 16

13/12/2019 15:47

Foreword It is always a privilege to be invited to join a project but so much more so when you feel a strong connection to the area of work and the ethos of others. I feel this strongly in relation to this book coming from the European Union TRIGGER project on gender inequality in academia. The results from this important project are brought together here as a body of work. There is no doubt that it will provide a valuable source of both reference and inspiration for readers interested in or exercised by, the issues surrounding gender in higher education. My direct involvement with the project is peripheral. I was invited to participate in a TRIGGER panel examining the role of learned and professional bodies in relation to gender. Initially I was challenged as to what my contribution could be. The Regional Studies Association has an international and multidisciplinary membership of academics, policy makers and practitioners interested in regional issues. To inform my presentation, my colleagues and I began collecting data on gender from within the Association, and the results were intriguing. In the course of our data examination we learnt that gender-based research is tricky. Even seemingly simple things such as setting benchmarks are fraught with complex decisions. Views on gender and gender balance vary around the world, as they do on the appropriate methodologies to use for its analysis. For our international organisation, this meant some explaining to our constituencies. We quickly understood that snapshots in time can be unhelpful and misleading, and that long-term data are necessary to gain real understanding of trends. Most importantly, we came to see that it is dangerous to react to headline figures. Detailed understanding of how those data come to be is necessary in order to form well-grounded conclusions. A good example of this is where one committee of a society might be under-represented by one gender and another may be over-represented. Surely beating the benchmark for women on a committee is a good thing? But in fact, not necessarily so, because committees vary in status and if the one in question has low status because it works virtually with few networking opportunities, or it uses only skills that members already have such as for grading applications and does not ­xvii

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 17

13/12/2019 15:47

xviii

Gender, science and innovation

offer new learning opportunities, then having a high female membership would not necessarily be celebratory. With colleagues on the board and the committees of the Association, we began a series of discussions about diversity and inclusion. The Association has had a diversity policy for many years and this was updated. We renewed a benchmarking exercise seeking to understand the gender balance in our global academic community. We did this by sampling academic departments in relevant disciplines in many parts of the world. We excluded non-faculty members and took an average, which interestingly we can see took a turn to the masculine following the 2008 financial crisis but has now reversed and sits at 32 per cent female. At the time of writing in summer 2019, female membership is 35 per cent. A vexing question that arose was whether or not the journal publishing process on which science and social science careers in academia depends, was gender biased. The Association, with the full and curious support of its editors, undertook a piece of research that was funded and executed by its publishers, Taylor & Francis (Routledge). In the context of a worrying literature, the findings were reassuring. Evidence was collected for a six-year sample using submission and publication records for the Association’s monthly and blue-chip journal, Regional Studies. We considered gender balance across submissions and published articles. Broadly we found that 33 per cent of articles were submitted by females as opposed to 67 per cent by males, and that the ratio remained the same both for all authors and for corresponding authors. Corresponding authors were slightly more likely to be male than female, and out of the totality of articles submitted, 16 per cent were all female, 46 per cent all male, and 38 per cent had both male and female authors. We found that for accepted articles there was a slightly higher proportion of males compared to the ratio for all submitted articles (67 per cent of all articles were submitted by male corresponding authors, with 30 per cent of these published). Of the articles submitted by female corresponding authors (33 per cent of the total) 23 per cent were published. We can only surmise at the explanation for this. A possible reason, given the unbalanced gender membership by career stage with far more female members in the student and early career categories than more senior membership classes, is that female corresponding authors submitting papers are more likely to be more junior. The geographical spread of membership also suggests that many in this cohort might not have English as their first language. As a proxy for hidden bias on the part of the editorial team we tested for the position of female authored articles both within each issue of the journal and across the annual volume. The most advantageous position

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 18

13/12/2019 15:47



Foreword ­xix

for an article is article 1, issue 1 so that it has two full calendar years to gather downloads and citations. We found that there is no evidence of unconscious bias in the positioning of female authored articles. If anything, they tend to run towards the front of both articles and the volume. This finding was pleasing. Further investigation revealed that usually, in the journal in question, the ordering was set by the Editorial Manager, who worked only from the article title and surname and who usually had no idea of the gender of the author. This finding confounds other results in the literature which have suggested that the way women title their work can affect its treatment by editorial teams. Research on gender and the Regional Studies Association journals is ongoing but it has already become clear that in order to offer evidencebased explanations for the patterns being revealed, we will need to collect more data about our authors, and that will require community consent. It seems that, from reactions to presentations of our work, both males and females are willing to spend a few extra minutes when submitting their articles to share critical data with us. Examples are where they received higher education, what their first language is and what their age is. It is noteworthy that in my study of a recent collection of learned society strategic and development plans across many disciplines, the majority have chosen to explicitly address diversity and equality, with most at least seeking to appoint a board member with this responsibility. The Regional Studies Association has appointed a champion for equality and diversity to help us to benchmark, to set up evaluation and monitoring protocols, and to raise awareness in our daily work. She will be supported by a committee with a budget to meet in person and with the Chief Executive as the Committee Secretary. We have learned from the many studies in this area that in order to make change lasting there needs to be leadership from the top, continual monitoring and evaluation, and support from the administration. It is in this context that the kind of work undertaken by the TRIGGER team is so important. This book addresses, in a no-nonsense, no-hyperbole way, key themes for higher education today. Sally Hardy Chief Executive Regional Studies Association, UK

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 19

13/12/2019 15:47

Acknowledgements The editors are extremely grateful to the chapter authors for their excellent and insightful contributions and to the reviewing team for their helpful and constructive commentaries; without their expertise, this book would not have been possible. Sincere thanks are also due to the entire team of the European Union TRIGGER project on gender inequality in academia, including project partners, internal and external board members, expert panellists, workshop participants, Birkbeck, University of London management and administration staff, and the project team which comprised Viviana Meschetti, Jeanne Le Roux, Andrew Atter, Mark Panton, Emma Curry, John Slater, Tahani AlHarbi and Dina Mansour. We are also grateful to all those external stakeholders who hosted TRIGGER events, or engaged with us in disseminating TRIGGER outputs through their networks; for example, the Institute of Directors and the National Athena Swan Committee, Ireland. All of this activity will help consolidate TRIGGER’s legacy and, hopefully, lead to real and tangible institutional change in terms of gender equality. Thanks are also due to the team at Edward Elgar Publishing for their helpful guidance through the manuscript preparation and publishing process. Finally, we are especially grateful to Henry Etzkowitz for bringing the TRIGGER project to Birkbeck in the first place. It was his and his coauthors’ seminal work on Athena Unbound 1 that inspired us.

1   H. Etzkowitz, C. Kemelgor and B. Uzzi (2000), Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

­xx

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 20

13/12/2019 15:47

1.  Introduction: pipeline break Henry Etzkowitz, Helen Lawton Smith, Colette Henry and Alexandra Poulovassilis We are now at the cusp of attaining the conditions needed for gender equality and equity in academic science. However, traditional academic science cultures are high walls, and those barriers have not yet fully been breached. Women now can enter many previously male-dominated academic fields but are still under-represented in higher positions. The socalled ‘pipeline’ thesis – encourage entry at the lower levels on the premise that with time, the increase will filter up to the higher levels – has led to the founding of numerous programmes and projects to encourage girls and young women to engage with science, technology and mathematics. An ‘assisted pipeline’ has worked up to and including PhD programmes and entry level positions in many academic science fields. However, it has been noted that the pipeline is ‘leaky’, with women being lost in ever greater proportions as they ascend the academic ladder (mixing metaphors). Indeed, their paucity at advanced levels is so great, with little ‒ if any ‒ improvement over the past 30 years, that it has been held that the pipeline is broken (see Etzkowitz et al., Chapter 19 in this volume). As Paula England (2010) has argued more broadly, the gender revolution has ‘stalled’. A simple funnel mechanism, an educational system attached to a pipeline with a ‘capillary action’ flow, propelling upward mobility of individuals expected to rise by virtue of increased input, has failed to produce equity, let alone equality. Instead, it has transmogrified into a mechanical model of an engine that has seized up and stopped running, at least temporarily, and is in stasis. In a ground vehicle, such as an automobile, a stall is inconvenient but not usually fatal unless a following vehicle runs into the stopped one. The academic system has proved resistant and resilient in the face of pressures to change. It bends, accepting gender research programmes, and is resilient, promoting relatively few female scientists, who generally accept the male model of science, thus keeping the existing system intact. Nevertheless, there are men and women scientists who attempt to innovate a female ‘family friendly’ model, balancing work and life with a private sphere, that an increasing number of ­1

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 1

13/12/2019 15:47

2

Gender, science and innovation

men also wish but do not dare to press for (Etzkowitz et al., 2000). Thus, systemic change is only likely to arrive as innovation from above, whether university, executive or legislative. An airplane stall, if not quickly recovered, can result in a fatal crash. Is the gender revolution in science in a temporary recoverable stall, with renewal of progress in sight, or it is in a downward spiral, with few positive outcomes at hand or in prospect? This book demonstrates the state of the art of the condition of women in contemporary academic science in Europe and the United States (US). Increasing competition in European universities following the US model of ‘up and out’ tenure introduces a hyper-competitive model of academic science, with sharp distinctions even among elite universities, into a European academic structure heretofore based on principles of relative equality among academic institutions. Most European universities characteristically had probationary periods of a long-term nature before arriving at a professorship, with moderate workloads that allowed room for a private sphere. This provided an academic structure amenable to women’s participation once admitted, even though exclusionary practices persist in highly conservative academic cultures. Is the glass half full or half empty? What has clearly not worked to create systemic change are programmes such as US Advance that elevate relatively few individual women, while offering ‘consciousness raising’ workshops for males and mentoring for females in the hope of changing a system of asexual reproduction in which like reproduces like, with little tolerance for diversity (Etzkowitz et al., 2000; Rosser, Chapter 4 in this volume). Birkbeck, University of London (where two of the coeditors of this volume work, Lawton Smith and Poulovassilis, and a third, Etzkowitz, served as a visitor, linking the college to the European Union programme that supported the TRIGGER project on gender inequality in academia), is a microcosm of the contradictions of contemporary academic science. Birkbeck provided a welcoming environment in the 1950s for Rosalind Franklin, the empirical discoverer of DNA, who suffered discrimination at her previous academic home (Maddox, 2002). Starting with Desmond Bernal’s leadership, Birkbeck’s Crystallography Department, since renamed the Department of Biological Sciences, has long provided a welcoming environment, recruiting an academic staff with 50 per cent and above female representation (Brown, 2005). Birkbeck’s Department of Computer Science and Information Systems is one of the earliest academic computing departments in the world, tracing its history back to the Computer Laboratory founded in 1946 where pioneering work in computer hardware and programming was undertaken by Andrew and Kathleen Booth in support of Bernal’s Biomolecular Research Laboratory. However, in contrast to Biological Sciences, the proportion

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 2

13/12/2019 15:47



Introduction ­3

of women in its academic staff has stayed persistently low, reflecting the national gender imbalance in the field (see below). Even in disciplines with better gender balance, hard won parity may soon be lost in recruiting each new generation. As academia becomes ever more competitive, mandating early high achievement and a virtually total concentration on work, the male model of science is strongly reinforced even as policy initiatives relatively weakly attempt to induce change (see Meschitti, Chapter 2 in this volume). Perhaps ironically, as life and work spans lengthen, allowing for a more even distribution of work and life tasks over the life course, an outmoded academic structure creates a ‘gender paradox’ reducing the likelihood of women’s rise unless emerging trends are forestalled and turned around.

1.1 GENDER IN SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATION AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP In published scholarship, perceptions of gender have changed dramatically over the years. One of our editorial team – Colette Henry – is the Editor of a gender-focused journal, International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship (IJGE). Since its inception in 2009, IJGE has sought to publish contemporary research that offers the broadest possible conceptualization of gender in the context of entrepreneurship. In Colette Henry’s experience, within the discipline of entrepreneurship, research studies have been gradually shifting from the early and extremely popular ‘gender as variable’ approach, whereby gender was only ever conceptualized as a binary construct, essentially acting as a proxy for biological sex (Cromie, 1987; Zolin et al., 2013). As such, gender was simply added into studies to ‘count’ women’s low levels of participation and highlight their ‘under’-performance in new venture creation activities, usually in comparison to men (De Bruin et al., 2007). Such approaches tended to be descriptive, privileging particular business models and sectors where men predominated, as if there was only one way to ‘do’ entrepreneurship (Ahl, 2006; Marlow, 2002). Little or no attempt was made to explore the reasons behind women’s under-representation in entrepreneurship, to highlight the particular challenges that they faced, or to shed light on the stereotypical views and role models that collectively created embedded gender biases and an uneven playing field. As more female scholars began to conduct research on women’s ­entrepreneurship ‒ and, by extension, on the influence of women’s education on their subsequent career choices ‒ more feminist approaches were adopted to critique the status quo and shape a more informed

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 3

13/12/2019 15:47

4

Gender, science and innovation

­nderstanding of the economic landscape women have to negotiate. u Previously accepted notions of gender began to be criticized, and the traditional accepted male models no longer remained unchallenged. Feminist standpoint theory and post-structural feminist approaches have emerged as more appropriate theoretical lenses for gender scholars to employ. Such approaches also tend to use a broader and more appropriate definition of gender, defining it as ‘social practices and representations associated with femininity or masculinity’ (Ahl, 2007, p. 544). Accordingly, research adopting such approaches can be said to study the ‘gender order’, whereby they analyse both the social and the material implications of gender. These observed shifts in how gender has been conceptualized over the years within entrepreneurship (Henry et al., 2016) have obvious spillover effects into other areas. If one wishes to study gender effectively, then wider lenses are needed so that its true relational, processual and performative aspects can be seen (Ahl, 2007; Henry et al., 2016). Adopting such a wide lens with regard to academia and, more specifically, science disciplines, not only allows for a fuller understanding of the barriers to women’s career progression and the promotional opportunities (or lack of) that exist, but also accommodates a better understanding of the particular context in which they operate. Only with such understanding can we expect to uncover and operationalize opportunities for real change. In this regard, gender-focused publication outlets such as IJGE have a particularly valuable role to play in uncovering and platforming embedded gender biases, sharing experiences, promoting good practice and encouraging those responsible for ensuring gender equality within their universities to take action.

1.2 WOMEN’S EXPERIENCE AS TECHNICAL ENTREPRENEURS AND VENTURE CAPITALISTS With the notable exception of biotechnology, female entrepreneurs are typically restricted to fields that are presumed appropriate, based on traditional gender prescriptions, with women funnelled into socialization and caring (Whittington and Smith-Doerr, 2005). Thus, in software, one of us – Henry Etzkowitz – has studied and invested in female entrepreneured software start-ups, a field in which, until quite recently, women were tacitly restricted to an education and training ghetto. In this fraught environment, against all odds, often inspired by the needs and interests of their young children, a few achieved breakthrough innovations, with scaling potential. Others created incremental niche firms, sometimes acquired by large firms to fill out their portfolios. For example, Salesforce acquired a female entrepreneur’s firm

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 4

13/12/2019 15:47



Introduction ­5

applying gaming techniques to job training. In this respect, in scope but not scale, women’s entrepreneurial experience is not dissimilar to men’s: a few truly disruptive firms with take-off potential, and a much larger proportion of incrementally innovative firms, constitute the universe. Apart from restricted entry into technical entrepreneurship, with the modest exception of training programmes that prepare women to pitch to potential investors, the key point at which the genders diverge is access to venture capital and significant support to scale their firms. For example, consider the experience of a female academic inventor, holding significant patents on the now commonplace graphical user interface, invented to allow her young son ‒ and by extension all preschoolers and non-literate persons without reading skills, and for that matter adults who find it easier to click on visual symbols than type in text strings ‒ to easily interact with computers. Men offered to join the firm as chief executive officer (CEO), but the intrepid female inventor refused to stand down. Intellinet achieved a series of National Science Foundation (NSF) and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) grants but was unable to break into the venture capital arena, despite her acceptance into one of the venture capital (VC) pitch training programmes. Whereas Windows, superseding DOS, was capitalized through Microsoft, ‘Pictures’ diffused into general use, with Intellinet closing and its founder departing the field of artificial intelligence, having ‘burnt out’. The resistance to women’s entry into the venture capital industry, and the concomitant virtual exclusion of female entrepreneurs from funding, came to a head in Silicon Valley a few years ago. Ellen Chao, a former member of a venture capital firm, bravely brought a suit charging discrimination. Although the legal system rejected her specific claim against an individual, the legal process brought to light not only egregious discrimination but also women’s virtual absence (with token exceptions, such as Marissa Mayer, CEO of Yelp) from senior positions in the Silicon Valley ecosystem. As it happened, a noted venture capital firm had made it a condition of employment to have been a start-up entrepreneur. This seemingly appropriate requirement virtually ensured women’s absence from their macho firm environment due to first order exclusion from the start-up scene. Again, there have been token exceptions, such as Heidi Roizen whose firm, having been acquired by Apple, was eventually allowed into the venture capital industry. On the other hand, when the organizational environment is encouraging, or at least gender neutral, women appear on the start-up scene in significant numbers. The founder of Stanford University’s student government StartX Accelerator noted the high rate of female participation as an unexpected, positive effect of the iconic entrepreneurship training initiative in support of proto-firms (Etzkowitz, 2013).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 5

13/12/2019 15:47

6

Gender, science and innovation

Silicon Valley is currently grappling with gender, diversity and other social issues that an algorithmically focused recent generation of firm founders had blindsided themselves from recognizing, let alone addressing. Hiding behind a ‘hands off’ ideology of technological determinism, only positive network effects were expected, with monetization the oft unstated but assumed objective. They ignored the deleterious side-effects of their algorithmic creations and the blithe biases of their actions, until attention was forced upon them. Nevertheless, diversity and gender equity, if not yet equality, is now on the Valley’s agenda, thanks to employee protest, litigation and external criticism.

1.3 GENDER IMBALANCE IN COMPUTER SCIENCE: GLOBAL, NATIONAL AND LOCAL PERSPECTIVES Computer science is a predominantly male discipline (for example, just two of the 26 academic staff and one of the five systems support staff in Birkbeck’s Department of Computer Science and Information Systems, in which one of us – Alex Poulovassilis – works, are women). The proportion of women choosing to study computer science at university in the United Kingdom (UK) and US has declined from the 1980s, when it was more than 35 per cent, to less than 20 per cent now. Several studies attribute this to the male orientation of the home computing and games industries starting in the mid-1980s, which were marketed towards boys and encouraged the perception of computing as a ‘geek’ pursuit and hence a turn-off for girls (Devlin and Hern, 2017). Those women who do enter the profession are often confronted with gender imbalanced work spaces and cultures, giving rise to further reductions in their numbers away from technical career pathways and the so-called ‘leaky pipeline’ (Simard and Gilmartin, 2010). There are a number of implications of this gender imbalance: from an employer and innovation perspective, not utilizing the full range of talent, potential and creativity available in the workforce; from a societal perspective, skewing socio-technical debates, products and services towards particular audiences rather than globally for all, having a knock-on effect of further increasing embedded imbalances; and from an individual’s perspective, a detrimental effect on personal career choices, development and fulfilment. A number of actions are being undertaken in the UK, US and Western Europe (the gender imbalance in computer science is by no means a global phenomenon: elsewhere in the world there is much better participation of

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 6

13/12/2019 15:47



Introduction ­7

women in computer science education and careers). Encouraging more girls to study computing at school – particularly at secondary school, where there may be negative pressures from peers – is of paramount importance. Careful design of early years computing curricula to attract all pupils to the discipline is necessary. Also important is exposure to female role models as early as possible and throughout school; these may be science teachers, alumni or guest lecturers from the tech industry (Cole, 2017). Looking specifically at academia, a recent analysis of researchers’ publication patterns (Elsevier, 2017) identifies 22 per cent of computer science researchers in the European Union (EU), US and UK as being women. This study points to the facts that: (1) women are less likely than men to collaborate internationally on research articles; and (2) women are generally less internationally mobile than men. It notes that if international collaboration occurs less frequently for women, then their international research networks may remain small, and this may negatively affect their career advancement. The same study finds that women publish fewer research papers on average than men, but that there is no evidence that this affects how their papers are cited or downloaded (the same numbers of citations and downloads per paper, on average, as for men). It finds a possible detrimental effect of career breaks on long-term productivity. There are many ongoing national and global initiatives that aim to encourage more women to study computer science and to enter the profession: BCS Women;1 ACM-W;2 yearly celebrations of significant women computer scientists – Ada Lovelace Day,3 Grace Hopper Celebration,4 Karen Sparck Jones lecture;5 initiatives such as CodeFirst:Girls,6 Women Who Code,7 and Computing At School,8 and extensive outreach activities from universities towards schools. Universities that are succeeding in closing the gender gap on their computing courses, such as Carnegie Mellon University in the US, are doing so through a number of means: changing their culture and environment so that women do not feel so out of place and outnumbered; changing their entry criteria so as not to demand prior advanced study of subjects such as computing, maths or physics in which girls are under-represented at school,

 https://bcswomen.bcs.org/.  https://women.acm.org/. 3  https://findingada.com/. 4  https://ghc.anitab.org/. 5  https://www.bcs.org/events-home/karen-spaerck-jones-lecture/. 6  https://www.codefirstgirls.org.uk/. 7  https://www.womenwhocode.com/. 8  https://www.computingatschool.org.uk/. 1 2

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 7

13/12/2019 15:47

8

Gender, science and innovation

and to incorporate instead the prerequisite material within the early years of their degree programmes; mitigating against implicit bias; promoting the visibility of women and their achievements; and providing extensive mentoring and networking opportunities (Frieze and Quesenberry, 2019). At Stanford University (where one of us – Henry Etzkowitz – is based), a gender equity initiative reached deeply into undergraduate course content and teaching style, including practical examples of computer usage in teaching, a practice that gender researchers had demonstrated drew women’s interest into the field. Instructors also called on members of both genders equally in discussion periods. Observation of teaching showed an apparently scripted active performance style, delivered with well-enunciated phrasing, designed to hold listener interest. Virtual parity in undergraduate enrollment was reached, but there has recently been some backsliding and female enrollment decline in the wake of the programme champion’s departure, leaving behind the question of whether Stanford’s achievement in gender equality at the undergraduate level has truly been institutionalized. However, Silicon Valley’s newly acquired direction towards gender equality is a strong pull factor, drawing both women and men into Stanford’s computer science programme, making it by far the university’s largest major subject in response to the Valley’s ever-growing talent needs. At Birkbeck’s Department of Computer Science and Information Systems, female student intake is at around the UK average for undergraduate studies and a little higher than the UK average for postgraduate studies. There are no significant differences between women’s and men’s performance on our courses. To close the gender gap, the department has put in place similar initiatives to those reported in Frieze and Quesenberry (2019), including: ●● ●●

●●

Athena SWAN mentoring activities – the department is a Bronze award holder since May 2018;9 ComputingWomen@BBK initiative, which organizes networking events, peer mentoring and invited talks by distinguished female computer scientists; participation in the new Institute of Coding – comprising more than 100 universities and employers – one aim of which is to widen the participation of under-represented groups in digital skills training in the UK;

9   The Athena SWAN Bronze award is the first positive level of a United Kingdom gender inclusion model developed for academia. Failure to qualify could preclude universities from access to research funds. Higher award levels are Silver and Gold.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 8

13/12/2019 15:47



Introduction ­9 ●●

●● ●●

provision of both undergraduate and postgraduate degrees that do not require prior advanced level study of computing, maths or the physical sciences; none of our undergraduate degrees require the demonstration of prior aptitude for computer programming; at postgraduate level three postgraduate conversion programmes for graduates of other disciplines are offered, two of which do require demonstration of prior aptitude for programming (the MSc in computer science and the MSc in data science) and one of which does not (the MSc in information technology, which also includes some management modules). The proportion of women studying on these programmes is 24 per cent on the MSc CS, 24 per cent on the MSc DS, and 32 per cent on the MSc IT.

From personal experience (Poulovassilis), equitable sharing of parenting, caring, family and household responsibilities is important. For example, a senior UK female computer scientist states, through personal communication, that: ‘We are doing well for senior women computer scientists in my department. However, senior women computer scientists do not have children – there are six in my department and none of them have children.’ Also important is vocalizing concerns about perceived unfair treatment; this can be with peers and managers not only within one’s own department or faculty, but also more broadly. Cross-departmental mentoring programmes help to identify inconsistent institutional practices and to empower people to speak out. It is important for women not to get caught up in an endless spiral of idealized diligence and perfectionism across all areas of one’s activity. It is more realistic to choose which activities to expend one’s main energies on at a given time, protect one’s time to focus on these activities, and be content to be less perfect elsewhere. Having supportive senior colleagues, of either gender, can make a big difference to one’s career development. Finally, it is important to network and meet other women within one’s own organization and beyond, as there are plenty of inspirational women computer scientists locally, nationally and internationally.

1.4 TRANSFORMING INSTITUTIONS BY GENDERING CONTENTS AND GAINING EQUALITY IN RESEARCH This book has arisen from the Transforming Institutions by Gendering Contents and Gaining Equality in Research (TRIGGER) project at Birkbeck. Birkbeck was part of a five-country European ­ consortium

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 9

13/12/2019 15:47

10

Gender, science and innovation

c­hampioning the role of female academics in scientific subjects (2014‒2017).10 TRIGGER’s nine actions were designed to meet three objectives. These were: to identify the nature of and causes underlying gender inequality within Birkbeck, to make recommendations for internal college changes, and to organize a series of interventionist activities. Actions focused on four broad areas. These were: identifying Birkbeck gender cultures, leadership development, networking for career advancement, and commercialization of academic research. They were designed to bring about transformation in college practices, include leading the college Athena SWAN mentoring programme, organizing workshops on leadership and networking events to promote interactive learning experiences. Video interviews (online), conducted with both college leaders including the President and Master and senior academics, have set the tone of the college’s commitment to gender equality. Those with a range of academic and professional staff have provided role models for colleagues at different career stages. The programme was outward looking, learning from experiences so as to foster gender equality elsewhere. These included TRIGGER partner teams in France, Italy, the Czech Republic and Spain; US, Swedish and Irish higher education institutions; and from the corporate sector, professional bodies and public authorities. Networking events always included academics and practitioners, so that knowledge exchange meant more than the co-presence of people from different organizations at these events. The research process included data collection through focus groups, surveys and analysis of statistics. It revealed a clear need and demand for improving gender relations. When TRIGGER started, the Athena SWAN process was in its early stages, the college having been awarded bronze status in 2013. Few resources were available to meet commitments made in the Athena SWAN application, including mentoring. Different departments had different habits and values (valuing collaboration or competition, for example, or promoting junior researchers). Gender stereotyping and gendered expectations are still a reality that greatly impacts upon women’s experiences. On the practical side, very few opportunities for networking existed, with little support for commercializing research. Of strategic significance to the state of gender relations and prospects for culture change was the dominance of men in key senior positions within the college. The TRIGGER project provided both resources and strategic thinking. For example, the TRIGGER team became an integral part of the 10

 http://www.bbk.ac.uk/trigger/.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 10

13/12/2019 15:47



Introduction ­11

college Athena SWAN Self Assessment Team and the Actions Sub Group which helped to identify and drive practical actions and interventions to support gender equality. TRIGGER’s contributions through Athena SWAN helped to shape aspects of the 2017‒2023 Birkbeck People Strategy, ‘Building Success Together’. This recognizes ‘Building Workforce Diversity’ as a core strategic aim and includes specific gender equality goals. The TRIGGER team provided valuable insights as a regular standing item at the College Equalities Committee, and for the College Strategic Equalities Review Group (SERG) as part of the Staff Working Group. SERG findings highlighted the institutional benefits of improving coordination of staff and student equality actions; defined new Equality Objectives; and recommended new structures for the governance and management of equalities. Its recommendation that an appointment be made to support the commercialization of research in the School of Business, Economics and Informatics was accepted. TRIGGER events have including a facilitated engagement between Birkbeck staff and business leaders on ‘Embedding Equality’. They are publicized widely within the college to encourage future job applicants, mentors and mentees, and to disseminate best practice inside and outside of Birkbeck. TRIGGER events complement other college events such as ‘Women in Science’ in Science Week, and the annual Rosalind Franklin lecture. Five chapters in this book (2, 5, 6, 7 and 12) and the Foreword directly relate to TRIGGER. The other chapters were invited by the TRIGGER team from colleagues during the course of the project.

1.5 CONCLUSION: A CALL FOR REFLECTION AND ACTION Our volume is a progress report on the slowdown in the gender revolution in science and its prospect for pick-up. Initiatives from internal academic leadership to change academic cultures to make them inclusive can be effective, for example initiatives in the Molecular Biology Department at the University of Colorado, Boulder; ‘family friendly’ in the Stanford Chemistry Department; and in Public Health at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. On the positive side, Johns Hopkins University has instituted formal recognition of gender imbalances in career progression. A Dean for Diversity sits on every committee in the college, there are an Associate Dean, Office of Women in Science and Medicine, and a Women’s Task force. However, in spite of representation at senior levels, these officers

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 11

13/12/2019 15:47

12

Gender, science and innovation

and their actions have been unable to address the gender imbalance in senior positions in academic medicine. The problem is US-wide. The causes of the problems are not the institutions and policies; rather, it is the long-established practices whereby there has been a resistance to promoting women. This is compounded because there are no women co-chairs of committees who sit on these committees apart from women representing nurses and administrative staff. Missing at Johns Hopkins Hospital is an executive leadership programme for women; helping women to get to the top and function effectively. Hence, as was the focus of the TRIGGER programme, gender equality requires both organizational and cultural change. The authors of chapters within this volume report that the situation is getting both better and worse. The chapters that follow include a methodological diversity of qualitative and quantitative research styles at different levels of analysis: macro, micro and meso, following the classical biological sciences research design of going one level above and one level below the phenomena to be elucidated. Macro analyses at the societal level ‒ for example, national and multinational gender policies ‒ provide a ‘top-down’ view both of resistance to gender equity as well as powerful tools to achieve it. Micro analyses at the individual level ‒ for example, individual scientists’ gender related discrimination experiences ‒ provide a ‘bottom-up’ perspective of the struggle to overcome inequalities; while meso analyses at the organizational level reveal the oft disguised fraught  gender relations of academic departments, research institutes and firms. The organizational level is thus the ‘battleground’ research focus of the struggle for equity and equality in science, technology and innovation. Finally, this diversity of levels and utilization of a range of research tools reflects the selection of relevant theoretical perspectives and identification of good practice in tackling gender inequality within academic science. An international comparative strategy provides research and practical insights into the agenda and practice of tackling gender inequities in academic structures with salient similarities and differences. The chapters in this volume include measures taken within higher education and professional bodies to address institutionalized inequality through the lens of cultures and institutions (Chapters 2–7), how opportunities are created by higher education institutions to support gender equality through, for example, networking and mentoring (Chapters 8–11), and theory, practice and evidence of how gender inequality in universities’ ‘third stream activities’, that of entrepreneurship and innovation, has been addressed by higher education and professional bodies (Chapters 12–18). As editors, it is our responsibility to take the next step and make infer-

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 12

13/12/2019 15:47



Introduction ­13

ences on revising academic structures to accommodate women and men who wish to balance family and work, high achievement in research, mentoring the next generation and putting research results to use, whether commercially or philanthropically. This book provides insight into how feminist and gender theories as well as human capital, neo-institutional and entrepreneurship perspectives can be used to understand both the complexity and simplicity of the nature, causes and cures of gender inequality. We trust that the work will provide the reader both with ‘Aha’ moments of common personal experience recognition, inspiring solidarity, sisterhood and comradeship, as well as clues to strategies and tactics useful to restructure one’s scientific, academic or other workplaces.

REFERENCES Ahl, H. (2006). Why research on women entrepreneurs needs new directions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 30(5): 595‒621. Ahl, H. (2007). Gender stereotypes. In Clegg, S. and Bailey, J. (eds), International Encyclopaedia of Organization Studies. London: SAGE, pp. 544‒7. Brown, A. (2005). JD Bernal: The Sage of Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cole, G. John (2017). How to close the gender gap in computer science. www.key​sto​ neacademic.com/news/how-to-close-the-gender-gap-in-computer-science-2008. Accessed 7 April 2019. Cromie, S. (1987). Motivations of aspiring male and female entrepreneurs. Journal of Organizational Behaviour 8(3): 251‒61. De Bruin, A., Brush, C.G. and Welter, F. (2007). Advancing a framework for coherent research on women’s entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 31(3): 323‒39. Devlin, H. and Hern, A. (2017). Why are there so few women in tech? The truth behind the Google memo. www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/aug/08/whyare-there-so-few-women-in-tech-the-truth-behind-the-google-memo. Accessed 7 April 2019. England, P. (2010). The gender revolution: uneven and stalled. Gender and Society 24: 149‒66. Elsevier (2017). Gender in the Global Research Landscape: Analysis of research performance through a gender lens across 20 years, 12 geographies and 27 subject areas. Elsevier’s Research Intelligence. https://www.elsevier.com/__data/ assets/pdf_file/0008/265661/ElsevierGenderReport_final_for-web.pdf. Etzkowitz, H. (2013). StartX and the paradox of success: filling the gap in Stanford University’s entrepreneurial development. Social Science Information 52(3): 605‒27. Etzkowitz, H., Kemelgor, C. and Uzzi, B. (2000). Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Frieze, C. and Quesenberry, J.L. (2019). How computer science at CMU is attracting and retaining women. Communications of the ACM 62(2): 23‒6. Henry, C., Foss, L. and Ahl, H. (2016). Gender and entrepreneurship research:

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 13

13/12/2019 15:47

14

Gender, science and innovation

a review of methodological approaches. International Small Business Journal 34(3): 217‒41. Maddox, B. (2002). Rosalind Franklin: The Dark Lady of DNA. London: HarperCollins. Marlow, S. (2002). Self-employed women: a part of or apart from feminist theory? International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation 2(2): 83‒91. Simard, C. and Gilmartin, S. (2010). Senior technical women: a profile of success. Anita Borg Institute for Women and Technology. Wittington, K. and Smith-Doerr, L. (2005). Gender and commercial science: women’s patenting in the life sciences. Journal of Technology Transfer 30(4): 355–70. Zolin, R., Stuetzer, M. and Watson, J. (2013). Challenging the female underperformance hypothesis. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship 5(2): 116‒29.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 14

13/12/2019 15:47

PART I

Gender Cultures and Institutions

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 15

13/12/2019 15:47

2. Being an early career academic: is there space for gender equality in the neoliberal university?* 1

Viviana Meschitti 2.1 INTRODUCTION The academic world has undergone notable changes in the last 20 years, among them: an increasing entrepreneurial drive (Etzkowitz, 2013a); a market orientation in relation to attracting students (Molesworth et al., 2009); managerialism and increased demands in terms of accountability (Amaral and Meek, 2003; Shore, 2008); a benchmarking culture, and consequent pressure on academics to perform (in terms of publications and grants) towards getting to the top of world university rankings (Rafols et al., 2012; Teelken, 2015). These trends could contribute to creating new professional profiles and opening up new career pathways inside and outside academia; nevertheless, they come at a time of decreasing public funding, with stronger competition to secure resources (Auranen and Nieminen, 2010; Hicks, 2012), and limited availability of permanent academic positions. This may lead early career scholars to opt out of academia (Hakala, 2009). In this context, the rise of the concept of academic capitalism is not surprising: Slaughter and Rhodes (2004) argue that by this process universities become increasingly integrated into the knowledge-based economy, sideline one core mission (education) and place greater value on moneygenerating activities. Universities are increasingly characterised by neoliberal discourses where, as argued by Ball and Olmedo (2013), ‘Results *  This chapter draws on research carried out for the TRIGGER project, A. No. 611034 funded under the Seventh Framework Programme, Specific programme ‘Capacity’, Work programme ‘Science in Society’, FP7-SCIENCE-INSOCIETY-2013-1. The research presented in this chapter was designed with the support of the TRIGGER team at Birkbeck, University of London, UK: Wendy Hein, Henry Etzkowitz and Helen Lawton Smith. I am also grateful to Giulio Marini for having directed me to Mosca’s work. ­16

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 16

13/12/2019 15:47



Being an early career academic ­17

are prioritised over processes, numbers over experiences, procedures over ideas, productivity over creativity’. This chapter aims to understand how the neoliberal discourses interplay with the need for gender equality, strongly advocated by national and international institutions over the last 20 years. The under-­representation of women in academia remains a cause for concern: in Europe, despite the percentage of PhDs obtained by women reaching 46 per cent in 2010 (EC, 2012), horizontal and vertical segregation are not going to be solved naturally (EC, 2016). On the wave of the Beijing Declaration (UN, 1995), international and national agencies started to devise initiatives to foster gender equality in science. One example is the United Kingdom (UK) Athena SWAN Charter, which is awarded to higher education institutions shown to be demonstrably committed to gender equality (ECU, 2015). Drawing on data recently collected in a UK institution, this chapter advances the debate on the impact of neoliberalism on gender equality in universities, focused on the experiences of early career scholars. The chapter discusses trends now well established in the UK academic system, that is, managerialism, audit culture and research performance indicators (Deem et al., 2007). Research shows that these trends might hinder gender equality (Saunderson, 2002; Teelken and Deem, 2013). The aim is to investigate how the trends associated with neoliberalism shape the career of early career scholars (postdocs and lecturers), especially women. Postdoctoral fellows and lecturers are quite different (the former fixed term, the latter usually open ended). All newly appointed lecturers are nevertheless at risk as they have to undertake a probation period usually lasting the first three years. Table 2.1 provides an overview of the discourses underlying this chapter.

2.2 GENDER (IN)EQUALITY IN THE PRESENT HIGHER EDUCATION CONTEXT Higher education has been a male domain for centuries, and universities are gendered to the detriment of women (Benschop and Brouns, 2003; Teelken and Deem, 2013). Despite the increase of women who graduate with a PhD, it is still challenging for women to advance in their career paths (Peterson, 2016). Abundant literature discusses the main problems. First, women are confronted by persistent gender bias (Valian, 2005). They are often discriminated against, directly or indirectly, in participation in important decision-making processes or career progression (Etzkowitz et al., 2000;

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 17

13/12/2019 15:47

18

Gender, science and innovation

Table 2.1  C  urrent discourses in higher education: neoliberalism and gender equality Neoliberal discourses

Gender equality discourses

Distribution of public funding based   on universities’ performance

Need to understand where inequality sits in universities, monitor data related to career progression and salaries, and ensure a fair distribution of resources. Need for more women in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, medicine (STEMM) Need for more women in senior academic and management positions (contrasting the glass ceiling and glass cliff effects) Support work‒life balance of all the staff as a strategy to support women’s careers

Focus on measurable research  outputs (e.g., number of publications in specific journals) University rankings as a springboard   for promotion and prestige Maximising individual research  performance as a way to climb the rankings Maximise external sources of  funding Students as customers: need to  attract more students and offer them attractive programmes and career prospects Managerial drive and accountability

Fight gender bias and indirect discrimination, promote an inclusive culture Promote mentoring, sponsorship, networking opportunities, to support career progression Monitor workloads to avoid unfair distribution of tasks

Morley, 2013). They are defined as ‘excellent’ less often than men (van den Brink and Benschop, 2012). They are more frequently offered tasks that are not essential for promotion, such as teaching and pastoral care (Guarino and Borden, 2017). They risk being excluded by important networks that could support their advancement (van den Brink and Benschop, 2014). They are still expected to be the ones taking on caring responsibilities, and this negatively affects their time management and participation in scientific activities (Woodward, 2007; Rafnsdóttir and Heijstra, 2013). As a result, there is a paucity of women in senior leadership roles. The number of women getting a PhD has been growing fast: the rate was 43 per cent in 2004, and 46 per cent in 2012 (EC, 2012, 2016). However, women constitute only 23 per cent of professors and 19 per cent of principals or vice-principals or equivalents. The under-representation of women in natural sciences, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) persists, as does the under-representation of women at the top of academic

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 18

13/12/2019 15:47



Being an early career academic ­19

hierarchies (HEFCE, 2015). Women more often become stuck in parttime, casualised or fixed-term contracts (Bryson, 2004; HESA, 2017). Given this slow progress, scholars are concerned with the impact of the wider (neoliberal) discourses. Davies and Petersen (2005) argue that neoliberalism limits academic freedom because of the narrow focus of performance indicators and accountability. Morley (2016) shows that neoliberalism tends to reinforce inequalities, since women still report feeling excluded from networks that produce the knowledge that counts. The quest for more accountability and auditing procedures overburdens academics (Gonzales et al., 2014), and time management has been reported as a major issue (Sang et al., 2015). Finally, the culture of benchmarking needs critical assessment: systems allocating public funding on the basis of research performance cause strategic behaviours in individuals and organisations (Hyde et al., 2013; Dixon and Hood, 2016); journal rankings are based on a limited understanding of research relevance and do not motivate interdisciplinarity (Rafols et al., 2012); and university rankings do not always include third mission and entrepreneurial activities, which constitute important sources of funding and regional development (Leydesdorff and Meyer, 2010; Etzkowitz, 2013b). There are two interrelated issues: first, because of accountability, universities devote more time to administration and service; these activities are undervalued and under-rewarded, and are often delegated to women (Park, 1996; Angervall et al., 2015). Teaching, where women are more heavily involved, is not as valued as research: Thornton (2013) and Hey (2011) argue that the undervaluation of teaching perpetuates gender inequality. Second, there is a more general problem related to the definition of what is ‘excellent’. Studies show that ‘excellence’ is gendered: women are considered ‘excellent’ less often without any apparent reason (van den Brink and Benschop, 2012; Fassa and Kradolfer, 2013). Academic excellence is said to be based on performance; however, the way performance is defined privileges only specific types of outputs and hinders equality (Teelken and Deem, 2013). Morley (2016) effectively shows how neoliberalism shapes the dynamics of inclusion and exclusion, feeding a vicious cycle where women’s contribution is misrecognised and their voice disappears, and relegating women to unrewarding and invisible activities. Initially scholars advanced the argument that the wave of changes characterising the neoliberal trend might have positive consequences on careers. Deem (1998), building on her research on 40 women managers in the UK, underlines how the rise of managerial practices can create new opportunities for women, who could better lobby for changes. Linstead and Eveline (2005) stress how changes in the university system might

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 19

13/12/2019 15:47

20

Gender, science and innovation

allow people, and women especially, to create spaces for new subject positions; the same argument arises from Clegg’s (2008) research on academic identity. However, recent research highlights more problematic aspects. O’Hagan et al. (2019) use data collected across several European countries and demonstrate that universities’ focus on individual agency, performance and competition for resources helps those already in power, but not gender equality. Morley’s (2016) study, involving academics from Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Australia, draws similar conclusions and further stresses the feeling of precariousness felt by women. The early stage of an academic career is when new academics have to build their profile and prestige (Smith, 2010). Obtaining a permanent position is challenging and might require relocating (McAlpine, 2012). Often women are in dual-career relationships, requiring them to reconcile different career needs (Tzanakou, 2017). Additionally, this often represents a time when people might start a family. Work‒life balance and parenthood are recognised as factors increasing pressure on women. O’Laughlin and Bischoff (2005) observe that women feel more stressed than men because of family commitments, and report less support from their institutions. Recent evidence from Canada reveals that both women and men with tenure carefully consider family needs throughout their career, but women are more overburdened than men with service tasks (Acker et al., 2016). Dubois-Shaik et al. (2019) show that early career academics experience many tensions, with family commitments often a serious problem, especially for women. In Europe research has only recently focused on an in-depth understanding of early career academics’ experiences and perceptions of their identity and role in academia (McAlpine et al., 2014). Early career academics, because of their restricted negotiating power, might be delegated timeconsuming tasks with little value for promotion. Jeanes (2017) reports the case of early career researchers devoting significant time to preparing ethical paperwork, and collecting or treating data, unrewarded by inclusion in publications. Smith (2010) focuses on UK probationary lecturers and notes that the path through probation is not transparent. McAlpine et al. (2014) demonstrate challenges according to position: for example, postdocs have less independence and stability. A permanent position (a lectureship) often has less time for research. In Nikunen’s (2012) Finland study, researchers on fixed-term contracts state that freedom and flexibility compensate for the lack of security; but that this feeling tends to transform into anxiety, for women especially, when planning a family. Archer (2008a, 2008b) focuses on how young academics negotiate their identity, observing that most of the participants in her study have internalised neoliberal discourses. Interestingly, among the participants of Archer’s

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 20

13/12/2019 15:47



Being an early career academic ­21

(2008a) and Teelken and Deem’s (2013) studies, some define the culture of benchmarking and competition as ‘macho’ cultures. Building on the above literature, this chapter aims to understand how current trends have a differing impact depending on gender and position (that is, being a woman and being an early career scholar). O’Hagan et al.’s (2019) argument that academic capitalism is re-masculinising academic institutions is especially interesting. Hence the chapter will try to understand how the experiences of early career academics are shaped by present trends and whether there are noticeable differences between women and men’s experiences.

2.3  THE STUDY This research is part of the European Union (EU)-funded TRIGGER project, aimed at addressing gender imbalance in higher education and proposing possible paths for change. The research design has been informed by a socio-constructionist perspective: gender is conceptualised as a practice that is performed in social interactions (Martin, 2003). The broad objective is to compare women and men’s career paths; the study involves academic and professional staff at different stages in their careers in STEM departments in a UK higher education institution (HEI) in the UK. The institution might be considered as representative of other middle-level academic institutions: it wants to keep a balance between competitive research and attractive teaching programmes, it offers a wide array of disciplines, and has some pockets of research excellence. The research uses in-depth interviews to elicit narratives about the participants’ career paths, and focus groups where both academic and professional staff were invited to create a broader discussion about their experiences of the institution. Participants were recruited on a voluntary basis: a self-selection bias may have operated. Data were collected between 2014 and 2016 by the author, recorded and transcribed verbatim. Analysis started by a careful reading of the transcribed data and notes. Further rounds of analysis allowed consistent patterns to be identified. In relation to interviews, 12 women and four men in different academic positions participated, including four former members of staff (who left the college at the latest two years before this research took place). In each of the two focus group sessions, five people participated (four men and six women overall), among them five academics. Overall, there are nine early career academics (five men and four women). The findings are presented below via the participants’ voices. The excerpts selected address issues that emerged across several narratives.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 21

13/12/2019 15:47

22

Gender, science and innovation

Only gender and position are indicated, together with a number identifying the participant in the dataset; ‘early career’ refers to research fellows and lecturers, while ‘senior’ refers to senior lecturers, readers (associate professors) and professors (full professors). In some cases narratives are paraphrased to preserve anonymity.

2.4 FINDINGS 2.4.1  It’s All About Publications Across the data, publications emerge as the unique key to a successful academic career (usually papers in specific ranked journals). This is because in the UK it is often believed that journal ranking might affect the judgement of the subject panels on papers submitted for the Research Excellence Framework (REF).1 This finding emerged spontaneously before any direct questions from the interviewer: ‘The former head of this department’s key phrase was: “the key to an academic career is survival”. I tend to feel that I just keep going, get the next paper in front of me and . . . and nobody cares about anything except papers any more in academic careers’ (Man 5, early career). This excerpt shows the centrality of publications, the routine of academic work, and the focus on productivity (‘the next paper in front of me’). Furthermore, it shows insecurity, ambiguity, struggle, and a sense of tiredness. This might be caused by having to cope with a system that, as this participant will then further explain, is focused on one aspect only of the academic job. It is remarkable that the participant quoted a senior scholar, this appearing to be a strategy to strengthen his argument. Some of the research participants criticised the necessity of publishing in specific types of journal. Not having enough appropriate publications slows down career progression; there are two among them (one man and one woman) who admitted to problems finding a permanent position because of a lack of the ‘right’ publications when PhD students (they reported that this was due to failure of PhD supervisor guidance). Another issue viewed as problematic was grants. One early career woman stated that, ‘apparently grant funders prefer it when there is someone more senior involved and I find that a little bit frustrating’ (Woman 9, early career). Another participant stressed, ‘I want to be in the position where I can build up a whole research programme on my  http://www.ref.ac.uk/.

1

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 22

13/12/2019 15:47



Being an early career academic ­23

own and you need a permanent position to do that’ (Man 4, early career). Before getting a permanent position it is difficult to get funding for building a research programme, and this can cause a vicious cycle, where less funding equals fewer opportunities to conduct cutting-edge research, and consequently fewer possibilities to get published in top journals. One of the interviewees aptly summed up the issue: I think everybody, most people feel that things are going the wrong way and that it’s too much driven by money and not enough by scholarship and thinking. And the fact that the universities are more or less forced to hire these fantastic staff because it’s the only economically viable situation. (Man 5, early career)

Universities, to acquire public funds, have to demonstrate excellence, and hiring staff with high potential in terms of publications is ‘the only . . . viable solution’. Staff with high potential are defined as ‘fantastic staff’. The interviewee then introduced the issue of gender, saying that in his experience women are less likely to be represented in the group of the ‘fantastic’, not because they cannot be ‘fantastic’, but because of the pressure that being ‘fantastic’ implies. Have the archetypal career – do your PhD in a fantastic lab with someone very well known, do your post-doc with someone very well known, get published, and then get a fellowship. And that makes sense from a department point of view because those people come with money, it looks good for the college and the REF, we don’t care if they can teach because they can probably learn how to do that. Basically they’re going to get people to do the work, teach on the side, it’s all about how much money you can suck into the system. (Man 5, early career)

The ‘fantastic’ academic personifies the perfect subject of the neoliberal university: a scholar (possibly man) working in a prestigious institution, having a network with the best scholars of his field, constantly delivering his work in highly ranked and recognised scientific fora, committed to competing for large grants. Another participant stressed that most of the PhD intake in his department now comes from Oxbridge. Following these accounts, we could contrast two profiles: the fantastic early career scholar versus the one who is knocking the elite’s door, to borrow a metaphor from Mosca’s (1939) political theory on social classes (Table 2.2). The undervaluation of teaching is echoed by several research participants, both women and men. This might appear at odds with the marketisation of universities (that is, attracting students), and can be considered as a symptom of universities’ focus on research rankings. The undervaluation seems ostensibly at odds with the institution’s mission to promote

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 23

13/12/2019 15:47

24

Gender, science and innovation

Table 2.2  Types of early career scholars The fantastic early career scholar

The scholar who is knocking on the elite’s door

Elite institution Well-known lab or supervisor Being surrounded by prestige, well  networked Getting a top publication early Getting a prestigious fellowship Focus on publishing

People who never thought university was for them Coming from different routes, getting a degree in a mid-level institution Not necessarily the most well-known supervisor Discovering late what the publication game is about Building a network from scratch

excellence in teaching, foster diversity and inclusiveness, and offer opportunity to those coming from disadvantaged backgrounds. A senior participant stressed that ‘excellence in teaching’, and ‘world class research’, do not necessarily go together, thus creating a tension; which individuals need to resolve. Such tensions are not new (Teelken, 2015). Women participants raised the issue of gender when it comes to career progression and attracting funding. A participant told the anecdote of a man being promoted from lecturer to professor because he got a big grant, and then added: ‘I don’t know whether any women were planning to apply to that funding because it’s a big time commitment and there are low chances and maybe that’s why they’re not being promoted as quickly’ (Woman 9, early career). It seems that the lower promotion rate of women might depend on the fact that women do not put themselves forward in, for instance, bidding for funds. We can read this through a neoliberal discourse (it is women’s responsibility, they do not engage in the system). However, it is clear that bidding for funds is especially time-consuming and the participants (men especially) make the assumption that women struggle more with managing their time. The vision that academia is becoming more and more competitive is confirmed by participants in senior positions. As explained by the participant below, a woman professor (who could be defined as successful based on current criteria), even for junior positions you need ‘several published papers’, in the ‘right sort of journal’. She used the metaphor of the ‘rat race’ to depict a situation where people are blindly following a single objective, that is, getting published in the right place: I think it’s worse than ever now, because you do not even get a junior job now, unless you’ve got several published papers and possibly a grant on the way. I

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 24

13/12/2019 15:47



Being an early career academic ­25 don’t know how people manage it, men or women, but women particularly if they want to have a family . . . Academia, I wouldn’t recommend anybody to get into it, it’s become a complete rat race, all these impact ratings. It used to be that you got things published and you got published in places where people who wanted to read it would read it, and now if it’s not the right sort of journal, you know . . . (Woman 11, professor)

There are several factors behind the rise in competition. One of the senior interviewees, now retired, and with a broad experience of attracting funds, explained how wider changes in technology and society made her research area more important compared to a few decades ago; this means that there are now many more groups competing for the same amount of resources (which also impacts on hiring practices). Also, in many areas of the natural sciences, having the ability to rely on cutting-edge technologies is paramount, but this involves significant investment by institutions. It is interesting to see how participants’ perceptions and experiences compare with the institution’s own data on career progression and ability to attract funding. In terms of engaging with the internal promotion procedures (for example, being a lecturer and deciding to apply for promotion to senior lecturer), there is no significant gender difference in application or success. However, when focusing on the ability to attract external funding, women are significantly less likely than men to get funded by industry or commerce. Networks and time constraints might have a role here. To sum up this section, all the junior scholars, both women and men, are aware of how the system works in relation to publications. They do not show enthusiasm, sometimes they might struggle, but they know the game they are playing. From the senior academics, there is a stronger critique and also some resistance strategies. Resistance comes from the senior women: two of them stated that they prefer to publish in alternative sources (journals not on the lists or with no impact factor). Of course, this may be possible for them because they have already achieved a senior position with more prestige and independence. 2.4.2  There Is Never Enough Time All the early career participants reported working around 50 or 60 hours per week, and their work seems pervasive. Research is a vocation, and researchers like their job. As stressed by an early career woman: ‘I love my work. I think about it all the time’ (Woman 14, early career). In general, all the participants reported a very high workload and blurred borders between work and personal life; working at home has often been the case in academia. However, there are possibly more tensions in the case of the early careers:

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 25

13/12/2019 15:47

26

Gender, science and innovation My work takes a lot of time and I spend far more than the 40 hours that I signed for in my contract, because otherwise I cannot cope with everything. This is something that I was kind of OK with until I got married and I had a wife and a family . . . But now that I have a family and I have responsibilities with my family I struggle to do everything that I think needs to be done at work and still spend enough time with my family. (Man 6, early career)

This illustrates the vocation aspect of research, but also some problematic aspects: doing research does not require being in a specific place, and can become your whole life. This causes tensions. It seems that, when having their own family to take care of, scholars realise that an academic job is suited to a particular type of person, and that this – to borrow Acker’s (1990) metaphor of the ‘disembodied worker’ – could be defined as the ‘disembodied academic’. Surprisingly, men also raised the issue of family and work. However, in most cases, despite a rise in awareness, the model of the male breadwinner still prevails. A point that seems problematic for all early career academics is the time required for administrative and service duties. The early career academics who have recently obtained a permanent position seem especially to suffer from not having enough time to do research; as stated by one of the participants, as a lecturer there are more teaching and administrative duties, and the consequence might be not having enough time to do any ‘real research’ (Man 6, early career). Early career academics on ‘research-only’ contracts report that time is still an issue: being involved in big projects requires a lot of time management and supervisory skills; moreover, they need to think about their own future, to look for new funds or positions. While several senior interviewees reported that women usually are the ones overburdened with administration and services, early career academics have a more nuanced impression. All the early career participants, independent of their gender or contractual condition, seem to be engaged in a broad range of activities. This resonates with the focus groups, where both academic and professional staff were present. At some point, a professional underlined how he tends to collaborate especially with early career academics, who usually get involved in more activities; being involved in more activities is not negative per se, but if we accept the perspective of the current performance-driven university, it means less time to focus on the key things needed in a curriculum vitae (CV). Several interviewees expressed a tension in managing their time. However, they have internalised the neoliberal discourse and assume that this is their problem, and as a way of solving it they think about bringing in more money to get a team and produce more:

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 26

13/12/2019 15:47



Being an early career academic ­27 Challenges . . . money . . . funding, funding, funding, and time management. That’s the two main things for me. Finding money because it seems to be important for promotions, not just for projects but also for PhD and postdocs because it makes your team bigger, so more papers, and more kind of, momentum. And time management, trying to fit it all in, and still do the research part and not being swamped by the admin part. (Woman 9, early career)

It is notable how this early career academic is focused on building her CV (promotion), increasing productivity, and limiting the amount of time devoted to administration. This is what all early career academics try to do. Also, when talking about promotion criteria, the use of the verb ‘seem’ is significant: transparency is not complete. This also emerged in previous literature (Smith, 2010). It is worth looking at the time issue from the perspective of a senior academic with longstanding experience in higher education. This participant stressed that the academic profession has changed and that this has also been caused by time constraints created by different requirements: that is, more teaching and more administrative and audit duties. In the eyes of the interviewee the amount of required information is in contrast to the decrease in public funding. For this participant, there is a perception that things are getting worse: I think the change in the academic profession comes into that because thirty or forty years ago, people didn’t have the constraints on their time that they have now. They didn’t have the amount of teaching or the amount of admin work or all the forms we have to fill out . . . I think it’s getting worse, probably, but it’s interesting, the UK government has cut the funding that goes direct to universities, but it hasn’t cut all the sorts of information they want to collect about what we’re doing, as if they were still funding it. (Woman 15, senior)

2.4.3  Women’s Work? So far, this chapter has discussed issues that are problematic for both female and male early career academics: a limited conceptualisation of the academic career and academic work, restricted to getting published in some journals and getting more grants; constraints in terms of time for research; the volume of administrative duties; the undervaluation of teaching; and increasing competition for a permanent position. Study findings have confirmed that early career academics are motivated by a strong passion for research and have internalised the neoliberal game: their career plans seem to complement the needs of universities today. Early career academics suffer from having their time for research constrained. Once they have family commitments they realise how much time they are putting into their job. However, it seems things are different for women. An especially relevant

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 27

13/12/2019 15:47

28

Gender, science and innovation

finding from a gender perspective relates to the roles women tend to take within departments. There is the perception, from some senior women (but also from some men), that women more often undertake roles that are not research-related, and devote more time to pastoral care and administration. This type of work is rarely rewarded. For example, one senior woman reported the case of (male) colleagues who never answer students’ e-mails. Another gave accounts of women spending a lot of unacknowledged time in preparing grant submissions. Another woman talked about men being actively motivated to take up senior roles, even without a formal application or promotion procedure; one of the early career academics recognised that she is often the one in the department to whom everybody comes with problems, using up personal time and energy. Some of these experiences were confirmed by data collected and analysed in the process of applying for the Athena SWAN awards. In the following excerpt a participant recently promoted to a senior position reported an anecdote from the time she was an early career researcher, and she was asked to sit on several committees. We cannot know if she was asked because of her gender. Later on, the same participant explained that, with a family, everything becomes very difficult to juggle because of the impossibility of working extra hours: I was asked to be a part of some working groups and I kind of found it difficult to say no and so I ended up doing a lot of work in addition to my teaching and the research I was trying to keep up with and I found that quite stressful and I think it’s . . . you know when an authority figure says we want you to be on this working group it is quite difficult to say ‘I’m too busy’. You sort of feel like . . . well . . . I think once or twice I tried to say I was too busy and then they would say that this was your priority and to rearrange your other stuff or whatever because we want you to do this at the cost of other things, but then the other stuff you might want to do is your research. (Woman 13, senior)

Senior interviewees especially highlighted that it is important to be focused at the beginning of one’s own career, and that too much administrative work can be detrimental. The impossibility of working extra hours due to family commitments was especially highlighted by the women participants, and two male participants. For the women the issue was often presented as a serious concern. This is interesting since, among the early career academics, none has children: participants are only trying to imagine their future with a child. For men the issue seems to be being able to compress work so as to spend more time with their family. Women expressed various concerns: one of the early career women reported that at some point she considered leaving academia; another stated that she is renounc-

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 28

13/12/2019 15:47



Being an early career academic ­29

ing having children; several senior women had decided to have only one child. One early career woman, considering having children in the future, explained that she currently spends most of her time working, and has no outside interests. She seemed to take for granted that she will be the one looking after the children, and wished to get promotion before becoming a mother. It seems like that balance will be much more difficult and I guess it depends on your partner and what they do and how much money you have. I mean I was looking at childcare costs and I don’t know how I could afford it on our salary, so I don’t know what it means. Should I stop working? But I don’t want to do that. So I can see why a lot of women quit through postdoc phase or go parttime during lectureship because it’s a big constraint. If you don’t want a family, I think it’s much easier. (Woman 9, early career)

She reported cases of women leaving during the postdoc phase. Additionally, most of the early career women interviewed came from other countries, but their extended family did not migrate and hence it would be impossible to rely on their own family for support. It was a common theme amongst the women academics that women ‘are often carers more than men’ (Woman 10, senior): they are more often in charge of caring roles in their families. This is not restricted to their children: in the data there were cases of women (two senior and one early career) who had to take care of their elderly parents and younger siblings, respectively. The women’s opinion was that, compared to men, they struggled more in managing a family and a career. One of the senior women reported that she has several male colleagues with children, but that they have a great career: one has five children, but ‘it doesn’t hold him back’ (Woman 11, senior). One should not forget that women are the ones who can potentially incur health issues when pregnant or following the birth of a child. Interestingly, juggling family and work seems to be an individual responsibility: the institution does not and is not expected to offer help. It is possible to observe in the focus groups how the traditional gendered division of roles still dominates society. It especially emerges how in many young couples the man is still considered the breadwinner and the one who focuses on his career (in the sense of climbing the hierarchy), while the woman is the one more devoted to care work. This might represent a functional choice for a couple, and reflect individual deep aspirations. Nevertheless, the persistence of such a division of labour contributes to normalising the caring work that women do, taking it for granted and not recognising it.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 29

13/12/2019 15:47

30

Gender, science and innovation

2.5 DISCUSSION This study suggests that early career academics experience considerable pressure to perform, especially in relation to research. Confirming previous studies, the neoliberal logic seems to be internalised (Archer, 2008a; Leathwood and Read, 2013). The space for enacting forms of resistance is quite restricted for people in junior roles. All the early career academics are struggling to manage their time; in some cases people expressed frustration and did not hide that they had considered leaving academia. It is evident that a tension exists between the passion for academic work and the requirements in terms of time and personal commitment. The findings of this study are contrary to Clegg’s (2008) point that, ‘despite all the pressure on performativity, individuals have created spaces for the exercise of principled personal autonomy and agency’. In this study, early career academics seem limited in their choices in relation to type of research and research output. Their level of engagement with trying to change the institution is quite low. Women experience multiple tensions. Most of the participants in this study thought managing family and career to be more difficult for women. Only in the women’s narratives are there reflections about whether or not to have a child, or whether to leave academia to take care of the family. The findings show that there is still a gendered division of labour, which puts extra burdens on women. The example of the early career woman interrogating herself on whether to leave her career once she has had a child is a poignant example. The regime of gendered division of labour hinders all the women, independent of their having children. These findings complement those of Fusulier et al. (2017) and Dubois-Shaik et al. (2019). They also confirm O’Hagan et al.’s (2019) study on ‘academic capitalisation’ as an inhibitor to gender equality. These three studies cover different European countries, suggesting that neoliberal logic is creating similar pressures for early career women in general. This study contributes to the literature on gender issues in the paths of early career academics by bringing forward fresh evidence in the UK context. The chapter, while not specifically focused on understanding the Athena SWAN process, suggests that Athena SWAN seems to have a positive impact at least in terms of shedding light on potential problematic issues. The sample is small and self-selection bias is likely to have operated. However, the triangulation between interviews and focus groups, and cross-comparisons of narratives from both early career and senior academics, helps to strengthen the findings. The international background of most of the interviewees (only one of the participants had an internal career, but he still had an international background) further supports the generality of the results.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 30

13/12/2019 15:47



Being an early career academic ­31

The narratives collected presented other interesting topics, such as the association between current trends in performance and metrics and a ‘macho’ culture, which were not discussed here. Instead, the chapter has focused on early career researchers, giving priority to their voices by reporting excerpts from their narratives.

2.6 CONCLUSION A difficult climate for women persists in academia. This culture is anchored to a more general context where gendered division of labour persists. The current neoliberal context does not help. Moving forward, from the point of view of practice, it is necessary to ensure that efforts are made to monitor and report the situation and ensure that early career academics, especially women, have time to reflect on their own careers and can access opportunities for career development. This involves the creation of support networks among peers and sensitising senior academics towards mentoring early career academics. In addition, more research is needed. The hypothesis that the pervasiveness of the neoliberal logic is creating similar pressures on early career academics in countries that traditionally have very different systems needs further investigation. Also, it is necessary to focus further on those academics on short-term contracts, since they are often in the more delicate positions. A longitudinal perspective could better aid understanding these challenges and help to devise possible solutions. Our data are not yet robust enough to support such a perspective. The current situation in academia is not easy. The preoccupation of one of our participants that ‘it’s all about how much money you can suck into the system’ does not appear to be much exaggerated. In this regard, it is meaningful that in the UK the achievement of gender equality in universities, through the Athena SWAN Charter, is tied to the possibility of institutions and departments applying for funds. The awareness of the challenges imposed by current trends should serve as leverage for making the effort to couple research and practice so as to tackle a problem that would not otherwise be solved.

REFERENCES Acker, J. (1990) ‘Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: a theory of gendered organizations’, Gender and Society, 4 (2), 139–58. Acker, S., M. Webber and E. Smyth (2016) ‘Continuity or change? Gender, family,

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 31

13/12/2019 15:47

32

Gender, science and innovation

and academic work for junior faculty in Ontario universities’, NASPA Journal About Women in Higher Education, 9 (1), 1‒20. Amaral, A. and V. Meek (2003) The Higher Education Managerial Revolution?, New York: Springer Science and Business Media. Angervall, P., D. Beach and J. Gustafsson (2015) ‘The unacknowledged value of female academic labour power for male research careers’, Higher Education Research and Development, 34 (5), 815–27. Archer, L. (2008a) ‘The new neoliberal subjects? Young/er academics’ constructions of professional identity’, Journal of Education Policy, 23 (3), 265–85. Archer, L. (2008b) ‘Younger academics’ constructions of “authenticity”, “success” and professional identity’, Studies in Higher Education, 33 (4), 385–403. Auranen, O. and M. Nieminen (2010) ‘University research funding and publication performance – an international comparison’, Research Policy, 39 (6), 822–34. Ball, S. and A. Olmedo (2013) ‘Care of the self, resistance and subjectivity under neoliberal governmentalities’, Critical Studies in Education, 54 (1), 85‒96. Benschop, Y. and M. Brouns (2003) ‘Crumbling ivory towers: academic organizing and its gender effects’, Gender, Work and Organization, 10 (2), 194–212. Bryson, C. (2004) ‘The consequences for women in the academic profession of the widespread use of fixed term contracts’, Gender, Work and Organization, 11 (2), 187–206. Clegg, S. (2008), ‘Academic identities under threat?’, British Educational Research Journal, 34 (3), 329–45. Davies, B. and E. Petersen (2005) ‘Neo-liberal discourse in the academy: the forestalling of (collective) resistance’, Learning and Teaching in the Social Sciences, 2 (2), 77–98. Deem, R. (1998) ‘“New managerialism” and higher education: the management of performances and cultures in universities in the United Kingdom’, International Studies in Sociology of Education, 8 (1), 47–70. Deem, R., S. Hillyard and M. Reed (2007) Knowledge, Higher Education, and the New Managerialism: The Changing Management of UK Universities, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dixon, R. and C. Hood (2016) ‘Ranking academic research performance: a recipe for success?’, Sociologie Du Travail, 58 (4), 403–11. Dubois-Shaik, F., B. Fusulier and C. Vincke (2019) ‘A gendered pipeline tipology in academia’, in Murgia A. and B. Poggio (eds), Gender and Precarious Research Careers: A Comparative Analysis, London: Routledge, pp. 178‒206. EC (2012) She Figures 2012, Statistics and Indicators for Gender Equality in Science, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. EC (2016) She Figures 2015, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. ECU (2015) ‘Athena SWAN Charter’, Equality Challenge Unit. Etzkowitz, H. (2013a) ‘Anatomy of the entrepreneurial university’, Social Science Information, 52 (3), 486–511. Etzkowitz, H. (2013b) ‘Mistaking dawn for dusk: quantophrenia and the cult of numerology in technology transfer analysis’, Scientometrics, 97 (3), 913–25. Etzkowitz, H., C. Kemelgor and B. Uzzi (2000), Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science and Technology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fassa, F. and S. Kradolfer (2013) ‘The gendering of excellence through quality criteria: the case of the Swiss national science foundation professorships in Switzerland’, Tertiary Education and Management, 19 (3), 189–204.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 32

13/12/2019 15:47



Being an early career academic ­33

Fusulier, B., P. Barbier and F. Dubois-Shaik (2017) ‘“Navigating” through a scientific career: a question of private and professional configurational supports’, European Educational Research Journal, 16 (2/3), 352–72. Gonzales, L., E. Martinez and C. Ordu (2014) ‘Exploring faculty experiences in a striving university through the lens of academic capitalism’, Studies in Higher Education, 39 (7), 1097–115. Guarino, C. and V. Borden (2017) ‘Faculty service loads and gender: are women taking care of the academic family?’, Research in Higher Education, 58 (6), 672–94. Hakala, J. (2009) ‘The future of the academic calling? Junior researchers in the entrepreneurial university’, Higher Education, 57 (2), 173. HEFCE (2015) ‘Equality and Diversity Tables, Staff Data’, Higher Education Funding Council for England. HESA (2017) ‘Staff in Higher Education 2015/16’, https://www.hesa.ac.uk/dataand-analysis/publications/staff-2015-16. Hey, V. (2011) ‘Affective asymmetries: academics, austerity and the mis/recognition of emotion’, Contemporary Social Science, 6 (2), 207–22. Hicks, D. (2012) ‘Performance-based university research funding systems’, Research Policy, 41 (2), 251–61. Hyde, A., M. Clarke and J. Drennan (2013) ‘The changing role of academics and the rise of managerialism’, in Barbara M. Kehm and Ulrich Teichler (eds), The Academic Profession in Europe: New Tasks and New Challenges, New York: Springer, pp. 39–52. Jeanes, E. (2017), ‘Are we ethical? Approaches to ethics in management and organisation research’, Organization, 24 (2), 174‒97. Leathwood, C. and B. Read (2013) ‘Research policy and academic performativity: compliance, contestation and complicity’, Studies in Higher Education, 38 (8), 1162­–74. Leydesdorff, L. and M. Meyer (2010) ‘The decline of university patenting and the end of the Bayh–Dole effect’, Scientometrics, 83 (2), 355–62. Linstead, A. and J. Eveline (2005) ‘Woman in the ivory tower: gendering feminised and masculinised identities’, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 18 (6), 641–58. Martin, P. (2003) ‘“Said and done” vs. “saying and doing”: gender practices, practicing gender at work’, Gender and Society, 17 (3), 342–66. McAlpine, L. (2012) ‘Academic work and careers: relocation, relocation, relocation’, Higher Education Quarterly, 66 (2), 174–88. McAlpine, L., C. Amundsen and G. Turner (2014) ‘Identity-trajectory: reframing early career academic experience’, British Educational Research Journal, 40 (6), 952–69. Molesworth, M., E. Nixon and R. Scullion (2009) ‘Having, being and higher education: the marketisation of the university and the transformation of the student into consumer’, Teaching in Higher Education, 14 (3), 277–87. Morley, L. (2013) ‘The rules of the game: women and the leaderist turn in higher education’, Gender and Education, 25 (1), 116–31. Morley, L. (2016) ‘Troubling intra-actions: gender, neo-liberalism and research in the global academy’, Journal of Education Policy, 31 (1), 28–45. Mosca, G. (1939) The Ruling Class, New York: McGraw-Hill. Nikunen, M. (2012) ‘Changing university work, freedom, flexibility and family’, Studies in Higher Education, 37 (6), 713–29. O’Hagan, C., P. O’Connor, E. Myers, et al.  (2019) ‘Perpetuating academic

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 33

13/12/2019 15:47

34

Gender, science and innovation

c­ apitalism and maintaining gender orders through career practices in STEM in universities’, Critical Studies in Education, 60 (2), 205‒25. O’Laughlin, E.M. and L.G. Bischoff (2005) ‘Balancing parenthood and academia: work/family stress as influenced by gender and tenure status’, Journal of Family Issues, 26 (1), 79‒106. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X04265942. Park, S. (1996) ‘Research, teaching, and service: why shouldn’t women’s work count?’, Journal of Higher Education, 67 (1), 46–84. Peterson, H. (2016) ‘Is managing academics “women’s work”? Exploring the glass cliff in higher education management’, Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 44 (1), 112–27. Rafnsdóttir, G. and T. Heijstra (2013) ‘Balancing work–family life in academia: the power of time’, Gender, Work and Organization, 20 (3), 283–96. Rafols, I., L. Leydesdorff, A. O’Hare, et al. (2012) ‘How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: a comparison between innovation studies and business and management’, Research Policy, 41 (7), 1262–82. Sang, K., A. Powell and J. Richards (2015) ‘“Being an academic is not a 9–5 job”: long working hours and the “ideal worker” in UK academia’, Labour and Industry: A Journal of the Social and Economic Relations of Work, 25 (3), 235–49. Saunderson, W. (2002) ‘Women, academia and identity: constructions of equal opportunities in the “New Managerialism” – a case of “lipstick on the gorilla”?’, Higher Education Quarterly, 56 (4), 376–406. Shore, C. (2008) ‘Audit culture and illiberal governance: universities and the politics of accountability’, Anthropological Theory, 8 (3), 278–98. Slaughter, S. and G. Rhodes (2004) Academic Capitalism and the New Economy: Markets, State, and Higher Education, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Smith, J. (2010) ‘Forging identities: the experiences of probationary lecturers in the UK’, Studies in Higher Education, 35 (5), 577–91. Teelken, C. (2015) ‘Hybridity, coping mechanisms, and academic performance management: comparing three countries’, Public Administration, 93 (2), 307–23. Teelken, C. and R. Deem (2013) ‘All are equal, but some are more equal than others: managerialism and gender equality in higher education in comparative perspective’, Comparative Education, 49 (4), 520–35. Thornton, M. (2013) ‘The mirage of merit: reconstituting the “ideal academic”’, Australian Feminist Studies, 28 (76), 127–43. Tzanakou, C. (2017) ‘Dual career couples in academia, international mobility and dual career services in Europe’, European Educational Research Journal, 16 (2/3), 298–312. UN (1995) Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, Fourth World Conference on Women, United Nations. Valian, V. (2005) ‘Beyond gender schemas: improving the advancement of women in academia’, Hypatia, 20 (3), 198–213. van den Brink, M. and Y. Benschop (2012) ‘Gender practices in the construction of academic excellence: sheep with five legs’, Organization, 19 (4), 507–24. van den Brink, M. and Y. Benschop (2014) ‘Gender in academic networking: the role of gatekeepers in professorial recruitment’, Journal of Management Studies, 51 (3), 460–92. Woodward, D. (2007) ‘Work‒life balancing strategies used by women managers in British “modern” universities’, Equal Opportunities International, 26 (1), 6–17.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 34

13/12/2019 15:47

3. Becoming a professor requires saying ‘No’: merging equality and quality agendas in a Norwegian gender balance project Rebecca Lund 3.1 INTRODUCTION: THE NORWEGIAN GENDER SYSTEM AND THE BALANCE PROGRAMME In 1912, Kristine Bonnevie became the first woman to achieve a professorship in Norway. She became Professor of Zoology at the University of Oslo,1 in a discipline and field that was, at the time, considered more appropriate for men. This was the year before women achieved the right to vote in Norway. Much has happened in Norway since then. Norway is considered one of the most gender equal countries in the world and gender equality is a significant part of the Norwegian self-understanding, promoted through a social democratic dual-earner family model and women-friendly welfare policies (Borchorst and Siim, 2008). Women are entering higher education in high numbers and they are doing well (Lehre et al., 2009), they are receiving doctorates and enter into academic career paths (European Commission, 2015). But all is not well: despite positive changes, development is slow; and horizontal as well as vertical gender segregation remains a problem (Ulvestad, 2017). In 2014 women held only 26 per cent of all full professorships in Norway. Apart from state-regulated demand that all Norwegian workplaces and higher education2 institutions should work to further gender equality and act against discrimination on the basis of inability, ethnicity and sexuality (Lov om Likestilling og forbud   Information retrieved from the Norway’s Biographical Lexicon on 14 August 2017 at https://nbl.snl.no/Kristine_Bonnevie. 2   For an example of an equality and anti-discrimination plan see Equality and Integration Committee Action Plan 2016‒2020 at the University of Agder: see https://www.uia.no/om-uia/uia-og-likestilling. 1

­35

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 35

13/12/2019 15:47

36

Gender, science and innovation

mot ­diskriminering 2017), a number of non-obligatory gender equality ­initiatives targeted at specific groups have been established, in order to further gender equality in professorships and research leadership. The Balance Programme is one such initiative. This chapter explores the enactment of the Balance Programme at one Norwegian University, University of Agder (UiA). The chapter draws on the conceptual tools of institutional ethnography as developed by feminist sociologist Dorothy Smith (2005). In the chapter I seek to map the social organization of everyday life within UiA; and more particularly, from the standpoint of junior female academics, I attempt to understand how their academic work and lives are organized in ruling relations of quality and gender that come together in the UiA Balance Project. The chapter is organized as follows: firstly, some information is provided about the Balance Programme more generally, followed by an explication of the way in which the Balance Project has taken form at UiA. This includes insights into the specific history of UiA, and regional particularities shaping the gender challenges of UiA and informing the challenges that the Balance Project attempts to target. Secondly, institutional ethnography is introduced as the method of inquiry for exploring the ruling relations of gender and quality at UiA. This introduction is followed by a brief review of theoretical debates of neoliberal feminism which this chapter is contributing to. Thirdly, I engage in analysis by mapping and analysing the ruling relations of quality and gender, from the standpoint of junior female academics. In the concluding section of the chapter the Balance Project’s ability to challenge gender inequality is discussed and concluded upon.

3.2 THE BALANCE PROGRAMME: MERGING EQUALITY AND QUALITY IN NORWEGIAN ACADEMIA The Balance Programme is a Norwegian national action-oriented programme (2013–2017),3 aimed at increasing the number of women in professorships and academic leadership positions. The ambition is to reach this goal through the production of new knowledge and innovation and ultimately the creation of a learning arena; practical change initiatives, dialogue and a research-based toolbox for making cultural and struc-

3   For detailed information see Programme Description in English at https://www. forskningsradet.no/prognett-balanse/Programme_description/1253964606599.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 36

13/12/2019 15:47



Merging equality and quality agendas ­37

tural change to improve gender balance and equality in the Norwegian research sector.4 Rather than create national-level standardized tools and approaches, the programme has aimed at recognizing local histories, differences and particular challenges. Upon applying for participation in the programme the applicant organization is then asked to identify and address concrete local challenges. The Norwegian Research Council provides funding for carrying out the project only insofar as the university management has provided a written statement of being committed to the project and its success. The research and change work done must be carried out in close collaboration with the university leadership in order to secure the long-term success of the efforts. According to the Norwegian Research Council the ultimate goal of the project is for Norwegian academia to become internationally leading in terms of gender equality and change initiatives. Aligning this agenda with the ongoing Norwegian ‘Quality Reform’ for Higher Education, initiated in 2003 in order to align Norway with the European Union’s (EU) Bologna Process and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) recommendations for making higher education competitive in the so-called knowledge economy,5 it is explicitly assumed that gender equality improves research quality because it increases the talent pool, as well as improving the societal relevance and international competitiveness of Norwegian research and higher education. The initiative can be seen as an attempt to respond to worries that the Norwegian Quality Reform has had a negative impact on gender inequality among faculty.6 3.2.1  The Balance Project at the University of Agder Norway has a population of approximately 5.2 million and a higher education sector consisting of nine universities, eight specialized universities, and 27 university colleges spread across the country. In addition there are some 14 private university colleges with accredited programmes. UiA is 4   Research results from Balance Projects in different Norwegian universities have, among other places, been published in the Norwegian Journal for Gender Research/Tidsskrift for Kjönnsforskning, Special Issue on Gender Balance and Equality/Kjönnsbalanse og Likestilling, in January 2017. 5   For a brief summary of the goal of the reform, see the government website: https://www.regjeringen.no/en/topics/education/higher-education/innsikt/struk​tur​ -i-hoyere-utdanning/goals-for-reform/id2416293/. For a summary of the reform components in Norwegian see: https://snl.no/Kvalitetsreformen. 6   Committee for Equality and Diversity in Research. See: http://kifinfo.no/en/ content/committee-gender-balance-and-diversity-research-kif-0.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 37

13/12/2019 15:47

38

Gender, science and innovation

one of Norway’s newest public universities founded in 2007,7 but its roots go back 170 years, when Norway was still part of Denmark. Kristiansand Teachers’ Training College was established in 1839; Arendal College of Nursing in 1929; Agder Music Conservatory in 1965; Agder Regional College of Technology (Engineering) in 1967; Agder Regional College in 1969; Kristiansand College of Nursing in 1976. All six regional colleges were merged in 1994 into one institution, Agder University College. It received full university accreditation in 2007, becoming UiA. This was based on funding, lobbying and collaborative effort together with regional businesses and think tanks, which believed this to be essential for the future economic competitiveness of the Agder region. Today UiA has 11 000 students, 1100 employees and an annual budget of 950 million NOK. It now includes faculties of social science, humanities and fine arts, has 14 PhD specializations, 33 MA programmes and 44 BA programmes. UiA aims to be cutting-edge and internationally competitive in innovation, education and research. While Norway is not part of the EU, Norwegian higher education (HE) institutions are involved in many EU projects and Norway adheres to EU standards on HE and research and innovation. Standardized measures of excellence in terms of publication (the Norwegian Tellekant system ranks journals as level 1 or level 2, with level 2 being the best) and student intake and output performance indicators, shape the state’s funding of Norwegian universities. However, although UiA has achieved university status, and seeks to boost its research profile, it does not have status as a research-intense Norwegian university (such as the University of Oslo or the Norwegian University of Science and Technology). UiA is still funded by the state as a teaching college, which means that first and foremost it receives funding on the basis of how many students complete the programmes. In practice this means that faculty on average, and compared to other universities, are allocated smaller quantities of research time, and faculty for the most part can only increase their allotted research time by first increasing their research output. While Norway can be considered a family- and women-friendly society, horizontal and vertical segregation in education and working life remains an issue. The region of Agder, where UiA is located, is characterized by being significantly less gender equal than any other region in Norway. According to a number of studies (Senter for Likestilling and Agder Forskning, 2015; Skarpenes and Eklund Nilsen, 2011; Røed et al., 2009; Magnussen et al., 2005), many women in Agder do not re-enter full-time   Nord University was established in 2016.

7

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 38

13/12/2019 15:47



Merging equality and quality agendas ­39

employment before their children move away from home, and the labour market is highly segregated. The studies point towards the regional history of poverty, heavy industry which offered jobs for male workers, and the stronghold of the Lutheran evangelical church up until today, to explain the specific characteristics of this region. Magnussen et al. (2005, more specifically, argue that these characteristics have manifested in the celebration of traditional family values, large families, gender stereotypes and a gendered organization of labour. This has shaped local family ideals and ideologies of motherhood, contributing to the creation and maintenance of gender inequality in the region, including the gender culture at UiA. Norwegian law requires that universities and teaching colleges work to further gender equality and counter discrimination in appointments, boards and leadership. They are required by the Ministry of Education and Research (in Norwegian, Kunnskaps-departementet) to formulate equality and inclusion action plans and, on an annual basis, evaluate their integration and effects. The Ministry specifies a number of measures and categories which the annual evaluation must address and report on. UiA has a 50 per cent position allocated to an Equality Advisor who is responsible for these reports and acts as secretary to the Committee for Gender Equality and Inclusion (in Norwegian, Likestillings- og Inkluderingsutvalget). When UiA first applied for funding from the Balance Programme, the application and project was defined on the basis of the problems identified in such reports and evaluations. The Balance Project at UiA had to address the lack of gender equality in professorships and research leadership, in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) subjects as well as in humanities and social sciences. At the time of writing in the autumn of 2017, the aim is to increase the percentage of female professors to 35 by the summer of 2018. The project has four dimensions: firstly, to integrate gender sensitivity into the university management structures through leadership training and meetings; secondly, actively to combat and break the ‘glass ceiling’ by establishing ‘preliminary evaluation committees’, providing career counselling for selected female associate professors within UiA, so they may qualify for a promotion to full professor;8 thirdly, to establish ‘search and find committees’ in order to hand-pick and invite talented women from outside UiA 8   This initiative is regulated under Norwegian Rules for Career Advancement in Universities, including professorship qualification. According to this set of rules and guidelines, academics can apply for professorship qualification on the basis of competence and merit, with deadlines settled by the relevant department. An independent committee evaluates competence on the basis of international and national standards for teaching and research, and in accordance with guidelines

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 39

13/12/2019 15:47

40

Gender, science and innovation

to apply for professorships; and fourthly, a research module consisting of an evaluation of the implementation and outcomes of the action measures listed above, and a study of the gendered nature of academic work, academic cultures and the institutional dimensions reproducing these. On the basis of this, advice and feedback will be formulated. Approximately one year into the Balance Project a new university Rector was appointed, and thus became the formal Project Leader of the Balance Project. He decided to make a numerical map of the university, providing department and institute breakdowns in order to identify how institutes and departments were doing in terms of female representation among professors and research leaders. It turned out that seven institutes and four departments had no female professors at all, and some of them did not even have female associate professors. Following this finding the Rector then divided the institutes into three groups: ‘Red institutes’ consist of those with less than 20 per cent female professors; ‘Yellow institutes’ between 20 and 40 per cent female professors; and ‘Green institutes’ with more than 40 per cent female professors. The Green institutes are not required to adapt themselves to the action plan of the Balance Project. On the other hand, the Red institutes, and in some cases the Yellow, are required to adapt to the balance actions and seek to increase equality. In order to make sure that this happens, the Rector has allocated funding from the university’s own budget, so that the Red institutes can invite women to a Professor 2 position (a part-time, 20 per cent professorship that can be granted to an academic employed at a different university in Norway or abroad). These are then in turn required to engage actively in the work and efforts for increasing gender equality at the given institute. The argument from the rectorate is that their presence will contribute to a change of the culture. Furthermore, to ease the burden on the Red institutes, each faculty (Social Science, Business, Arts, Technology) has been granted money to allocate one day a week to a member of their administration or faculty for ‘balance work’. This time should be spent taking the steps necessary to push or pull the project actions forward and ensure that the ambitions for 2018 are met. At each faculty a relevant person has been identified and approached to take on the job. In each case it has been a woman in an administrative or junior academic position.9 The project leader and the project coordinators place emphasis on requiring equality competence among applicants for leadership positions specified by the Ministry of Education and Research. See: https://www.forskerfor​ bundet.no/verktoykasse/opprykksreglement/. 9   See: ‘Hunting for Female Professor Candidates’, accessed 1 August 2017 at https://www.uia.no/nyheter/jakter-paa-kvinnelige-professoremner.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 40

13/12/2019 15:47



Merging equality and quality agendas ­41

at UiA,10 on increasing the recruitment of women from outside UiA and on ensuring women’s career progress within UiA. In doing so they identified 70 female assistant professors at UiA and invited all of them to a so-called ‘Career Progress Seminar’. According to the senior advisor there tended to be lack of clarity about criteria for climbing the career ladder; and furthermore, women tended to be less knowledgeable about evaluation and the qualification criteria than did men. Approximately half of those invited turned up. Institute leaders have also been informed about these so that they can encourage and support female faculty members at their institute to make more focused and strategic career planning decisions. By the autumn of 2017, approximately 20 female assistant professors had received or were in the process of receiving preliminary evaluations. Additional ‘Career Progress Seminars’ have been planned and will include recently appointed female professors and one female assistant professor, who will each speak about their experiences of evaluations and progress. Furthermore, ‘Shut Up and Write’ seminars will be organized for assistant professors, in order to create spaces for writing up journal articles. Finally, another set of seminars are being planned and will focus on ‘Why One Should Become a Professor’. The idea of these is to make people mindful of the fact that professorships are not just about individual career goals, but about serving the academic community and social responsibilities. The work of ‘Search and Find Committees’ has progressed slowly, and a project coordinator described this as being due to the lack of clarity of the job description. The project leader and coordinators have recently worked on this. The purpose of the committee is to increase the pool of external female applicants for professorship positions, through the active mobilization of national and international networks. On the basis of the assumption that women tend to have more women in their professional and academic networks, UiA management has now required that at least one committee member should be a woman, arguing that this will ensure that the job descriptions and calls for applications do not scare away female applicants.

3.3 MAPPING THE RULING RELATIONS OF THE BALANCE PROJECT Institutional ethnography can be described as a theorized practice for mapping the social organization of everyday life (Campbell and Gregor,

10   See: ‘More want Gender Competent Managers’, accessed 1 August 2017 at http://kifinfo.no/en/2017/02/more-want-gender-competent-managers.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 41

13/12/2019 15:47

42

Gender, science and innovation

2004; Smith, 1990a, 1990b, 2009). In line with the standpoint of feminist tradition (Harding, 1993, 2007; Haraway, 1988), Dorothy Smith suggests that we ought to begin our inquiry from a standpoint within social relations. The institutional ethnographer analyzes experience as shaped in social relations and perceives the experience as ‘work knowledge’; that is, everything people do as they participate in (re)producing or subverting institutional orders. Exploration starts within a specific local setting where people carry out their everyday activities, and searches for clues in these accounts that help to explain how activity is coordinated in sequences of action connecting them to people located elsewhere, in order to identify how local activity engages people into ‘translocal’ social relations. Some of these relations are ‘text-mediated’ and are organized through what Smith (2005) terms ‘ruling relations’. These include concepts, categories, ideologies, discourses and procedures for action. These relations shape the activities and experiences of people, as they encounter, take up, read/listen and interpret the texts making institutional goals and intentions actionable. 3.3.1  Feminist Critiques of Gender Equality Agenda Feminist scholars have long critiqued the ways in which the gender equality agenda has been co-opted by neoliberalism and capitalism, thus pinpointing how feminism has become an instrument of exploitation; that is, in the terminology of institutional ethnography, part of the ruling relations. This is a co-option that has happened in conjunction with an increasingly transformative dialogue between social activism and scholarly knowledge, which has resulted in assimilating even the most radical feminist critiques of power into a discursive and activist practice acceptable to the mainstream (Messer-Davidow, 2002). Nancy Fraser (2013) showed how feminist critiques have been transformed and co-opted by neoliberalism. Firstly, feminist critique of the ‘family wage model’ has legitimized flexible capitalism and led to the victory of the ‘two-earner family’ model. While this has been recognized as ‘female empowerment’, the reality is rather one of increased tolerance of exploitation. That is, increased wage gaps, decreasing job security, declining living standards, increased working hours and stress, to mention a few. Secondly, feminist critique of cultural sexism has taken away focus from questions of structural inequality, making feminist critique something done on individualist terms rather than in collective struggle. Thirdly, feminist critiques of ‘welfare state paternalism’ have been converted into a neoliberal war on the ‘nanny state’, justifying the replacement of macroscale redistributive efforts with micro-scale ‘empowerment’ initiatives that

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 42

13/12/2019 15:47



Merging equality and quality agendas ­43

in turn legitimize austerity and the privatizing of state services (Fraser, 2013). Along similar lines, Hester Eisenstein (2009) has argued that feminism has come to serve the agenda of global capitalism and the white elite by abandoning structural questions of race and class and replacing these with an agenda of women’s access to work and career, the war on terror, and securing the future economic competitiveness of the nation state. Feminism has been reduced to an imperialist and capitalist right to compete. This so-called neoliberal co-option of feminist agenda is epitomised in what Catherine Rottenberg (2014) has named the ‘lean-in feminist’ subject.11 This draws attention to a particular kind of inequality, and offers tools and methods to reflect upon and address questions of gender inequality that both ‘inscribes and circumscribes’ a critique of inequality. This is a form of feminism that ‘showcases enlightened superiority’ and fits into the neoliberal ideals of the reflexive leader, worker and organization (Rottenberg, 2014, p. 418). The lean-in feminist subject is displacing the liberal feminist subject, reformulating the fight for justice in individualistic terms. She is ‘distinctly aware of current inequalities between men and women’, but simultaneously she ‘disavows the social, cultural and economic forces producing this inequality’ and ‘accepts full responsibility for her own well-being and self-care’, which is based on ‘finding work‒family balance based on careful cost‒benefit analysis. The neoliberal feminist is mobilized to convert continued gender inequality from a structural problem into an individual affair’ (Rottenberg, 2014, p. 420). In June 2017 an article named ‘You Have to Say No to Become a Professor’ (Du må si nei for å bli professor)12 – citing two recently appointed female professors who had participated in Balance Project initiatives at UiA and the University of Oslo – was published in the Norwegian online magazine for equality and diversity in academia, Kifinfo. This article is a good illustration of the development that the feminist scholars above describe. Women are taught how to say ‘No’ to the things that do not count, in favour of making a career for themselves; they learn to prioritize and (in the words of one of the UiA research participants) to ‘run through the university corridors with wind in their hair and plugs in their ears’. A number of seminars and actions mobilize female assistant ­professors to provide an individualized response to a structural problem and discipline themselves for the right kind of career path. While it is certainly very important to say ‘No’, it does not solve the problem that their   Referring to the bestseller book Lean In published by Sheryl Sandberg in March 2013. 12  http://kifinfo.no/nb/2017/06/du-ma-si-nei-bli-professor. 11

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 43

13/12/2019 15:47

44

Gender, science and innovation

success is made possible by other people saying ‘Yes’. Those are often women on short-term teaching contracts; with teaching and administrative overload; who carry out casualized and exploitable labour without career prospects (Blackmore, 2017; Rowlands, 2017). The following analysis contributes, from the standpoint of junior female academics, to feminist discussions of what happens when the feminist agenda for social justice and equality is reduced to numbers and incorporated into managerial strategies: on the one hand, having explicitly strategically articulated ambitions with defined measurable and comparable outcomes; and on the other hand, becoming organized and distributed through particular ways of knowing gender, equality and quality. We argue that, while it does allow for the countering of certain forms of inequality, it also leads to the reproduction of orders of privilege.

3.4 MAPPING THE BALANCE PROJECT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF FEMALE ACADEMICS The standpoint of female academics at UiA is the point of entry for discovering the ruling relations of equality and quality assurance as meditated through the texts in and around the Balance Project. At the time of the study, these people were at different stages in their careers, employed on either fixed-term or permanent contracts, and they were in one way or another affected by UiA’s ambition of excellence. Due to my background in research on gender in academia I became involved as an expert researcher in the Balance Project during the autumn of 2015. UiA was visited for data production purposes approximately seven times over the following one-and-a-half-years and collaborations established with two researchers who had been active in the project from the point of submitting an application to the Research Council. Together we generated various empirical materials for exploring how experiences and opportunities were shaped. Approximately 25 in-depth interviews over a period of approximately one year starting from spring 2016 were undertaken. Together with observant participation (Moeran, 2009), and a variety of policy and organizational texts, these served in making sense of junior female academics’ everyday lives within the university and outside it, how the Balance Project took form, and how this shaped their everyday activities and opportunities. As an early career female academic from Denmark, I came to UiA with no prior knowledge of the university and its predecessor organizations. Getting detailed knowledge of the organization involved many conversations with co-researchers who were long-term insiders who spent their

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 44

13/12/2019 15:47



Merging equality and quality agendas ­45

everyday working lives there. They would provide insights, observations, networks and connections that were useful for significant engagement and interpretations of interview data. Close collaboration between the three researchers has been significant for developing knowledge of organizational, regional and national specificities. The in-depth interviews were carried out in Danish and in Norwegian, with the purpose of unpacking how the activity and experience reported by research participants becomes socially organized. All interviews were transcribed externally and anonymized subsequently by the project researchers. In this chapter the quotes have been translated into English with a commitment to capturing the particular meanings conveyed. In the accounts of participants, textual and other coordinative clues of translocal social and ruling relations have been sought. Interviews were used to investigate how texts, discourses, and knowledge of gender and quality are activated and how they shape local experiences and work. Each interview lasted between one and one-and-a-half hours and some people had two interviews. Most research participants were early career female academics, but some were male early career academics; male and female professors, as well as academic and administrative managers, were interviewed in order to get an impression of work relations. There was variation between the interviewees’ workplaces in terms of female presence and the degree of critical reflection on gender-related issues, but overall, questions of gender equality and the agenda of the Balance Project was a topic about which all had an opinion.

3.5 MAKING A TOP QUALITY GENDER EQUAL UNIVERSITY 3.5.1  Disjunction Between What Is Needed and What Is Rewarded UiA is characterized by gendered divisions of labour in the home and at the university. This is despite the fact that Norway has progressive paternity leave policies, provides daycare for children at a reasonable price, and has other policy measures to ensure the thriving of a dual-earner family model (Eydal and Rostgaard, 2016; Brandth and Kvande, 2013). Despite women surpassing men in terms of educational levels, and equalling them in terms of entering PhD programmes and academic career paths since 2000 (Senter for Likestilling and Agder Forskning, 2015), women are not progressing to the upper echelons to the same extent, nor at the same speed, as men, and in some disciplines they do not reach assistant professorship level at all. The data suggest that the reason for

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 45

13/12/2019 15:47

46

Gender, science and innovation

the ­persistency of this pattern is that women lack the knowledge and time to do the work that counts in promotions and job evaluations; that the regional gendered culture and historically rooted segregation is reproduced by men and women at the university. The interview with junior female academic, Karen (a pseudonym), serves as a good entry point for mapping out the ruling relations of gender and quality, as it highlights a problem. UiA’s agenda of quality does not take into consideration how people are divergently positioned within the social relations in terms of living up to the quality criteria: Karen: I haven’t had anything published the last couple of years. For a number of years I acted as [an academic manager], then I had to leave the university for a while because of stress, and before that I had been completely overloaded with teaching responsibilities for a few years. And yes, I probably should have been better at saying no to all that teaching, but I have not been very good at that. I have always been a Yes-person . . . I have been ascribed the role of someone who notices issues and takes care of them. Yes, it is rather crazy. You are in a kind of hamster wheel. It never stops. It never ends . . . It is never a man who enters that wheel. Not in my department . . . They protect themselves, they protect themselves very much . . . That is one of the things that is so very challenging about the university culture we are currently creating here at UiA. Because we have a management that is actively encouraging that kind of behaviour

Karen, like other junior female academics spoken to, describes an everyday life characterized by a lot of teaching, emotional work connected with helping students, and administrative responsibilities that do not really count in competence evaluations. Several of the research participants reported that they struggle to find a balance between the kind of work that is needed to keep UiA running financially and in practice, and the kind of work that is rewarded with career progress and ultimately a professorship. Junior female academics reported that it seemed much easier for their male colleagues to back away from responsibilities and focus on the rewarded work. They also explained finding it hard to say ‘No’ and that it was often expected of them to ‘take care of things’. In what follows I analyse the disjuncture between the institutional requirements and the actuality of everyday work at the university, by explaining those ruling relations that Karen herself hints towards, and that have shaped her experience. Firstly, the ruling relations of quality shaping the university strategy, which is characterized by internal contradictions: on the one hand, arguing for the ‘centrality and importance of teaching’, ‘teaching development’ and ‘generosity’; and on the other hand, encouraging people to ‘protect themselves’ from the work that does not count in order to pursue a career and help improve the international reputation of

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 46

13/12/2019 15:47



Merging equality and quality agendas ­47

UiA. Secondly, the ruling relations of gender shaping the departmental culture and the division of labour within these. Finally, I show how these come together and are reproduced and challenged in the Balance Project. 3.5.2  The Ruling Relations of Quality UiA has very high ambitions to become a leading teaching and research university and employs discourses meditated through OECD recommendations, the European Research Area (ERA)13 and the Norwegian Quality Reform, emphasizing openness and inclusion, a global mindset, the co-creation of knowledge between staff, students and wider community, education for the future and social innovation.14 In and around the university websites it is possible to see how this teaching and research excellence is being defined and discursively constructed. The Rector and Vice-Rector for teaching at UiA, in an interview as part of this research as well as in the UiA strategy, emphasize the importance of making teaching quality quantifiable and comparable, in order for excellent teaching staff to be acknowledged. However, at this stage such comparable standards are only in the early stages of being developed and their effect remains to be seen. Hence, until further notice, emphasis is still placed on research as a measurable and comparable output on the basis of which excellent academics can be identified. The faculty at each school and department formulate a strategy, explaining what their goals are, how they propose to achieve them and how they fit into to the overall strategy of the university. Key performance indicators of faculty members and department/ school were listed at one faculty as: (1) number of publication points per full-time faculty member; (2) number of publications in level 2 journals;15 (3) Norwegian Kroners applied for in external research applications per year; (4) number of lectures conducted per semester and per programme; (5) total number of incoming and outgoing exchange students per year; (6) student completion rates per programme; (7) number of strategic meetings held with clusters, companies or government entities; (8) number of joint applications or projects developed with clusters, companies or   Although Norway is not a member of the European Union it is committed to collaboration on certain policy areas (such as higher education) and hence has carried through reforms of its sector to align with EU harmonization policies. 14   See: UiA Strategy 2016‒2020, https://www.uia.no/en/about-uia/organizati​ on/strategy-2016-2020. 15   Referring to the Tellekant system, which is Norway’s national journal ranking system effective since 2006. Journals are divided into level 1 and 2, where level 2 journals are the 20 per cent most influential scientific journals. See also the Norwegian Lexicon at https://snl.no/tellekantsystemet/. 13

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 47

13/12/2019 15:47

48

Gender, science and innovation

g­ overnment entities; (9) number of industrial PhD applications developed; and (10) number of work environment initiatives from the ARK intervention process completed.16 These goals, strategies and performance indicators are meant to make activities, people, departments, universities and ultimately diverging national higher education organizations measurable and comparable, and to ensure that all faculties move in a similar direction of increasing teaching and research excellence. So how do these texts shape the work and expectations held by research leaders and academic managers at UiA, and how does that in turn shape the experience of their junior female colleagues? The following quote, from conversations I had with two male professors, Martin and Michael (pseudonyms), from two different departments and disciplines, are illustrative: Interviewer: If you were to define what a good academic is, how would you do that? Michael: It is someone who does not distinguish between work and private life. Academic work is a lifestyle. You are driven by curiosity and always open to new ideas, and you cannot be that only from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. . . . a good academic has to provide top quality research . . . Good research is research that gets published in international top journals . . . Those who thrive with competition move forward, and those who do not thrive with competition tend to ­struggle with moving forward. Because the pressure is enormous in my field . . . I am afraid that I might also contribute to increasing the pressure on my colleagues because I thrive on it. But I try to motivate and help my colleagues to join me. Interviewer: If you were to define the good academic, how would you do that? Martin: Someone who delivers results and is committed . . . Being committed involves .  .  . that you engage, you take initiative and responsibility .  .  . you come to the office . . . another thing and the most important is that you deliver scientific results . . . If not, you have nothing to do here . . . A good academic publishes at top level. Tellekant defines that . . . Teaching is important for the universities, but it doesn’t leave any trace. It’s important here and now.

Both Michael and Martin emphasize different kinds of performance indicators and textually defined quality criteria, but they highlight research and publications in top journals as the most important indicators of competence. The quality criteria are considered neutral and objective, and success ultimately boils down to whether a person is sufficiently committed to their work and feels comfortable with competition, or not: academic work is a lifestyle that requires full commitment at any time of the day, week or year. Unlike Michael, Martin shows a lack of awareness of his

  The ARK intervention process is a research-based system for promoting psychosocial factors in the work environment (ARK intervention programmes website: https://www.ntnu.edu/ark). 16

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 48

13/12/2019 15:47



Merging equality and quality agendas ­49

own privilege in terms of producing publications and engaging in competition on several levels. Furthermore, while Michael expresses a wish that the work environment should be supportive, Martin seems insensitive towards the reasons people may have for not producing articles or staying away from the office. As the work of Patricia Palulis (2015) points out, staying away from campus may not be from lacking commitment to the work, but rather an expression of stress, fear of ‘institutionalised indiscretion’ and the experience of a harsh environment, where ‘we tend to eat our own’ (Thorne, 2015). But the question is, how are people positioned within the social and ruling relations of UiA in terms of choosing such a lifestyle and finding time to research and publish in top journals? 3.5.3  The Ruling Relations of Gender From the standpoint of Karen, introduced above, and many of her junior female colleagues, the ‘good academic’, as defined by the professors above, is not readily achievable (see also Bagilhole and Goode, 2001; Bailyn, 2003). Karen and her colleagues’ experience highlight how people are differently positioned in terms of living up to that standard. It is not a neutral standard of quality, but rather a standard that works in the interest of those in a position to do the work that counts; it is a position speaking from a place of privilege. Karen and others explicitly referred to divisions of labour in the home and particularly at the university as a gendered issue. The families of the junior female academics were often large, and while their husbands certainly were helpful with cleaning and cooking, they were not the ones who the children would phone during the work day, nor were they the ones who organized the social activities of the family. At work, male colleagues were often better at ‘protecting’ themselves from the kind of teaching and service work that did not benefit their career or position, and women experienced running around in a ‘hamster wheel’, running the university behind the scenes, while hardly finding time for publishing. The division is one that happens along lines of gender as defined within a heteronormative order of contradistinction and hierarchy between the feminine and the masculine (Lund, 2015; Rowlands, 2017). Feminized service, teaching and care for the well-being of students and colleagues is academic ‘household work’ on which the university depends; it is expected from women and this expectation is reproduced by men and women alike. While women can also say ‘No’ and some manage to protect themselves – that is, ‘do masculinity’ through focusing on what counts for their personal career advancement – it is often more difficult due to the ruling relations of gender that shape the local culture and expectations in Agder and the UiA.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 49

13/12/2019 15:47

50

Gender, science and innovation

Although this gendered division of labour is clear from the accounts provided by junior female academics as well as from the statistical reports (Senter for Likestilling and Agder Forskning, 2015), the implications of a ‘masculine career model’ are seldom recognized by those in influential positions, even those within departments marked as Red by the university Rector. This is illustrated in the quotation below, where Michael reflects on questions of gender and his notion of the ‘good academic’: Michael: I understand that my way of defining success can seem like a very strong masculine way of speaking, I think some women will claim. And perhaps even some men will claim that . . . But it is a lifestyle and it might be true that more men are willing to have such a lifestyle . . . perhaps men are more disposed for workaholism.

Michael is not purposefully seeking to exclude anyone, but as his reflection also illustrates, the notion of the ‘good academic’ that he stands for and promotes is not as easily achievable for women as it is for men. He explains that through invoking and reproducing a gender stereotype that ‘men are more disposed for workaholism’ and competition and hence for taking on the academic ‘lifestyle’. Instead of problematizing the textually mediated ideals and the competitive culture, he locates the problem in the nature of women and thereby reproduces the stereotypical notion that men are more suitable for academic work; ultimately justifying inequality. The same can be said of Martin: Martin: Eeehm, we know that they [women] do not publish as much. That’s the brutal truth . . . it’s difficult to be a top mother and a top researcher at the same time . . . research time at UiA is distributed on the basis of results. So that basically means that those who do not show research results, they are forced to teach more. And the more you teach the fewer results you will be able to provide. It’s a negative spiral and some have been in it for too long. That can be explained by a combination of lacking competence and will. They are lazy to be honest.

While Martin, on the one hand, comes off as an enlightened and progressive male professor (e.g., Holgersson, 2013) ‒ that is, well aware of the difficulties related to aligning the ideals of motherhood and academia, the ‘negative spiral’ that arises for some as a result of UiA’s funding model ‒ he does, on the other hand, voice the terms of evaluation as absolute and not up for negotiation. Speaking from a position of thriving with UiA’s current excellence standards, he seems blind towards the large amounts of other work his female colleagues do ‘behind the scenes’ at the university. He argues that women who do not produce research output are lazy and probably incompetent. This is a statement that is a very far cry from the

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 50

13/12/2019 15:47



Merging equality and quality agendas ­51

reports we received in our interviews, which told stories of work overload, stress and frustrations with never having enough time for research. Martin’s statement illustrates a dominant attitude among professors and academic managers: that success is rooted in the individual’s attitude and has very little to do with culture, economy and structure. This sort of attitude signals the way in which attempts to address the structural and cultural dimensions of gender inequality can only happen if the academic culture is addressed as gendered, and feminist masculinity is fostered (see, e.g., hooks, 2004). The intentional or unintentional reproduction of gendered ruling relations is furthermore supported by a tendency among male professors to position gender equality as a mission accomplished, one which is just a matter of time. This is very clearly expressed by Martin: ‘I don’t think gender is the most important question. I think it is generation and age. Because it’s just going to be a matter of time’. In some cases it was even argued that the most pressing problem was more likely ‘the opposite .  .  . men, rather than women, will be needing support’, assuming that the increase in women achieving degrees in higher education and their outnumbering of males in some fields in time will lead to women dominating the upper echelons of academia (Lund, 2015), despite evidence of the opposite tendency (e.g., EC, 2015; Senter for Likestilling and Agder Forskning, 2015). A similar pattern could be detected across the STEM sciences, social sciences and humanities, and therefore the data do not suggest that it makes sense to uphold dichotomies between these fields. It is not clear-cut that STEM subjects are organized along careerist masculinist logics and gender insensitivity, or that humanities and social sciences are defined by more caring feminine logics and gender sensitivity. The picture is significantly more complex, and at UiA several of the humanities and social science disciplines are dominated by male faculty, many of whom see gender equality initiatives as ‘discriminating against men’.  he Balance Project: Reproducing or Challenging Gendered 3.5.4  T Quality Regimes? So how does the Balance Project respond to the ruling relations of quality and gender? To what extent does it reproduce these, and to what extent does it in fact manage to challenge them and thereby have an effect that benefits junior female academics? The views on this were sought from those female academics who had participated in the Balance Project. One person described what she got from the Balance Project as ‘the cherry on the top’, illustrating that it provides support for those women who are

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 51

13/12/2019 15:47

52

Gender, science and innovation

already doing well in terms of living up to standardized quality criteria and increasing research time as a result. In fact, funds have been set aside by the Equality Committee, for which the department heads can apply to buy research time for female assistant professors who have participated in the Balance Project and are close to qualifying for professorship. Those who do not have a certain number of publications, or who are unable to place focus on their research, report that they are not invited to participate in the Balance Project activities. The following quote from an interview we did with Victoria [pseudonym], from a STEM science discipline, illustrates this: ‘Victoria: I was not invited to the Balance Project seminar . . . you know this professorship qualification seminar that all female assistant professors were invited to. I am simply not perceived to be an active researcher in the eyes of management.’ How female academics are positioned in terms of focusing on the activities that count and ultimately receive support from the Balance Project depends on the local culture and the academic management’s willingness to engage in communicating to faculty where they ought to focus their efforts, shaping an encouraging work culture that furthers gender equality. People have different points of entry for knowing or claiming space for this which makes it possible for them to pursue an academic career. Junior female academics reported that they experienced different degrees of access to the informal spaces with information about how much work people actually did, and where opportunities were passed on. Furthermore, they pinpointed that their success or ability to focus on the work ‘that counts’ would boil down to individual negotiations with the department head, who in turn is responsive to a particular budget allocation model. From the standpoint of those who are struggling, such as Karen (quoted earlier), with massive teaching and service loads and lacking opportunity to focus on their research, it is of course deeply problematic, because the individual negotiation model produces and strengthens polarization between those who say ‘No’ and those who say ‘Yes’: those in the ‘positive spiral’ and those in the ‘negative spiral’. Gender equality in the form of the Balance Project thus becomes the handmaiden of neoliberalism and its tendency for dividing the world into winners and losers (e.g., Fraser, 2013). The Balance Project does not question or challenge the dominant notion of the ‘good academic’ and the ‘masculine career model’ towards which it points (e.g., Lund, 2012; Monroe et al., 2008). Although the intention with the Balance Programme was to combat cultural and structural gender inequality, success in UiA’s Balance Project has been constructed and reduced to numerical success through individualized actions and support. As a result, and despite claiming to ‘not blame the individual’, it does not locate gender in the academic institutions and the masculine aca-

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 52

13/12/2019 15:47



Merging equality and quality agendas ­53

demic culture, but reduces it to ‘women’s right to compete’, and a life of work and careering (e.g., Eisenstein, 2009; Rottenberg, 2017). While more women might enter top positions at UiA as a result of the Balance Project efforts, the increased presence of female bodies there does not automatically translate into a more ‘women-friendly’, inclusive, equality-favouring and gender-sensitive culture. In fact, research shows that the women who are successful are not automatically very supportive towards their junior colleagues: they remove the ladder once they have climbed it themselves. The following quotation from a conversation with a female academic manager, Olga (pseudonym), illustrates that numbers are not enough: Olga: There are a few too many people in leadership roles at UiA who don’t really care about it, or take it seriously . . . On one occasion the Balance Project leader had invited a Swedish professor from the natural sciences who had a lot of experience of evaluating men and women’s competences and he showed that women were systematically considered less competent then men . . . it was not taken seriously at all . . . that has consequences . . . the longer I have spent in working life, the more aware I become of the gender differences and stereotypes at play here and how taken for granted it is. It is extremely tiring. And it is even more tiring when no one takes it seriously and you are perceived as someone who is just complaining for the sake of it.

Olga emphasizes how gender stereotypes, prejudices and the lack of leadership commitment are the root cause of continuing gender inequality. She pinpoints the need to bring these critical perspectives into management team meetings and take them seriously.

3.6 CONCLUSION Both men and women struggle to live up to the dominant notions of the ‘good academic’, but women are more systematically disadvantaged due to the gender culture at UiA, in Agder and in Norway (see also Fotaki, 2013; van den Brink and Benschop, 2012, 2013; Monroe et al., 2008). Some women and men, however, are worse off than others when it comes to living up to prevalent excellence criteria. Women’s empowerment and ability to pursue a career has been incorporated in the corporate social responsibility agenda and is perceived as an asset for growth and development (Prügl, 2017). The Balance Programme agenda generally, and at UiA particularly, is aligned with a broader ­tendency in the Western world. The analysis above contributes to feminist discussions on what happens when the feminist agenda for social justice and equality is reduced to body counts and incorporated in managerial strategies to ensure quality or excellence. On the one hand these are

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 53

13/12/2019 15:47

54

Gender, science and innovation

explicitly strategized ambitions with defined measurable and comparable outcomes. On the other hand, they are organized and distributed through particular discourses about what counts as equality, and in accordance to particular quality standards. I argue that while it does allow for the countering of certain forms of numerical inequality and puts equality on the debate agenda, it also takes part in reproducing the gap between winners and losers. Indeed, while the Balance Project has been quite successful at addressing and increasing the presence of female bodies in professorships, it is a project that so far has benefitted those who are already successfully and strategically managing their academic careers along the prevalent ideals of the ‘good academic’. So it may increase gender equality for the benefit of already privileged women, while reproducing the unprivileged position of others. Furthermore, since the project so far has not been successful in changing the culture or stereotypes, but has emphasized individualized support and responses, it is unlikely that its effects will be long term. The mere presence of more women in the professorate may be good in the sense they can be important role models for younger women, but it is no guarantee that a more woman-friendly environment is produced if they are reproducing the ‘masculine career model’. The data and analysis illuminate the difficulties in aligning the agenda of equality and quality within an academic culture that tends to deny that questions of quality are themselves gendered. Junior female academics – as long as they pursue a broad academic model, encompassing teaching, research and service ‒ will not make it to the upper echelons of academia. Most men pursue a narrow academic model that emphasizes research and publishing in highly ranked journals. Within a university and a knowledge economy the latter model is privileged. As a consequence, gender equality will persist and possibly widen, and women’s labour will continue to be exploited. The roots of the gendered divisions of labour need to be tackled at the level of everyday practices and academic culture. While the analysis draws on experiences of everyday life within a particular university, regional and national context, these experiences are hooked into wider global processes shaping higher education and academia, including dominant understandings of equality and quality. These processes thus reach beyond both the local and national particularities of the UiA. Analysis and conclusions concerning these processes will vary depending on contextual particularities, but they will also be recognizable internationally.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 54

13/12/2019 15:47



Merging equality and quality agendas ­55

REFERENCES Bagilhole, B. and J. Goode (2001), ‘The Contradiction of the Myth of Individual Merit and the Reality of a Patriarchal Support System in Academic Careers: A Feminist Investigation’, European Journal of Women’s Studies, 8 (2), 161–80. Bailyn, L. (2003), ‘Academic Careers and Gender Equity: Lessons learned from MIT’, Gender, Work and Organization, 10 (2), 137–55. Blackmore, J. (2017), ‘Leadership in Higher Education: A Critical Feminist Perspective on Global Restructuring’, in S. Wright and C. Shore (eds), Death of the Public University?, New York: Berghahn Press. Borchorst, A. and B. Siim (2008), ‘Woman Friendly Policies and State Feminism: Theorizing Scandinavian Gender Equality’, Feminist Theory, 9 (2), 207–24. Brandth, B. and E. Kvande (2013), Fedrekvoten og den farsvenlige velferdsstaten (The father quota and the father friendly welfare state). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Campbell, M. and F. Gregor (2004), Mapping the Social Relations: A Primer in Doing Institutional Ethnography, New York: AltaMira Press. Eisenstein, H. (2009), Feminism Seduced: How Global Elites Use Women’s Labor and Ideas to Exploit the World, New York: Routledge. European Commission (EC) (2015), ‘Gender in Research and Innovation’, http:// ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/promoting-gender-eq​ uality-research-and-innovation. Eydal, G.B. and T. Rostgaard (2016), Fatherhood in the Nordic Welfare States: Comparing Care Policies and Practices, Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press. Fotaki, M. (2013), ‘No Woman is Like a Man (in Academia): The Masculine Symbolic Order and the Unwanted Female Body’, Organization Studies, 34 (9), 1251–75. Fraser, N. (2013), Fortunes of Feminism: From State-Managed Capitalism to Neoliberal Crisis, London: Verso. Haraway, D. (1988), ‘Situated Knowledge: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective’, Feminist Studies, 14 (3), 575–99. Harding, S. (1993), ‘Rethinking Standpoint Epistemology: What is “Strong Objectivity”?’, in L. Alcoff and E. Potter (eds), Feminist Epistemologies, New York: Routledge, pp. 49–82. Harding, S. (2007), ‘Feminist Standpoints’, in S.N. Hesse-Biber (ed.), Handbook of Feminist Research: Theory and Praxis, London: SAGE, pp. 45–69. Holgersson, C. (2013), ‘Recruiting Managing Directors: Doing Homosociality’, Gender, Work and Organization, 20 (4), 454‒66. hooks, b. (2004), The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity and Love, New York: Washington Square Press. Lehre, A.-C., A.H. Hansen and P. Laake (2009), ‘Gender and the 2003 Quality Reform in Higher Education in Norway’, Higher Education, 58 (5), 585–97. Lov om Likestilling og forbud mot diskriminering (Equality and Antidiscrimination Act) (2017), Lovdata: Barne-, likestillings- og inkluderingsdepartementet (Ministry of Children, Equality and Inclusion), Oslo. https://lovdata.no/dokume​nt/NLE/ lov/​2017-06-16-51. Lund, R. (2012), ‘Publishing to Become an Ideal Academic: An Institutional Ethnography and Feminist Critique’, Scandinavian Journal of Management, 28 (3), 218–28.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 55

13/12/2019 15:47

56

Gender, science and innovation

Lund, R. (2015), Doing the Ideal Academic: Gender, Exellence and Changing Academia, Helsinki: UniPress. Magnussen, M.-L., T. Mydland and G. Kvåle (2005), Arbeid Ute og hjemme: Sørlandske mødres valg og vurderinger. Kristiansand: Agder Forskning (Work outside and in the home: the choices and judgments of mothers from Southern Norway). Messer-Davidow, E. (2002), Disciplining Feminism: From Activism to Academic Discourse, Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Moeran, D. (2009), ‘From Participant Observation to Observant Participation’, in S. Ybema, D. Yanow, H. Wels and F.H. Kamsteeg (eds), Organizational Ethnography: Studying the Complexity of Everyday Life, London: SAGE, pp. 139–55. Monroe, K., S. Ozyurt, T. Wrigley and A. Alexander (2008), ‘Gender Inequality in Academia: Bad News from the Trenches, and some possible solutions’, Perspectives on Politics, 6 (2), 215‒33. Palulis, P. (2015), ‘Tenure (Un)secure/d: As Words Go into Labour’, in E. Whittaker (ed.), Solitudes of the Workplace: Women in Universities, Montreal: McGill University Press, pp. 80‒100. Prügl, E. (2017), ‘Neoliberalism with a Feminist Face: Crafting a New Hegemony at the World Bank’, Feminist Economics, 23 (1), 30–53. Røed, H., K. Hilde and K.M. Hjemdahl (2009), Kulturen og det regionale Norge (Culture and the regional Norway), Kristiansand: Agder Forskning. Rottenberg, C. (2014), ‘The Rise of Neoliberal Feminism’, Cultural Studies, 28 (3), 418–37. Rottenberg, C. (2018), ‘Women Who Work: The Limits of the Neoliberal Feminist Paradigm’, Gender, Work and Organisation, 26 (8), 1073‒82. Rowlands, J. (2017), ‘The Domestic Labor of Academic Governance and the Loss of Academic Voice’, Gender and Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2 017.132413. Sandberg, S. (2013), Lean In: Women, Work and the Will to Lead, New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Senter for Likestilling and Agder Forskning (2015), Likestillings Monitor Agder 2008–2015 (Equality Monitoring report 2008–2015, Agder region), Kristainsand: Agder Forskning. Skarpenes, O. and A.C. Eklund Nilsen (2011), Kjønnsforskjeller i en likhetskultur: En studie av arbeidsdeling, sosialisering og likestilling i Agder (Gender differences in an equality culture: a study of labour division, socialising and gender equality in Agder), Kristiansand: Agderforskning. Smith, D. (1990a), The Conceptual Practices of Power: A Feminist Sociology of Knowledge, Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Smith, D. (1990b), Texts, Facts and Femininity: Exploring the Relations of Ruling, New York: Routledge. Smith, D. (2005), Institutional Ethnography: A Sociology for People, Oxford: AltaMira Press. Smith, D. (2009), ‘Categories Are Not Enough’, Gender and Society, 23 (1), 76–80. Thorne, S.E. (2015), ‘A view from the Pinnacle: Conversation with Martha Piper’, in E. Whittaker (ed.), Solitudes of the Workplace: Women in Universities, Montreal: McGill University Press, pp. xiii‒xxix. Ulvestad, J.M. (2017), ‘Fremad i alle retninger: Implementering af Kjønnsbalanse

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 56

13/12/2019 15:47



Merging equality and quality agendas ­57

i Akademia’ (Moving forward in all directions: implementing gender balance in academia), Tidsskrift for Kjønnsforskning, 40, pp. 5–21. Van den Brink, M. and Y. Benschop (2012)‚ ‘Slaying the Seven-Headed Dragon: The Quest for Gender Change in Academia’, Gender, Work and Organization, 19 (1), 71‒92. Van den Brink, M. and Y. Benschop (2013), ‘Gender Practices in the Construction of Academic Excellence: Sheep with Five Legs’, Organization, 19 (4), 507–24.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 57

13/12/2019 15:47

4. The National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE programme: issues for senior compared to junior academic women scientists Sue Rosser 4.1 INTRODUCTION Initiated in 2001, the United States (US) National Science Foundation’s (NSF) cross-directorate ADVANCE programme launched a national effort towards encouraging academic institutions to transform and to evolve policies and practices to facilitate careers for women scientists and engineers. From its inception, a major theme of ADVANCE centred on advancing women to senior leadership positions such as professor, chair, dean and beyond. This was reiterated in its 2011 Program Solicitation: ‘for many decades, an increasing number of women have obtained STEM [science, technology, engineering, mathematics] doctoral degrees, yet women continue to be significantly underrepresented in almost all STEM academic positions. The degree of underrepresentation varies among STEM disciplines, although women’s advancement to senior ranks and leadership is an issue in all fields’ (NSF, 2011). This chapter focuses on how issues facing senior women differ from those of junior women, and whether these have changed over time. This focus becomes important for revealing the intersectionalities of age and career advancement with gender. Evidence is drawn from two surveys of the Professional Opportunities for Women in Research and Education (POWRE) programme, the initiative preceding ADVANCE, leading to the conclusion that there is far less understanding of the issues facing senior women than those for junior women. In the next section, the chapter documents how the US National Science Foundation has introduced a series of initiatives designed to improve career opportunities for both junior and senior women in science.

­58

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 58

13/12/2019 15:47



The National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE programme ­59

4.2  SUPPORTING WOMEN IN SCIENCE Recognition of the need for support for women in science in the US dates back to the end of World War II. Table 4.1 documents the shift in NSF policies over time from a focus on funding individual researchers to institutional and systemic approaches to increase numbers and percentages of women and under-represented minorities (for a narrative to explain the table, please see Rosser, 2017, pp. 6–13). As of 2018, more than $297 million in awards had been given to more than 179 institutions to encourage this effort. In its 2019 programme solicitation (NSF, 2019), NSF has recognized the significance of intersectionalities of other factors such as race/ethnicity, class, sexualities, religion, country of origin and education, disabilities, and age with gender that shape the experiences and career advancement for women in STEM. The theoretical framework of intersectionality that arose from feminist theory (hooks, 2014 [1984]) and critical race theory (Crenshaw, 1989) explains how related systems of oppression, Table 4.1  Timeline of initiatives for women at NSF Date

Initiative

1945 1950 1980

Vannevar Bush’s Report: Science: The Endless Frontier NSF established Women in Science and Technology Equal Opportunity Act mandates that NSF collect and analyse data on the status of women and minorities in the engineering professions First publication of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering (beginning in 1984, ‘Persons with Disabilities’ were included) Visiting Professorships for Women (VPW) Career Advancement Awards (CAA) Faculty Awards for Women (FAW) Program for Women and Girls (PWG) Professional Opportunities for Women in Research and Education (POWRE) Program for Gender Equity in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology ADVANCE Gender Diversity in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Education (GDSE) Research on Gender in Science and Engineering Inclusion across the Nation of Communities of Learners of Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and Science (INCLUDES)

1982 1982–1997 1986–1998 1990 1993–1998 1997–2000 1998–2006 2001–Present 2003–2010 2010–2013 2016–Present

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 59

13/12/2019 15:47

60

Gender, science and innovation

domination or discrimination depend upon and reinforce each other to lead to systemic injustice and social inequality. A brief history of women’s programmes at NSF provides a context for understanding ADVANCE. ADVANCE was conceived back in 1998‒1999, as a result of the recognition that the percentage of women had not increased significantly by providing awards to individual women to further their research in most of the disciplines funded by NSF (in some cases, for more than five decades). It was realized that a structural rather than an individual approach was needed to transform STEM and academic institutions in order to increase the numbers and percentages of women and, particularly, to advance them to leadership positions such as department chair, dean, provost and president. When the first cohort of awards was given in 2001, the initiative was critiqued because most of the awards had gone to public R-1 institutions.1 Since those institutions attract relatively fewer people of colour and people of lower socio-economic status, it was suggested that class and race had been ignored in the attempt to correct for gender discrimination, thereby marginalizing women scientists who were not white and middle to upper class. Over the years, NSF took these critiques to heart, reflecting a recognition of intersectionality both in its programme solicitation (indicating that it welcomed applications from undergraduate and under-represented minority-serving institutions), and in its awards to such institutions. NSF also began to understand other types of intersectionality, in addition to race, class and gender, such as the importance of disciplinary diversity. Programme solicitations strongly encouraged involvement of faculty from the social sciences and women’s studies, as well as the traditional sciences and engineering, both in the leadership and the research of ADVANCE projects. It also began to consider the role of other groups outside of academia, such as industry and the professional societies, including the Association for Women in Science (AWIS), which influence the experience of women scientists and the scientific culture and practice in terms of awards, leadership and policies. As ADVANCE continues to evolve, other intersectionalities experienced by women scientists such as their sexualities, physical and mental abilities, country of origin, education, and age are beginning to be recognized. Just as the experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersexual (LGBTQI) scientists have only recently begun to be examined and explored, so the situation for older women scientists   ‘R-1’ refers to the Carnegie classification system used in the US to rank academic institutions. R-1 universities have very high research activity and graduate a large number of PhD students per year. 1

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 60

13/12/2019 15:47



The National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE programme ­61

remains largely overlooked and understudied. The intersectional, theoretical approach of gender with age underpins differences between junior and senior women scientists uncovered in this study, since with a few exceptions, junior and senior scientists correlate with younger and older ages, respectively. Many of the early twenty-first century institutional changes heralded as significant for attracting and retaining women in science, and adopted by both prestigious US private institutions (Bartlett, 2005; Fogg, 2005, 2006; Pope, 2005) and institutions funded through the NSF ADVANCE programme (Stewart et al., 2007), emphasize issues that are particularly significant for junior women. This focus on junior women remains critical, particularly in the light of the study conducted at Pennsylvania State University documenting the significant difference in the percentage of women faculty (48 per cent) achieving tenure at ten top research institutions relative to their male peers (56 per cent) (Wilson, 2006). If institutions do not evolve policies to attract and retain women, especially in STEM, there will be no issues for senior women because there will be few or no senior women. Little is known about the needs of senior women scientists. A few liberal arts institutions were awarded an ADVANCE grant to collaborate on ‘Horizontal Mentoring Alliances to Enhance the Academic Careers of Senior Women Chemists at Liberal Arts Institutions’ (Karukstis et al., 2011), an initiative focused clearly on senior women. An important aspect of the ADVANCE Institutional Transformation (IT) grant at the University of Wisconsin–Madison centred on ‘discovery interviews’ with senior women faculty in the physical and biological sciences to inform the policies and transformations that would be most useful for them on campus, and to increase the networks of senior women, thereby reducing their isolation and improving their workplace climate (Sheridan et al., 2006). Although other ADVANCE initiatives had as their ultimate goal advancing women to senior and leadership positions, their primary activities tended to focus on recruitment, retention, climate and tenure for junior women in order to build a critical mass of women in STEM and facilitate their preparation eventually to assume leadership positions after they had become full professors.

4.3 METHODOLOGY: UNDERSTANDING ISSUES FACING SENIOR WOMEN IN SCIENCE Evidence from two e-mail questionnaires was gathered. In 2006, an e-mail questionnaire was given to the AWIS Fellows. It had previously

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 61

13/12/2019 15:47

62

Gender, science and innovation

been administered to more than 450 women scientists and engineers, consisting primarily of untenured assistant professors, either Professional Opportunities for Women in Research and Education (POWRE) awardees (the NSF initiative that was replaced by ADVANCE; Rosser and Lane, 2002), or Clare Booth Luce (CBL) Professorship awardees (Rosser and Daniels, 2004). The results of the questionnaire helped to elucidate the issues of senior women scientists in contrast to those of junior women scientists. The results also shed light on what institutional practices might facilitate attracting and retaining both groups. The results of that study (Rosser, 2006) revealed little overlap between the issues AWIS Fellows considered important for junior compared to senior women scientists. Responses of AWIS Fellows to a question about the most significant issues, challenges and opportunities facing ‘junior’ women scientists today as they plan their careers overlapped substantially with those given by POWRE and CBL awardees to that same question, without the word ‘junior’. In contrast, the AWIS Fellows did not give the same responses when the word ‘senior’ was exchanged for ‘junior’. The responses of AWIS Fellows suggested that they believed more information from senior women scientists would help in understanding both the issues that they face and the institutional policies and practices that might facilitate resolution for those issues. As one woman wrote: ‘I think we need to know more about what senior women scientists feel is important. Is it lab space, release time, more post-docs, higher salary, a chance for an administrative assignment, etc. Do we know this?’ (Rosser, 2006, p. 289). Because the vast majority of the POWRE and CBL professors were untenured assistant professors, the barriers they identified in 1997–2000 were particularly problematic for women scientists and engineers at early stages of their academic careers (Rosser and Lane, 2002; Rosser and Daniels, 2004). Ten to 15 years after the initial administration of the e-mail questionnaire to the POWRE awardees, re-administering the first two questions of the initial questionnaire to the original POWRE awardee respondents yielded some insights about senior, compared to junior, women scientists: 1. What are the most significant issues/challenges/opportunities facing women scientists and engineers today as they plan their careers? 2. How does the laboratory climate (or its equivalent in your sub-­ discipline) impact upon the careers of women scientists and engineers? In addition, two questions from the questionnaire given to the AWIS Fellows in 2006 were added to the 2012 POWRE survey and focused specifically on issues for senior women scientists:

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 62

13/12/2019 15:47



The National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE programme ­63

Table 4.2  R  esponses to whether issues and/or climate differ for junior versus senior women according to POWRE cohort Year cohort

Different Same Don’t  know

No.

1997 %

No.

1998 %

No.

1999 %

No.

2000 %

Total

%

26  3  4

79  9 12

41  6  3

82 12  6

37  6  2

82 13  4

35 10  4

71 20  8

139  25  13

78 14  8

3. Do you think that the issues and/or climate differ for junior compared to senior women? If so, how? 4. In your opinion, what changes in institutional policies and practices are most useful for facilitating careers of academic women scientists or engineers at the junior level? Would these be the same for women at the senior level? Both the quantitative and the qualitative data from the 2012 written responses from all four cohorts of POWRE awardees to question 3 above overwhelmingly affirm that they believe junior and senior women face different issues, challenges and opportunities to those faced by the senior women colleagues (see Table 4.2). Although some examples mentioned might be specific to a discipline, respondents from all NSF directorates in all cohorts believed that the issues faced by senior and junior women differed (see Table 4.3). This suggests that issues are more different than similar between the more senior and junior groups, and that this perception is not unique to particular disciplines. In order to explore whether balancing career and family explains the perceived differences for junior and senior women, the written responses categorized as ‘balancing career and family’ to question 1 from each individual were compared with her responses to question 3 to determine whether she saw the issues as the same or different for junior and senior women. As Table 4.4 documents, 100 of the 175 individuals who listed ‘balancing career with family responsibilities’ and/or ‘two career problem’ to question 1 also responded that issues and/or climate differ for junior compared to senior women in answer to question 3. Since these were comparisons of an individual’s response to question 1 with her response to question 3, this meant that 100 individuals responded ‘balancing career with family’ and/or ‘dual career problem’ to question 1 and responded that issues differed for junior and senior women to question 3.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 63

13/12/2019 15:47

64

Gender, science and innovation

Table 4.3  R  esponses to whether issues and/or climate differ for junior versus senior women according to NSF directorate SBE No. Different 17 Same 5 Don’t 3  know Total 25

ENG

EHR

MPS

GEO

BIO

CISE

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

No.

%

68 20 12

26 4 4

76 12 12

4 1 0

80 20 0

33 3 2

87 8 5

15 1 1

88 6 6

30 8 2

75 20 5

10 3 1

71 21 7

100

34

100

5

100

38

100

17

100

40

100

14

99

Note:  NSF directorate names: SBE 5 Social Behavioral and Economic Sciences; ENG 5 Engineering; EHR 5 Education and Human Resources; MPS 5 Math and Physical Sciences; GEO 5 Geosciences; BIO 5 Biology; CISE 5 Computer and Information Sciences.

Table 4.4  Comparison of responses to questions 1** and 3*** #1 #5 Balancing Dual career with family

Total*

Differ 131 Same 41 172

67 23

5 0

Both #1 and #5

Neither #1 nor #5

28  7

31 11

Notes: * 3/175 individuals were not included because they did not provide a response to question 1 or to question 3. ** Question 1: What are the most significant issues/challenges facing women scientists and engineers today as they plan their careers? *** Question 3: Do you think that the issues and/or climate differ for junior compared to senior women? If so, how?

Looking at the quantitative data quickly, the conclusion might be drawn that most women scientists think that the issues for junior and senior women differ because of childbearing and childcaring and/or maybe because of the difficulties associated with dual career couples. Dual career couples must obtain jobs that are satisfactory for both and within reasonable geographic proximity. Children, and couple status, stand as intersectionalities with gender and age that may impact upon the experiences and careers of women scientists. Closer examination of the 100 responses identified above reveals that most (67/100) gave a response of ‘balancing career and family’ along with their response of difference to

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 64

13/12/2019 15:47



The National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE programme ­65

question 3. Few (5/100) indicated ‘two career problem’ along with the response of difference to question 3, while a substantial number (28/100) gave a reply that was categorized both as ‘balancing career and family’ and ‘two career problem’ along with the response of difference to question 3. 4.3.1  R  espondents Who See Issues as Different and Due to Balancing Career and Family The 67 responses categorized as ‘balancing career and family’ to question 1 and response of difference to question 3 are exemplified by these qualitative comments: In the academy, I think the issue of generating enough published research to get tenure, right at the point in time when people want to have kids, is still hard. I think there is a lot more recognition of the issues, and many schools have taken steps to address it. And there are places that say that men also should spend time with their kids, and let men and women both stop the tenure clock when they have a kid. But we don’t really know that those accommodations are equally useful across the board. (2012 response from 1999 CISE POWRE awardee to question 1) Yes, I think the issues are different. Within the academy, junior women are all about getting tenure. What do they need to do in order to satisfy all the criteria, while still maintaining some semblance of a life, etc. Within that, they have to quickly learn an institution which is new, get up to speed on the personalities and politics in their department, figure out who can be a mentor, who will make life difficult, who will be neutral. (2012 response from same 1999 CISE POWRE awardee to question 3) Balancing career and family priorities. It seems, all too often, a woman is forced to choose one or the other. And if she chooses to have a family, she must have a partner who is willing to become the ‘nurturer’ so that the female academic can succeed. (2012 response from 2000 BIO POWRE awardee to question 1) The issues differ, because senior level women are at a fundamentally different stage. Junior women can be struggling with very new/young families in combination with the stresses of teaching courses for the first time, managing a lab, etc. (all the ‘normal’ stresses associated with being a new professor). Senior women may have more official responsibilities. However, in my experience, the issues might require less urgent compromises (e.g. for junior women, a screaming baby needs immediate care and work must stop). My impression is that senior women have more stability (their courses are set, they know the ‘ropes’ of their institution) and flexibility (kids are in school, more time to focus on expectations of the workplace). (2012 response from same 2000 BIO POWRE awardee to question 3)

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 65

13/12/2019 15:47

66

Gender, science and innovation

4.3.2  R  espondents Who See Issues as Different and Due to Both Dual Career and Balancing Career and Family The qualitative comments below demonstrate the examples from among the 28 responses categorized both as ‘balancing career and family’ and ‘two career problem’ to question 1, along with the response of difference to question 3: Family issues in all their manifestations: the 2-body problem (or n-body when children come); maternity leave just at the time you need to be working 80 hour weeks; responsibility for the ‘executive care’ of the family ­­– everything from identifying summer camps, contacting baby sitters, baking cookies for birthday parties, planning birthday parties, dealing with family holiday celebrations; planning on and executing elder care; planning family nutrition; supervising housekeepers and staying home when repair people arrive, etc. All this work and executive thought is so exhausting that even women who ‘do it all’ tend to do research that focuses more on ‘quick and dirty’ results rather than on the far-reaching profound problems that move the field. (2012 response from 2000 MPS POWRE awardee to question 1) The situation is very different for junior and senior women. In a sort of perverse Darwinian scenario, the climate issues and crushing workload at home and in the lab (did I mention the huge amount of travel involved?) discourage all but the most resolute women. Thus, the senior women (the few) are the most resilient, energetic, in-control, and assertive (‘bitchy’ as their detractors often say). The pipeline continues to leak at the lower levels due to the two items in #1, but those who have made it are largely immune to the issues. But the final irony is the senior women recognize the issues, while the junior ones are oblivious at first. (2012 response from same 2000 MPS POWRE awardee to question 3) I think the most significant challenge is that women still do the majority of childcare work (including making the arrangements for outside childcare, dropping children off and picking up, finding backups, staying home with a sick child etc.). Because the years of having young children coincide with the years when scientists’ careers should be accelerating (and when some of us need to travel for field work or to distant, child-unfriendly facilities), this puts women in a bind. Especially since many women scientists are married to male scientists who are promoting their own careers, and time attending to family duties can be a zero-sum game. (2012 response of 1999 GEO POWRE awardee to question 1) It appears to me that junior women are working with a generation of men who are used to having female colleagues, and that this makes the climate more friendly. Senior women are still dealing with a generation of men used to a male-dominated system, especially in positions of leadership. I expect that this will change as the current generation of younger scientists advances into those positions. (2012 response of same 1999 GEO POWRE awardee to question 3)

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 66

13/12/2019 15:47



The National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE programme ­67

4.3.3  Respondents Who See Difference Due to Dual Career Issues The qualitative comment below comes from one of the five responses categorized only as ‘two career problem’ to question 1 and the response of difference to question 3: Dual career couples are the most significant problem that I see. Women physicists are much more likely to be married to other professionals who also have limited job choices. (2012 response of 1997 MPS POWRE awardee to question 1) The junior women have it even tougher because they are in their childbearing years. (2012 response of same 1997 MPS POWRE awardee to question 3)

In sum, a large majority (100/175) of respondents indicated that issues differed for junior and senior women in response to question 3, and the intersectionality of ‘balancing career and family’ and/or ‘dual career’ to question 1. In contrast, a substantial group (31/175) who thought the issues differed for junior and senior women did not mention either ‘balancing career with family’ or ‘dual career’ issues in response to question 1. Problems resulting from tight funding and struggles to obtain visibility and access to powerful networks feature prominently in the comments about difference. 4.3.4  R  espondents Who Saw Difference but Not Caused by Balancing Career and Family or Dual Career The following quotations exemplify responses of individuals from this substantial group: Loneliness, isolation, lack of community/connectivity/politics and non-­ technical issues that impede the technical work, plus funding hardships within federally-sponsored programs (gender neutral concerns)/there are still incentive hires and funding for early-career women and minorities. Less for mid-level women, unfortunately. (2012 response of 1997 GEO POWRE awardee to question 1) I think the gender differences become more pronounced as I become older. I am more aware of the inequities. And I am more likely to be bothered by them and less tolerant of them. I see more women moving into EPO [Educational Program Opportunity] roles, or mid-level management roles (i.e., few achieve senior leadership roles) or leaving, period. This saddens me though I understand why. (2012 response of same 1997 GEO POWRE awardee to question 3) Science is becoming increasingly interactive and multidisciplinary. Successful scientists are those who have not only strong disciplinary skills, but also the ability to communicate well and maintain strong networks. I believe that it can

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 67

13/12/2019 15:47

68

Gender, science and innovation be harder for women sometimes to develop and maintain strong networks in the same way as men can. This is especially true when women are in the minority. Getting ahead still sometimes requires getting access to the ‘old boys club’ . . . (2012 response of 2000 MPS POWRE awardee to question 1) In some ways I wonder if things might be a little easier for younger women these days. Things get easier as there are more senior women around to act as role models. Younger women have also grown up in a more connected and collaborative world and I think this enhances their abilities to network and collaborate. (2012 response of same 2000 MPS POWRE awardee to question 3)

4.4 SIMILAR ISSUES FOR JUNIOR AND SENIOR WOMEN To complicate things further, an equally substantial group (30/175) indicated in response to question 3 that they thought the issues were similar for junior and senior women, and responded either ‘balancing career and family’ or ‘two career problem’ to question 1. Since dual career couples might have issues that persist from the junior to the senior level, those responses were separated from those who discussed childrearing and childbearing to disentangle those responses. That separation revealed that none of those who thought that issues for junior and senior women were similar in response to question 3 mentioned only dual career to question 1. Eleven indicated that the issues were the same but gave neither a response of ‘balancing career and family’ nor dual career to question 1. 4.4.1  R  espondents Who Thought Issues were the Same but Caused by Balancing Career and Family Most (23 of the 30) only indicated issues of ‘balancing career and family’. The following quotations typify these responses: Balancing careers and family. (2012 response of 1999 ENG POWRE awardee to question 1) No difference. (2012 response of same 1999 ENG POWRE awardee to q ­ uestion 3) Challenges: women are still delaying having children because of the tenure clock, often leaving it too late. (2012 response of 2000 GEO POWRE awardee to question 1) Not to my knowledge. I do think that junior female scientists have benefitted positively from the impact of current senior women in the field. (2012 response of same 2000 GEO POWRE awardee to question 3)

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 68

13/12/2019 15:47



The National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE programme ­69 Compatibility of academic careers with family life. Family responsibilities are assumed by women, and until the expectations change so that men see families as their responsibility, things won’t improve for women. And academic responsibilities do interfere with family life. The travel schedule is punishing. Academic life was invented by men, especially in computer science, where there are conferences year round, and you are expected to appear at them to build a reputation. (2012 response of 2000 CISE POWRE awardee to question 1) I cannot identify any issues. I am happy at my institution – I do not feel there are any systematic differences in how men and women, junior or senior, are treated. (2012 response of same 2000 CISE POWRE awardee to question 3)

4.4.2  R  espondents Who Saw Issues as the Same, but Caused by Dual Career and Balancing Career and Family Seven of the 30 who thought that the issues were the same for junior and senior women indicated both ‘balancing career and family’ and dual career issues in response to question 1, presumably because children and dual career issues may change, but persist in intersecting with gender, as the woman scientist experiences ageing and advancement. The following quotations demonstrate the types of answers they expressed: Managing tenure clock and biological clock . . . Difficult to accept semesterlong invitations at other institutions or resident fellowships during sabbatical because of husband’s job constraints and family responsibilities. (2012 response of 2000 SBE POWRE awardee to question 1) Probably not. Universities are working hard on improving diversity issues and instituting family-friendly policies. I think that I was more appreciated and treated with proper respect when I was a junior faculty (before tenure) because perhaps, I was still in a subordinate role to my male colleagues . . . When I was promoted to the rank of full professor, with male colleagues who were ahead of me but stayed in the associate rank, the situation seemed to become much more difficult and at times felt abusive. (2012 response of 2000 same SBE POWRE awardee to question 3) In my experience, the greatest issue and challenge is development of a win‒win solution for both institutions and faculty couples with dual-careers in science . . . Some women might contend that children and raising a family are the biggest challenge . . . This issue is alleviated once the children grow up and leave home, whereas the dual-career spouse issue remains constant, assuming the couple stays together. (2012 response of 1999 BIO POWRE awardee to question 1) In a general way the main issue is the same, that there is a single ideal model for a scientist’s work/life balance of activities. That model does not allow much flexibility for dealing with family issues, whether it be raising a family or caring for an elderly parent. For dual-career couples at my institution, the negative climate

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 69

13/12/2019 15:47

70

Gender, science and innovation towards the trailing spouse does not seem very different for junior and senior women. (2012 response of same 1999 BIO POWRE awardee to question 3)

4.4.3  R  espondents Who Saw Issues as the Same, but Not Related to Family or Dual Career Eleven thought the issues were the same for both junior and senior women in response to question 3 but did not mention either ‘balancing career and family’ or dual career issues in response to question 1. The types of issues that they raised included the following: The professional/social interactions with male colleagues in seminars, committee work etc. can be difficult for many women due to the presence of some men with an aggressive way of interacting. A softer approach, say using a softer voice or a softer way of expressing ideas and opinions, can easily drown under such circumstances. (2012 response of 1999 SBE POWRE awardee to question 1) The number of women at the junior level has increased in my field, and this makes the problem I have stated above less prominent. On the other hand, not much has changed with respect to the social structure such as family relations, and more men than women in academe are married to spouses that are forgiving of the long work hours that are implied by this job. (2012 response of same 1999 SBE POWRE awardee to question 3) The main challenge is that it is men’s world. They are the majority who are in the leadership role and decide who will be in the leadership role, the promotions, salary increases and so on. Most women, including me, for many reasons do not want to fight. (2012 response of 1997 MPS POWRE awardee to question 1) Same for junior, but for different issues, such as survivor instead of salary justice. (2012 response of same 1997 MPS POWRE awardee to question 3)

These data and quotations reveal that ‘balancing career and family’ and dual career issues only partially explain the differences for junior and senior women scientists that most perceive. The explanation that differences for junior and senior women emanate from family and dual career issues proves too facile to cover the complexity of reasons for the differences. While family and dual career issues prove significant, other issues surface to explain why individuals perceive that senior women face different issues that are encountered less by their junior colleagues. Junior women must strive to earn tenure, obtain their first major grant and establish their career. Having surpassed these hurdles earlier in their careers, senior women face different obstacles. Senior men fear competition from the senior women. Senior women must also struggle for resources, and they experience expectations for excessive mentoring and other service responsibilities.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 70

13/12/2019 15:47



The National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE programme ­71

In contrast, some who indicated their belief that junior and senior women face similar issues did so on the basis that balancing career and family continues throughout the career span. This occurs when junior women defer childbearing until they receive tenure or in the cases where women who have their children well before earning tenure may be dealing with eldercare for aging parents or other relatives. In addition to childbearing and childcare issues, the difficulty of pursuing careers in tandem with a partner or spouse can remain challenging throughout the career span. In the earlier years, obtaining two appropriate, satisfactory positions in geographic proximity may constitute the problem; in later years, one partner or spouse may wish to pursue opportunities for a better position or at a more prestigious institution that does not have an equally satisfactory situation for the other partner or spouse.

4.5  POLICIES FOR JUNIOR WOMEN Additional information comes from question 4 of the 2012 e-mail survey of POWRE awardees which asked the following: ‘In your opinion, what changes in institutional policies and practices are most useful for facilitating careers of academic women scientists or engineers at the junior level? Would these be the same for women at the senior level?’ Tables 4.5 and 4.6 document the policies and practices that respondents suggested would be useful for facilitating the careers of academic women scientists or engineers at the junior (Table 4.5) or senior (Table 4.6) level. The categories used to group the 2012 responses in these tables were the same categories as those used for grouping responses for policies for junior and senior women in the study of AWIS Fellows (Rosser, 2012, Tables 4.3 and 4.4). Using these categories from the AWIS study meant that some categories had no responses in them from POWRE awardees in 2012. Most respondents identified a number of changes in institutional policies and practices that they find most useful for facilitating careers and laboratory climates for junior women. 177 individuals gave a total of 383 responses, since individuals could give as many responses as they wished to the open-ended question. 4.5.1  Family Friendly Policies As Table 4.5 shows, 161 individuals gave responses that might be grouped together as family-friendly issues, and seen as the highest institutional policy priorities for junior women:

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 71

13/12/2019 15:47

72

Gender, science and innovation

Table 4.5  P  olicies and practices most useful for facilitating careers of junior women Grouping Family-friendly issues: Family-friendly policies Extension of tenure clock Daycare Career partner positions Opt-out policies available to everyone Sick daycare Mentoring Mentoring for junior faculty Directives for administrators Transparent expectations, especially for tenure and promotion Do not overload with excess committee work Monitor infrastructure issues: start-up, salaries, space Train faculty and administrators for non-discrimination Change 24/7 expectations for academics in science Leadership training Network/support group for women Hire more senior women Value service more Incentives to value diversity Workshops on negotiation Woman president, provost Access to graduate students More women on search, admissions and tenure committees Rethink tenure Best practices in recruitment Funding Availability of federal money Seed money for women Establish ‘rainy day’ fund: unanticipated emergencies Total responses

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 72

Number of responses 161 56 49 25 17 11 3 45 45 150 19 18 17 16 16 13 11 9 9 5 4 3 3 3 2 2 27 13 8 6 383

13/12/2019 15:47



The National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE programme ­73

Table 4.6  P  olicies and practices most useful for facilitating careers of senior women Grouping Family-friendly issues: Family-friendly policies Eldercare Same as for junior Mentoring Directives for administrators Training for leadership Making sure women are in key decision-making positions Provide male colleagues a safe way to discuss overcoming gender biases Have women in highest levels of power Awards and honours not based on ‘old-boy network’ Value human impact and impact on community Monitor equity in space, salaries, travel, students Reward service Ways to overcome isolation such as networking Targeted recruitment for senior women Funding Bridge/seed funding Granting agencies need to hold institutions accountable for equity Total responses

Number of responses 18 9 5 4 0 24 9 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 7 4 3 49

Family-friendly policies, such as scheduling departmental seminars at mid-day rather than late in the afternoon or in the evening. University-based child care for employees, which is still quite rare. More flexibility in hiring academic partners of recruited candidates; this is a major reason we lost our best attempted hires. (2012 respondent from 1997 cohort) Dedicated space in child-care on campus for the female faculty. Many universities don’t even offer child-care and if they do the space is extremely limited. (2012 respondent from 1999 cohort) Extending a tenure clock if a woman has a child is a must. Acceptance of such extension by all members of a department is also a must. (2012 respondent from 2000 cohort)

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 73

13/12/2019 15:47

74

Gender, science and innovation

Although family-friendly policies such as childcare or extension of the tenure clock at the time of childbirth are more likely to intersect with gender to benefit junior women, other family-friendly policies such as eldercare might be more relevant for senior women. Others, such as a reduction in the time base to accommodate family and personal time needs or dual career hires, might be beneficial for either junior or senior women: ‘The partner hire program would benefit women at any level’ (2012 respondent from 1999 cohort). The exact wording as to whether policies are opt-in or opt-out, and whether such policies extend to both men and women at the birth of a child, become crucial. Some recent studies (Wolfers, 2016) suggest that men may gain an advantage in terms of publication productivity from parental leave policies that are gender neutral, compared to their women colleagues who actually give birth and have gone through pregnancy, childbirth and nursing. 4.5.2 Mentoring Mentoring emerged as a very helpful practice that 45 colleagues see as critical for junior faculty: ‘Availability of and access to senior role models/ mentors’ (2012 respondent from 1997 cohort). Although individual faculty can take it upon themselves informally to mentor their junior colleagues, many felt that a formal institutional college or departmental mentoring policy, overseen by administrators, proves most effective: ‘Formal mentoring programs for junior faculty would help both men and women, but may be more important for women in fields where they are in the minority’ (2012 respondent from 1999 cohort). People did recognize the tie between the situations of junior and senior faculty. Several individuals commented explicitly on the links between junior and senior women, especially because of mentoring: ‘Junior women need mentoring in their career activities; senior women may be those mentors’ (2012 respondent from 1997 cohort). Policies such as required mentoring for junior faculty from senior faculty may result in positive effects for one group and negative impacts or more service work for the other. For example, requiring that all junior women have at least one senior woman on their mentoring committee in a department that includes many junior women faculty would be likely to result in overloading a sole woman full professor with committee work that is not always highly valued: ‘Starting women faculty really need mentors – both male and female. A series of policies that would bring together junior and senior women would be helpful. This needs to be formalized’ (2012 respondent from 1998 cohort). Again, overuse of senior women as mentors may benefit the junior women, while burdening the

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 74

13/12/2019 15:47



The National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE programme ­75

senior women faculty with service that may not be valued very much by their department or broader profession. 4.5.3  Policies for Administrators One hundred and fifty responses described a whole set of issues that might be grouped as practices/policies and directives for administrators; for example, ‘train faculty and administrators for non-discrimination’ at various levels. Simultaneously, ‘training for leadership’ also corresponds with the policy/practice cited most for senior women (Table 4.6). ‘Leadership development for chairs, deans, etc. so that they know how to work with people (this is good for senior women and all men too)’ (2012 respondent from 1999 cohort). The importance of transparency and monitoring on a continuing basis were seen as crucial, especially around issues such as start-up packages, salaries and time to promotion. Respondents also cited the following as important: ‘transparency of expectations, especially for tenure and promotion’, ‘network/support group for women’, ‘don’t overload with excess committee work’, and ‘value service more’: Transparency and codification of promotion criteria. In a department with no will, no institutional policy will help, however! (2012 respondent from 1998 cohort) Having clear written expectations regarding tenure & promotion (and annual evaluations) benefits women, since they otherwise may have less ‘informal’ access to information about what is expected. (2012 respondent from 2000 cohort)

Senior women leaders who may themselves have suffered from fewer informal mentors and methods to obtain information may especially appreciate and foster transparency. Transparency becomes important not only in the initial tenure and promotion process, but most particularly in uncovering what is necessary for advancement to full professor: Transparency, how the decisions are made. (2012 respondent from 1997 cohort) Make departmental and university policies and practices transparent. Issues relating to teaching assignments, lab space allocation, assignments to important committees, allocation of departmental financial resources, the placement of graduate students with faculty advisors – can each have a tremendous impact on a faculty member’s career. (2012 respondent from 1998 cohort) Another issue is finding ways to create fair evaluations and fair access to ­university support, awards, etc. (2012 respondent from 2000 cohort)

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 75

13/12/2019 15:47

76

Gender, science and innovation

4.5.4  Funding Issues Undoubtedly a reflection of the current tight fiscal times, 27 individuals cited the availability of federal money as critical for the success of junior colleagues: Granting agencies might be aware of the shrinking amount of time available to faculty, not only to conduct research, but to write it up. I’d like to see more ‘writing stipends,’ to allow junior faculty the time to put their research into publication. (2012 respondent from 1997 cohort) More funding opportunities for junior women will be really helpful. (2012 respondent from 1997 cohort)

Respondents recognized that reductions in federal funding and budget constraints also make it difficult for senior women to maintain their labs, re-compete for grants or consider taking on new potential high-risk, highyield projects: All women scientists need better funding opportunities! (2012 respondent from 1998 cohort). Senior women understand they have a responsibility to mentor their junior colleagues in obtaining grants: During this time of difficult grant funding, I think that for any scientist, junior or senior, female or male, a scientist with experience on grant reviewing panels should help review drafts of grants before their submission. NIH [the US National Institutes of Health] only allows two submissions for any proposal, and NSF recently changed to only one submission/year for many directorates, so obviously, the best grant needs to be put forward. Junior faculty members don’t know what a ‘fundable’ grant is yet. I routinely give my funded grants to other faculty members as well as to the students in my lab. Many faculty members, however, are unwilling to share their grants (don’t know why). In addition, I routinely review grants for others, but again, many faculty are unwilling to take the time and give critical advice to others. Maybe NIH and NSF can set up a database so that we can see the complete grant, not just the abstracts. (2012 respondent from 1999 cohort)

4.6  POLICIES FOR SENIOR WOMEN In contrast to policies for junior women, respondents gave relatively few suggestions for senior women (Table 4.6). Although the 177 awardees could provide more than one response, only 49 total responses were given to the question: ‘What changes in institutional policies and practices are most useful for facilitating careers of academic women scientists or engineers at the senior level?’ This contrasted with the 383 responses given

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 76

13/12/2019 15:47



The National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE programme ­77

to the same question when the word ‘junior’ replaced the word ‘senior’ (Table 4.5). These results reinforce the findings from the earlier study (Rosser, 2006) using the AWIS population, that little is known about the issues senior women face as they age and advance in their careers. Within this same population of POWRE awardees, only eight of the categories overlapped between policies for junior women compared to policies for senior women scientists. These included training for leadership (9 responses), non-discrimination (2), monitoring space, salaries, travel (1), networking (1), seed money (4), more women on important committees (3), women leaders (2) and hiring senior women (1). However, the response level was much higher for the same policy for junior rather than senior women. For example, 11 people responded ‘network/support group for women’ for junior women but only one responded ‘ways to overcome isolation such as networking’ for senior women. Similarly, 17 responded ‘monitor infrastructure issues – start-up, salaries, space’ for junior women, but only one responded ‘monitor equity in space, salaries, travel, students, etc.’ for senior women. ‘Training for leadership’ ranked as the most frequent response for policies for senior women, with nine responses: ‘Provide leadership opportunities and mentor women in leadership positions. Same for all – men and women!’ (2012 respondent from 2000 cohort). ‘More leadership and entrepreneurial opportunities that are extended outside of the institution’ (2012 respondent from 1998 cohort). For junior women, 13 responded ‘leadership training’. Several underlined the importance in one response or another for the policies for senior women of having women in key decision-making positions: I think that every tenure and promotion review committee should have senior women (who get it and are willing to speak up) on them (even if the women have to come from other colleges and be paid for their efforts). (2012 respondent from 1998 cohort) More female administrators. (2012 respondent from 1999 cohort)

The Dean at the college level has a lot to say about how women move through the system and how they are supported: ‘We need more women to serve as Deans’ (2012 respondent from 1998 cohort); ‘Senior: having women in key administrative roles, such as President and/or Provost’ (2012 respondent from 1999 cohort). Again, the importance of hiring and having more senior women, particularly in influential positions, was emphasized for junior women. Financial issues continued to play a role in policies sought for senior

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 77

13/12/2019 15:47

78

Gender, science and innovation

women, with a need for ‘bridge/seed funding’ mentioned by four respondents. Again, many respondents (27) mentioned the need for these policies for junior women.

4.7 CONCLUSION Although they acknowledge that issues differed between junior and senior women overall, relatively few respondents have ideas about how to improve the situation for senior STEM academic women, unlike for their junior colleagues, indicating that the intersection of gender with ageing and career advancement remains poorly understood for academic women scientists. Since both junior women themselves (Rosser, 2012) and senior women (Rosser, 2006) seem to agree on what the issues are for junior women, it is not surprising that some consensus, fostered by research based upon ADVANCE projects, has also emerged about effective institutional policies and strategies to address those issues. Family-friendly policies, dual career hires, equitable start-up packages and space, and monitoring the data to ensure that women receive tenure, promotion and awards at the same rates as their male colleagues, constitute institutional practices and policies significant for success for junior women. People recognize the significance of mentoring in a variety of areas, including the promotion and tenure process, grant writing and providing advice for professional success. Many underline that a formal mentoring process, overseen and rewarded by administrators at the departmental, college or institutional level, translates into more equitable mentoring for both women and under-represented minorities. Administrators have key roles in communicating policies and implementing them equitably. Leadership of senior women can be crucial. Attention also needs to be given to the environment for senior women. These women represent a group of successful scientists who have survived and thrived, despite obstacles and barriers that deterred others. They have made significant contributions to STEM, the institution and the broader profession. Yet, as the MIT report documented (Hopkins, 1999), these very successful women scientists and engineers do not have the same access to space, awards, students and perks as do their male peers. An initial impetus for ADVANCE also came from the recognition of a glass ceiling (Etzkowitz et al., 1994) and problems for senior women (Handley, 1994) even in the life sciences that have a substantial percentage of women. In addition to the NSF Partnerships for Adaptation, Implementation or Dissemination (PAID) grant for STEM women at small liberal arts colleges (Karukstis et al., 2011), and the discovery interview portion of the ADVANCE IT grant at the University of Wisconsin–Madison aimed at

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 78

13/12/2019 15:47



The National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE programme ­79

senior women (Sheridan et al., 2006), some of the other ADVANCE initiatives included a small programme for senior women. These encompassed shadowing programmes for women considering moving into institutional leadership roles, named fellowships or chairs for senior women such as the ADVANCE professorships at Georgia Tech (Georgia Institute of Technology) (Rosser and Chameau, 2006), and informal networking events or groups for senior women, particularly those serving in the role of department chair. Most of the ADVANCE efforts either centred directly on junior women or included senior women as role models, mentors and institutional leaders to facilitate the attraction and retention of junior women STEM faculty, rather than focusing on the needs of the senior women themselves and the intersection of gender, age and career advancement. A Fidelity Investments study of higher education faculty shows that 74 per cent of professors aged 49–67 plan to delay retirement past age 65 or never retire (Flaherty, 2013). These data and increasing numbers of programmes to encourage retirement in the absence of a mandatory retirement age (Patel, 2016) suggest that more academics, including senior women, postpone retirement, remaining in their tenure track positions, teaching in the classroom, and conducting research in their laboratories. A study by Blau and Weinberg (2017) confirmed that scientists, regardless of gender, are delaying retirement more than the general workforce norms. They choose to delay retirement or not retire, partially because of changing personal fiscal circumstances in light of the Great Recession that began in 2008 and because of the increasing life span statistics, but most particularly because of their commitment to their students, to research and their institution. Failure to recognize the issues facing these senior women scientists at the intersection of gender and age, and to address them with appropriate policies and practices, risks undercutting the productivity and professional contributions of these women who, earlier in their careers, overcame many obstacles to become successful. NSF’s ADVANCE has directed more than $297 million in a national effort towards encouraging academic institutions to transform and to evolve policies and practices to facilitate careers. NSF launched ADVANCE in 2001, with the first cohort of nine Institutional Transformation five-year awards being completed in 2006. This timing suggests that most POWRE awardees were not able to benefit from the institutional transformations and national emphasis upon removing barriers to attract, retain and facilitate careers of women scientists while they were still junior in their own careers. Perhaps it is not surprising that POWRE awardees in 2012 perceive basically the same issues surrounding gender in career progression and in the laboratory as they did 15 years earlier. The results of the data from this re-survey suggest additional policies

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 79

13/12/2019 15:47

80

Gender, science and innovation

and practices that institutions might pursue, especially for women at the senior level, when the complexity of gender intersects with age and other factors. One hopes that the policies and practices now in place in academic STEM departments will mean that women scientists and engineers surveyed 15 years from now will no longer perceive the same issues and ­barriers that they did in 1997–2000 and 2012.

REFERENCES Bartlett, T. (2005), ‘More time’, Chronicle of Higher Education, 52 (2), A-16. Blau, D. and Weinberg, B. (2017), ‘Why the US science and engineering workforce is aging’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. DOI: 10.1073/ pnas.1611748114. Crenshaw, K. (1989), ‘Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: a black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics’, University of Chicago Legal Forum, 140, 139‒67. Etzkowitz, H., Kemelgor, C., Neuschatz, M. and Uzzi, B. (1994), ‘Barriers to women’s participation in academic science and engineering’, in W. Pearson, Jr and A. Fechter (eds), Who Will Do Science? Educating the Next Generation, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 43–67. Flaherty, C. (2013), ‘Working way past 65’, Inside Higher Education, 17 June. Accessed 27 June 2016 at www.insidehighered.com/print/news/2013/06/17/datasuggest-baby-boomer-faculty-are-putting-off-retirement. Fogg, P. (2005), ‘Princeton gives automatic tenure extension to new parents’, Chronicle of Higher Education, 19 August. http.//chronicle.com/daily/2005/08/20​ 05081901n.htm. Fogg, P. (2006), ‘Stanford offers paid maternity leave to all graduate students’, Chronicle of Higher Education, 30 January. https//www.chronicle.com/article/st​ anford-offers-paid-maternity/118803. Handley, J. (1994), ‘Women, decision-making, and academia: an unholy alliance’, Women in Management Review, 9 (3), 11–16. hooks, b. (2014 [1984]), Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center, 3rd edn, New York: Routledge. Hopkins, N. (1999), ‘MIT and gender bias: following up on victory’, Chronicle of Higher Education, 46 (15), B-4. Karukstis, K.K., Gourley, B.L., Rossi, M., et al. (2011), ‘A horizontal mentoring initiative for senior women scientists at liberal arts colleges’, in K.K. Karukstis, B.L. Gourley, M. Rossi and L.L. Wright (eds), ACS Symposium Series, Washington, DC: American Chemical Society, pp. 141–51. National Science Foundation (NSF) (2011), ‘ADVANCE’, accessed 11 July 2011 at www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm.summ.jsp?pims_id=5383. National Science Foundation (NSF) (2019), ‘ADVANCE’, accessed 4 March 2019 at www.nsf.gov/pubs/2019/nsf19552/nsf19522.pdf. Patel, V. (2016), ‘To ease professors into retirement, “a Terminal Sabbatical”’, Chronicle of Higher Education, 62 (42), A-14. Pope, J. (2005), ‘Harvard to commit $50 M to women’s programs’, Boston Globe, 17 May. www.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/2005/05/17/html.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 80

13/12/2019 15:47



The National Science Foundation’s ADVANCE programme ­81

Rosser, S.V. (2006), ‘Senior women scientists: overlooked and understudied?’, Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 12 (4), 275–93. Rosser, S.V. (2012), Breaking Into the Lab: Engineering Progress for Women in Science, New York: New York University Press. Rosser, S.V. (2017), Academic Women in STEM Faculty: Views Beyond a Decade after POWRE, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Rosser, S.V. and Chameau, J. (2006), ‘Institutionalization, sustainability, and repeatability of ADVANCE for institutional transformation’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 32, 331–40. Rosser, S. and Daniels, J.Z. (2004), ‘Widening paths to success, improving the environment, and moving toward lessons learned from experiences of POWRE and CBL awardees’, Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 10 (2), 131–48. Rosser, S. and Lane, E.O. (2002), ‘Key barriers for academic institutions seeking to retain women scientists and engineers: family unfriendly policies, low numbers, stereotypes, and harassment’, Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 8 (2), 163–91. Sheridan, J., Brennan, P.F., Carnes, M. and Handelsman, J. (2006), ‘Discovering directions for change in higher education through the experiences of senior women faculty’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 31, 387–96. Stewart, A., Malley, J. and LaVaque-Manty, D. (2007), Transforming Science and Engineering: Advancing Academic Women, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Wilson, R. (2006), ‘Just half of professors earn tenure in 7 years, Penn State study finds’, Chronicle of Higher Education, 52 (46), A-10. Wolfers, J. (2016), ‘A family-friendly policy that’s friendliest to male professors’, New York Times, 24 June. Accessed on 26 June 2016 at www.nytimes. com/2016/26/ business/tenure-extension-policies.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 81

13/12/2019 15:47

5. Using the embedded case study approach to analyse the leaky pipeline phenomenon in academic careers* 1

Silvia Cervia 5.1 INTRODUCTION The exclusion dynamics exacerbating the progressive loss of female talent in academia has been analysed and interpreted in international literature from different perspectives. Attention initially addressed to the micro level and to the interactions and friction of the process of socialization in gender identity and in science (Clark and Corcoran, 1986; Long, 1990). This was subsequently integrated with analyses focusing on the meso level dedicated to examining the interactions between caregiving obligations and research responsibilities (Xie and Shauman, 2003; Joecks et al., 2014). At the same time, analyses centred on the macro level enabling scholars to highlight the presence of systemic obstacles and barriers, at both regulatory and organizational levels (Cook, 2001; Rosser, 1999, 2004; Rosser and Lane, 2002; Settles et al., 2006). The artificial separation of the three analytical levels of observation, and the need to understand the dynamics of reciprocal action and retroaction of the phenomena at each level of sociological observation, has led scholars to search for perspectives ‒ the most widespread is probably the life course approach (Hewlett et al., 2008) ‒ that analyse intersecting processes of an individual, relational and institutional nature. This study, which was conducted within the framework of the TRIGGER project, founded by the European Union Seventh Framework Programme in order to analyse gender inequality in academia, adopts an *  This chapter draws on research carried out for the TRIGGER project, A. No. 611034 funded under the Seventh Framework Programme, Specific programme ‘Capacity’, Work programme ‘Science in Society’, FP7-SCIENCE-IN-SOCIE​ TY-2013-1. ­82

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 82

13/12/2019 15:47



The leaky pipeline phenomenon in academic careers ­83

embedded case study approach (Yin, 2009): it establishes a multidimensional perspective that allows for an in-depth analysis, which considers the dynamics and career paths of women in academia as context-driven. In so doing, institutional and organizational characteristics become an analytical and interpretative dimension, thanks to which the processes at individual level can be understood better as characterized by courses of action and retroaction (Wharton, 2005).

5.2  THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Based on the development and orientation of the reference literature, this section puts forward a rational summary of the main interpretative lines, from the explanations provided at the individual level (micro), to the organizational and relational perspectives (meso level) also considering the persistent gender-based asymmetries in science rooted in broader, systemic phenomena (macro level). During the first phase of this evolution (micro level), which focused on women and their behaviour, the international literature highlighted a certain irreconcilability between the socially constructed attitudes surrounding women and science (Kahle et al., 1993; Epstein et al., 1998). This dilemma was subsequently manifested in their educational, career and reproductive choices. It is at this level of observation that the literature finds the main explanations for the issue known as ‘territorial sex segregation’ or ‘ghettoisation’ in science (Rossiter, 1995). The social construction of science placed the various disciplines within a continuum that ranged from female to male: biology and other life sciences were at one end of this spectrum, while physics and engineering were at the other (Blickenstaff, 2005). Based on this construct, the socialization of gender roles defined the compass steering an individual’s choices, by building self-confidence, motivation and a perception of the attitudes of the individual and others. A socialization process lacking in technical experiences for girls, and a similarly significant deficit in the life sciences for boys, reverberated through the education choices made by both the former and the latter (Osborne et al., 2003). The socialization of gender roles also defined the presence of behaviours necessary to survive in an academic environment and the construction of identity spheres. Indeed, numerous studies have underlined the fact that in the critical moments of their scientific careers, women tend to abandon the academic path (‘fight or flight’) for ‘expressive’ motivations that go beyond the professional sphere and relate to their private lives (Xie and Shauman, 2003; Joecks et al., 2014). In the past, such interpretations have

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 83

13/12/2019 15:47

84

Gender, science and innovation

been used to support naive policies geared to bringing women’s training paths closer to science (‘fixing the women’; Schiebinger, 1999). Instead they must be interpreted as the need to reconsider the socio-cultural scope of the construction of gender roles and of science, thereby introducing macro or systemic perspective. Recently, this perspective has allowed the development of research paths that have highlighted how women’s ‘choices’ in the world of science are perceived as ‘normative’ behaviour (Frehill et al., 2015), adopted within the limits defined by the broader rules of the academic world and its being in tune with a specific ‘gender order’ (Connell, 1987). It would be useful to consider one in light of the other, as a specific and peculiar variation on broader trends and connotations. However, prior to developing such interpretative models, other studies identified motherhood as fundamental for understanding the dynamics of women’s imperfect participation in a scientific career. The literature has largely highlighted the friction between couple dynamics and the need to reconcile work, family and private life with female academic careers (Aisenberg and Harrington, 1988; Sullivan et al., 1997; Rosser, 2004). The resulting tension and penalization in terms of career progress are characterized by a strong form of gender selectivity (Simard et al., 2008). There is a positive correlation for women between being single and having a stable position as a researcher (Ginther and Kahn, 2006). Conversely, when investigating the link between marriage and career advancement, there is frequently a negative correlation (Fox, 2005; Hunter and Leahey, 2010). This penalization increases exponentially where children are present. Indeed, being a parent is the most significant factor associated with poor productivity and reduced career opportunities (Stack, 2004; Fox, 2005).1 Women therefore remain crushed under the weight of others’ expectations regarding caregiving duties, while for men the literature refers to a kind of ‘family bonus’, the intent being to emphasize the effects of this virtuous alliance between being married (and having children) and having a successful academic career (Joecks et al., 2014). The expectations of a scientist’s role are particularly ‘cumbersome’ and the organization of work in science is particularly demanding. Universities are known to be ‘greedy institutions’ (Coser, 1974) and in late modernity (Giddens, 1991), rather than becoming weaker, it has been fortified by increasing expectations and demands in both research and teaching, which require extreme flexibility and absolute dedication (Caprile et al., 2012). 1   Research shows that women’s careers in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) are more affected by family status; indeed, women are at a disadvantage only if they have children, and not because of their marital status (Xie and Shauman, 2003).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 84

13/12/2019 15:47



The leaky pipeline phenomenon in academic careers ­85

Moreover, university work increasingly requires a significant institutional and bureaucratic or administrative commitment that demands the physical presence of individuals on specific occasions and in decision-making processes. ‘There seems to be an increasing requirement of omnipresence in all three pillars, of which each pillar has increased in levels, demands and complexity of required personal engagement’ (Dubois-Shaik and Fusulier, 2015, p. 218). It is therefore not surprising that it is frequently only those women who are able to conform to the expectations of a dominant male culture – which requires absolute dedication to a career – who are successful in academia (Haas et al., 2011). However, this equation does not always add up. Indeed, in some cases, the life course approach has revealed the emergence of different ‘styles’ of academic success, that is, the ‘relational’ style (Etzkowitz et al., 2000). It is highly likely that different eras, different contexts and even different disciplines produce specific styles of success. Targeted case studies can identify the peculiarities and rewarding styles of a specific context and its evolution over time, across generations, and these are a useful benchmark of a broader cultural and organizational environment. The final analytical level, the macro level, has detected the presence, including within an academic environment, of segregative dynamics that characterize female participation in the labour market. At the same time, it has focused on the more typical processes of this context. The social construction of the compatibility between the supposed gender attitudes and the skills required by the various disciplines – which have been introduced when talking about education and professional choices (Blickenstaff, 2005) – significantly supports the so-called horizontal segregation, where female presence is noticeable in specific disciplines and in specific sectors therein. The very construction of an antithesis between leadership attitudes and those stereotypically recognized as typical of the ‘female world’ seems to provide a useful explanation of the low presence of women in top positions in science (so-called vertical segregation). However, as this chapter endeavours to highlight, understanding the dynamics that support these processes means considering that these processes are not found in a socio-cultural vacuum; rather, they appear as ‘social products’ (mediated by institutions and culture) that simultaneously express and contribute to the formation of a precise gender order. Literature adopting a contextual approach has focused on the effects of incorporating gender norms within social institutions ‒ that is, the sex segregation regime ‒ and has explained the results of the analyses through the use of such metaphors as the ‘leaky pipeline’ (Berryman, 1983), ‘sticky floor’ (Booth et al., 2003), ‘vanish box’ (Etzkowitz and Ranga, 2011),

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 85

13/12/2019 15:47

86

Gender, science and innovation

‘glass ceiling’ (Hymowitz and Schellhardt, 1986), and so on. Each of these metaphors emphasizes the specific cumulative dynamics that characterize different career steps. The dynamics of the ‘leaky pipeline’ phenomenon have been theorized in a context in which academic careers develop according to a rigid tenure track, such as in the United States. According to this interpretation, there is a significant loss of female talent at each step of an academic career, even more so with the ticking clock of tenure and the biological clock of women (Etzkowitz et al., 2000). The ‘sticky floor’ metaphor specifically refers to the first steps taken in an academic career. Holders of postdoctoral positions are geared towards a (gender) specialization of tasks: women towards didactics; while men are encouraged to invest in academic networking, research and publications. This implies a curriculum disadvantage for women who, for the same number of years of work, have fewer titles when competing for fixed positions: this mechanism has been defined as curriculum vitae (CV) ‘bodybuilding pressure’ (Dubois-Shaik and Fusulier, 2015). Another metaphor has been used in reference to the same stage in a woman’s career path; though recent, it has resonated well with scholars: the ‘vanish box phenomenon’ (Etzkowitz and Ranga, 2011). With this metaphor, the authors intend to stigmatize the myopia of analysis that tends to explain academic career trajectories as if they were in a vacuum. Conversely, job and career opportunities (including scientific ones) outside the academic environment tend to be a viable alternative, especially (but not only for) those women who prefer to go for other career options where the rules for hiring are clearer and more transparent, and where their talents and experience (including that of an academic nature) might be more appreciated. Once they have secured a position within the academic world, women continue to clash with gender-blind rules that prevent them from reaching the top positions. This is explained through the well-known metaphor of the ‘glass ceiling’ (Hymowitz and Schellhardt, 1986). Women are bogged down by social and position-related obligations that prevent them from opting for the ‘rule of exogamy’ (whereby women have a family in one location and their work in another), which actually turns out to be necessary if they wish to increase their career prospects (Etzkowitz et al., 1994). Furthermore, these obligations turn them into the preferred targets of peer review processes that have been spoiled by persistent gender bias (Wennerås and Wold, 1997), or victims of opaque selection criteria that prevent them from verifying the suitability of their profile or from aligning their professional choices with the credentials that they need (the ‘crystal labyrinth’ referred to by Eagly and Carli, 2007). Women’s aca-

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 86

13/12/2019 15:47



The leaky pipeline phenomenon in academic careers ­87

demic careers are therefore characterized by small cumulative disadvantages with an often devastating impact on their individual paths (Valian, 1998). When navigating through this labyrinth, women cannot count on Ariadne’s thread, in this case represented by the mechanisms of belonging, on which co-option is based. The prevalence of this criterion in the selection process is a disadvantage for women, who end up being excluded or on the edge of the central groups of power, the so-called ‘old boys’ network’ (Kaufman, 1978). Put simply, they are relegated to the outer circle of the scientific community (Zuckerman et al., 1991). A growing set of studies aimed at emphasizing the relevance of policies promoted at the contextual and institutional level potentially partially contain and/or ameliorate the adverse effects of some of the dynamics identified and illustrated above, for example the policies on family leave, resistance to telecommuting, lack of access to childcare, and so on (Maes et al., 2012; European Commission, 2014). It is also possible to cover the need for ‘onramping’ programmes for women who may have had such breaks, to reintegrate them into their careers (Gupta et al., 2004). The literature cited above highlights the transversality and pervasiveness of the phenomena at macro level. It also indicates the variability of segregative dynamics, which are characterized in different contexts by varying degrees (European Commission, 2016): both the institutional contexts and disciplinary sectors have proved to be critical variables (August and Waltman, 2004). By considering the macro level as crucial, this chapter intends to underline its role in defining the rules of the game within which the teams and individual players move. To analyse the female academic careers as a result of mechanisms that act and retroact on three different levels (macro, meso and micro) the in-depth analysis focused in particular on the role of macro and meso levels in shaping the dynamics observed at micro level.

5.3 RESEARCH DESIGN AND SUB-UNIT OF ANALYSIS SELECTION Before considering the methodological choices, it is crucial to underline that ‘case study is not a methodological choice but a choice of what it is to be studied’ (Stake, 2005, p. 443). It becomes an obligatory choice when the goal is to explain, describe or explore events or phenomena in the everyday contexts in which they occur, and it is particularly useful to generate an in-depth, multifaceted understanding of a complex issue in its real-life context (Yin, 2009); and this is also the case in this chapter. The methodological approach has been centred on the embedded case study.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 87

13/12/2019 15:47

88

Gender, science and innovation

The advantages of using an embedded case-study approach are twofold: on one hand, because the embeddedness allows an exploration of the courses of action and retroaction of the three analytical levels of observation by adopting a multidimensional and holistic approach; and on the other hand, because of the identification of sub-units which is appropriate for descriptive studies, where the focus is on the context and process of a phenomenon (ibid.). Furthermore, by selecting more than one sub-unit of analysis, it allows the integration of quantitative and qualitative methods into a single research study (ibid.). The University of Pisa has been selected as a case study, as its female presence in academic careers is in line with those recorded in Italian universities with both humanities and natural science departments (feminization rate at national level: 30‒39 per cent; feminization rate at Pisa University: 34 per cent; Frattini and Rossi, 2012). A detailed analysis of the female participation rates at the different steps of an academic career in the University of Pisa’s departments identified the sub-units. By using the logic of theoretical replication, the sub-units were chosen by focusing on cases with the worst performance in terms of the more typical forms of female employment segregation, that is, horizontal and vertical, which are expected to cover different theoretical conditions. Horizontal and vertical segregations tend to be explained from very different perspectives, linking the first to micro processes, and shifting the explanation for the second entirely to the institutional level. However, if the existence of an inextricable interconnection between the phenomena observed in each of the three levels of sociological observation, and the inability to isolate and examine the dynamics of these phenomena in a system of mutual influence, is posited, the choice of two polarized units, even if they do belong to the same institutional context, favours better understanding of the dynamics of action and retroaction operating in that context and at the current historical moment. With regard to the phenomenon of horizontal segregation, a comparative data analysis at the University of Pisa level identified the disciplinary field of engineering as a paradigm characterized by the highest degree of rigidity at entry level (with a female participation rate at the first step of their careers of 12 per cent). In terms of vertical segregation, medicine is characterized by a particularly severe expulsion rate (with a Glass Ceiling Index of 3.55).2 In both cases, a comparison with the performance 2   The Glass Ceiling Index (GCI) compares the proportion of women in Grade A positions to the proportion of women in all stages of academic careers (EC, 2016). A GCI of 1 indicates that there is no difference between women and men being promoted. A score of less than 1 means that women are over-represented

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 88

13/12/2019 15:47



The leaky pipeline phenomenon in academic careers ­89

recorded at national level revealed a more severe segregation in both disciplinary areas, making the case study even more interesting. The rate of expulsion in the medical sciences, albeit high (the Italian average as of 31 December 2013 was 2.24), is in fact more than 1.31 points below the Pisa average. Similarly, the rigidity at entry level for academics in engineering is considerably higher for the University of Pisa than the national average: 12 per cent, compared to a national average that is more than double (28 per cent, as of 31 December 2013). Prior to proceeding further, it should be noted that from an organizational point of view the mentioned disciplinary areas correspond to six departments: three in medicine and three in engineering.3 Despite this internal articulation, both areas can be considered as unitary, as they have a common historical matrix (until 2012, they were part of the same faculty, and as of 2013 and 2016, Engineering and Medicine, respectively, have been organized into a single didactic structure). The motivations that led to the identification of these two units of analysis also determined the methodological choices of the research design. This involved the integrated case study that was outlined in order to detect the presence, relevance and reciprocal influence of the phenomena identified by the reference literature as explanations for the two segregative dynamics (both horizontal and vertical) in each analysis unit. Two main sources of data were used for this study: individuals and organizations (in the sense of departments) that are part of the analysis units. Both were interviewed according to a mixed-method logic, starting with a unitary research design (see Table 5.1). The organizational units were investigated according to the logic of results, perceived as career paths. The analysis of the secondary data was furthered through the database of the University of Pisa for those dimensions that the literature suggests as determinants: promotions, the timing of the promotions, assignment of institutional tasks, scientific productivity, and so on. In this phase of the study, disciplinary contextualization became an interpretative and analytical dimension crucial to the interpretation of the results. However, the organizational practices can be analysed according to the logic of operation. It is for this reason that the research design included focus groups with the top management of the at Grade A level; and a GCI score of more than 1 means that women are underrepresented in Grade A positions. 3   The Departments of Medicine have a total of 260 appointed members of academic staff, with 176 male and 84 female professors; the Departments of Engineering have a total of 231 appointed members of academic staff, with 204 male and 27 female professors.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 89

13/12/2019 15:47

90

Gender, science and innovation

Table 5.1  Data collection From individual About macro level

About meso level

About micro level

From the organization

Questions

Source

Questions

Source

Social construction  of: individual attitude; gender roles; role of scientist; role of leader Ideal type of  successful women (from a holistic perspective) Negotiation  outcome for workload in daily life: work‒life interface Level of  transparency perceived for allocating tasks Organizational  climate and relationship at work Role models Perception of  individual attitudes Individual  behaviour, trajectories, ‘choices’

Interviews*

Secondary data Organization  outcome  (university (career paths) database) Scientific  performance from gender perspective

Survey **

Workload  organization

Organizational  chart analysis

Interviews*

Rhetoric of  rationale/ reason for allocation

Focus group  with top-level management***

Interviews*

Gender  and science stereotype detection (in terms of attitude, preferences, etc.)

Focus group  with top-level management***

Notes: * For a total of 25 interviews, covering 67 per cent of female full professors, and 46 per cent of female associate professors. ** The survey was conducted on the entire universe of reference (a census). It obtained a response rate of 44 per cent (the sample results were represented by departments, gender and grade; for more details see Cervia and Biancheri, 2017). *** For a total of two focus groups, with an average of 10 participants (Deans and ViceDeans of Departments, and PhD Presidents).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 90

13/12/2019 15:47



The leaky pipeline phenomenon in academic careers ­91

relevant departments in order to reveal the dominant rhetoric and any stereotypes that can influence the organization of work and the allocation of responsibilities and tasks. Individuals were involved in a survey with the entire reference population (appointed academic staff). The aim was to determine the outcome of the negotiation process for roles in the public and private sphere and to uncover the strategies adopted for the work‒life interface by highlighting the obligations pertaining to each sphere and the composition strategies, and to identify any gender, generational or disciplinary peculiarities. ‘Successful’ women, that is, full and associate professors promoted to full professors at a young age compared to the average, were involved in a qualitative study aimed at reconstructing the life and career paths of these women, and the meaning that they attribute to those concepts identified as sensitizers in the reference literature (perception of identity and role as a scientist, life and work choices, turning points, transitions, and so on). The interviews were an important source of information regarding stereotyping, the awareness and transparency of mechanisms and processes, and the perception of the organizational climate and its place in a department and in a disciplinary field.

5.4 FINDINGS: THE EVIDENCE FROM TRIANGULATION The triangulation of data sources enabled the analysis and interpretation of the information collected by quantitative and qualitative methods into a unitary framework by means of a recursive mechanism that has proven to be particularly useful in order to identify courses of action and retroaction among different levels of observation (micro, meso, macro). Starting with the statistical evidence from female careers, the study used the information gathered by other sources in order to give the data complexity and highlight the risks of one-dimensional interpretations. Then, using the same criteria, the study proceeded with a contextualized interpretation of the life histories. 5.4.1  Interpreting Statistical Evidence from a Micro‒Meso Perspective The gender-based analysis of career paths highlighted further peculiarities, in addition to the trends illustrated above, and therefore contributes to restoring the complexity that is typical of reality and hard to simplify. The horizontal segregation that characterizes female participation in engineering has also been found in medicine even if in a very peculiar way

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 91

13/12/2019 15:47

92

Gender, science and innovation

Table 5.2  D  istribution of professors by gender and scientific discipline (Departments of Medicine); years of reference: 2013 and 2016 Men

Full professor  (M/F) Associate  professor (M/F)

2013 2016 2013 2016

Women

BIO

MED

BIO/MED (%)

7 5 (22) 12 10 (22)

38 42 (14) 55 59 (14)

16 11 (25) 18 14 (24)

BIO

MED

2 3 1 (21) 3 (5) 5 16 10 (15) 21 (15)

BIO/MED (%) 40 25 (215) 24 32 (18)

Note:  BIO 5 Biology; MED 5 Medicine; M/F 5 Male/Female. Source:  Elaborated administrative data of the University of Pisa, as at 31 December 2013 and 31 December 2016.

and, in both cases, has proved to be related with the vertical segregation and with the persistence of the glass ceiling. Indeed, when considering the disciplinary affiliation of the teaching staff, it becomes evident that women find more opportunities in the ancillary disciplines (biology), whereas men prevail in the mainstream disciplines of the departments and related courses. Moreover, the adopted longitudinal observation shows how this tendency is reinforced; how in only three years there are even fewer men in the fields of biology and more women (see Table 5.2). The analysis of the allocation of institutional tasks outlines the very close relationship between this and the disciplinary segregation highlighted above. None of the directors of the departments or of the newly established Medical School is female. Similarly, none of the women who run a PhD course at the University of Pisa organizes a PhD in medicine. In keeping with these trends, it is not surprising to find a weaker female presence compared to the average for the University of Pisa, including in terms of the directors of graduate courses or the coordination of specialized schools. At the University of Pisa, top positions are assigned to women in a little over four out of ten cases, whilst in the target departments and specialized schools the incidence is only one in ten. However, a closer look at the curricula shows that the universe of reference for assigning such roles is extremely limited. Given that full professorship and disciplinary affiliation are required in medical fields, only three women are candidates, while the number of men is significantly higher, that is 42. As already stated, the literature tends to link horizontally segregated dynamics to micro-level processes. However, the analysis conducted and

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 92

13/12/2019 15:47



The leaky pipeline phenomenon in academic careers ­93

the disciplinary areas of reference allow, in this case, delving deeper and discovering the importance of phenomena that can be associated with the other two levels of observation. Both fields (medicine and biology) are related to the life sciences and have experienced a similar feminization process. Different career opportunities are almost entirely related to workload. Physician-professors (both men and women) have to face a triple presence: they have to teach, conduct university research and perform their hospital duties (and as their academic role grows, so too do their duties). This leads to a so-called ‘triple engagement’ which, in the case of female physicians, is added to the phenomenon known in Italy as ‘double presence’, that is, professional work and household duties (Balbo, 1978), and termed in America the ‘shift presence’ (Hochschild and Machung, 1990). This means that these female professionals reach a superhuman goal, which for the purposes of this study could be called a ‘quadruple presence’. By contrast, the workload of a biologist does not incur any hospital work: a clinic is a lot more . . . for a woman, it implies a lot more difficulty in reconciling family and work life . . . because having to be frequently in an operating room . . . I don’t know. . . if we’re talking about a woman who also wants a family . . . because you have women who have chosen not to have a family and perhaps they could manage . . . (COD_14; Full Professor, MED)4

This interpretation is further confirmed by the analysis of the workload of three female full professors, two of whom work in disciplinary fields that do not involve hospital work (anatomical pathology and medical ­genetics). In the Engineering Departments, where segregation is horizontal, further elements consistent with the ‘ghettoization’ of science can be found; in this case, the elements are situated on the vertical axis. It is worth examining this aspect more closely. In spite of the fact that the proportion of female full professors in engineering is essentially the same as that of medicine, from an institutional point of view their presence is even less visible. They do not have any institutional duties, with the exception of directing graduate courses in three out of ten cases (that is, close to the University of Pisa’s average), but this number is largely derived from chairing departmental meetings that are less prestigious and have less institutional centrality. This indicates the presence of a much broader phenomenon that, by adopting a stereotypical vision, tends to assign teaching   All quotes from the interviews have been translated from Italian into English. In brackets, at the end of each quotation, is the progressive code associated with the interview and the interviewee’s affiliation. 4

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 93

13/12/2019 15:47

94

Gender, science and innovation

or administrative duties to women on a preferential basis and to reserve the positions of greater prestige and power (and of financial interest) to men: I will share my experience with you: if there are any positions of power or duties with certain responsibilities . . . they tend to go to men. So you go with a less substantial CV . . . but you get slapped with everything . . . because women are more willing and available, so they are assigned roles that are more . . . not more demanding, but definitely more tedious . . . definitely . . . there’s that course that no one really wants . . . the course involving many hours . . . (COD_09, Associate Professor, ENG)

The tendency to assign the said responsibilities to women is fuelled by a rhetoric based on curriculum paths and a greater tendency for disciplinary contamination. Some of the women in engineering, as well as those appointed in medicine, come from other disciplines. Among the full professors interviewed, one has a degree in information technology (IT); while among the associate professors, three are graduates in the subjects closest to the skills stereotypically associated with the female universe – that is, managerial economics (two) and architecture (one), and another two have degrees in the non-applied sciences (mathematics and physics). These cases are interesting, from a micro perspective. In the first case, the female professor with a degree in mathematics both has an aptitude for science and undertakes a role consistent with the social expectations related to the female gender. However, she has elected to study the curriculum devoted to teaching at secondary school, which, and not by chance, has a higher female involvement than both engineering and mathematics as a whole. In the second case, the female professor with a degree in applied physics, in keeping with the hypotheses developed in the reference literature (Greenfield, 1995), has been influenced by other factors, such as ethnic and social origin, which have played a decisive role in the construction of ‘other’ meanings, attitudes and affiliations. It is interesting to note how the career paths of those coming from other disciplinary areas seem to be affected by the reputation of their subjects of origin. The effect is greater for mathematics, physics and computer science than for economics and architecture. It is precisely in the latter cases that the biographies of women reveal tougher career paths in terms of access at the outset, and promotion later, with significantly extended waiting periods. Another example acts as the perfect bridge linking the two argumentative nuclei of this study. The case deals with a full professor who holds a degree in IT. When recounting her educational choices, she spoke of how when choosing a faculty, the curriculum she chose was perceived to

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 94

13/12/2019 15:47



The leaky pipeline phenomenon in academic careers ­95

be a ‘job-type’ qualification and therefore characterized by a high female presence. This perception was later overturned with the progressive confirmation of the subject matter and its technical-scientific interest, to the extent that today this undergraduate course has one of the lowest female presences. 5.4.2  Analysing Life Histories from a Meso‒Macro Perspective For the interviewees, the idea of a woman and a scientist being compatible lies at the heart of their life histories and life choices. It is a notion that is formed in childhood and that grows over time. It is interesting to note how this compatibility is not always general or even generalized. For female engineers in particular, it seems that the process of socialization has established a way for them to be a woman, to challenge social constructions. They often emphasize in their narratives that they are a bit of a tomboy (almost wanting to reiterate their proximity to the male universe, which allows them to develop other male characteristics such as an aptitude for science and technical subjects). It is as if they want to highlight their idiosyncrasies, which are suited to challenging stereotypes and prejudices, as illustrated by the following comment: My mom would stress me out a lot, because of the way I dressed and because of the way I acted, because I always felt, not from a sexual point of view, but in terms of my role, that I was more boyish than girly . . . I chose engineering, because it was a very masculine profession, and I liked the idea of doing something that, back then, only 99 percent of men were doing. (COD_23; Associate Professor, ENG)

Women doctors manifest this tension differently; in some cases, by marrying and reproposing the stereotypical incompatibility between the role of mother and scientist (as is also apparent in the passage cited above). In others, they use rhetoric that allows them to recompose their life histories and career paths and gender-related social expectations. The rhetoric of ‘good fortune’ and ‘luck’ accompanies all the narratives, almost as if to justify the dissonance between female gender and academic success. There are two corollaries of this argument. Firstly, the narratives, especially those of women doctors, appear to be affected by tension, as shown by the use of the verbs ‘must’ and ‘want’ in reference to the choices made in life. The first of these verbs is most often associated with the private sphere, for example when referring to a husband’s business trips; the second when talking about a career (and education), as a way of realizing oneself and as the terrain on which to test and bet on oneself.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 95

13/12/2019 15:47

96

Gender, science and innovation

However, the rhetoric of benevolent fate is linked with another representation that assumes, for the purpose of this analysis, an equally fundamental role: that is, the image of an academic career that is governed by obscure and capricious forces, where the rules of the game are changeable and ambiguous. In academia, the old adage homo faber ipsius fortunae (Man is the maker of his own fortunes) does not seem to apply, especially when the expression refers, by extension, to the female universe. Contrary to what emerged from the focus groups with the leaders of the target departments ‒ that is, the rhetoric regarding difficult career and life paths ‒ the storytelling is centred on the importance of willingness, tenacity and determination as fundamental features for women to build their academic fortunes. This different perception of the ability to control their own work fate can fuel the selective estrangement of women from academia, considerably more so than for men, and reinforce the ‘vanish box phenomenon’, especially in areas such as medicine and engineering, which are characterized by important and qualified work. The pervasiveness of gender models clearly emerges from the results of the survey on the work‒life interface, which paint a picture that is entirely consistent with the one depicted in the reference literature, but which, under the magnifying glass of other sources, allows for further, interesting reflections on the definition of roles as a result of a continuous and contingent negotiation process. Pursuing a practice established in the literature, the study organized the results of the survey by categorizing the distribution of the family workload within the couple based on the distinction between routine and occasional work and frequency. There is an evident gender connotation whereby the first type of work – routine – is of female relevance, and the second is of male relevance (Shelton and John, 1996). In accordance with the proposed definition of these types of work, the survey included all activities requiring a daily and constant commitment in the first category (Coltrane, 2000). Occasional work includes those activities requiring incidental or intermittent engagement, such as repair work, gardening, car maintenance and managing the household finances (Bartley et al., 2005). The proposed categorization (Tables 5.3 and 5.4) further distinguishes between tasks related to home management and childcare duties in order to understand better the management of the different roles within the home walls, with or without children. The division of household-related obligations reflects the social construction of gender attitudes, with a polarization between the routine activities taken on by women (58 per cent of female doctors and 57 per cent of engineers) and the occasional activities taken on by men (65 per cent in medicine and 76 per cent in engineering). This is reflected perfectly by the numbers on how partners allocate activities to each other. To fulfil

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 96

13/12/2019 15:47



The leaky pipeline phenomenon in academic careers ­97

Table 5.3  Management of household tasks by the couple  

Medicine Routine activities (%)

Personal responsibility

M W M W M W M W

Partner responsibility Sharing Outsourcing

Engineering

Occasional Routine activities activities (%) (%)

13 58 44 7 23 16 21 20

65 26 15 44 11 14 9 15

Occasional activities (%)

22 57 26 9 30 20 21 14

76 22 11 51 10 18 3 8

Source:  Survey conducted between November 2015 and March 2016.

Table 5.4  Management of childcare by the couple Medicine

Engineering

Routine Occasional Childcare Routine Occasional Childcare activities activities during activities activities during (%) (%) holidays (%) (%) holidays (%) (%) Personal responsibility Partner responsibility Sharing Outsourcing

M W M W M W M W

15 37 45 8 16 15 24 40

10 64 42 0 39 29 10 7

12 20 26 0 38 5 24 75

26 45 12 21 40 13 22 21

12 58 6 15 74 12 8 15

2 18 0 41 68 0 30 41

Source:  Survey conducted between November 2015 and March 2016.

their routine responsibilities, female companions are the main resource for male doctors (44 per cent of cases), while engineers seem to adopt more varied coping strategies, using fairly similar approaches (delegation, sharing or outsourcing). Conversely, for women, their male counterparts are the main resource managing occasional responsibilities, be they physicians (44 per cent) or engineers (51 per cent). When interpreting the reported practices regarding the management

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 97

13/12/2019 15:47

98

Gender, science and innovation

of caregiving duties, the gender dimension intersects more clearly with another dimension, that is, the disciplinary/organizational dimension. The comparison between the strategies adopted by the professors (men and women) in the Departments of Engineering and those adopted by the professors of the Departments of Medicine shows that work-related tasks are managed differently: greater flexibility in the first case, and definitely more urgency in the second. This difference is confirmed by the perception of the interviewees: female professors in medicine, especially those who are physicians, perceive work-time duties as demanding and pervasive. Female engineers highlight the advantage of being able to organize their own work schedules, not because it means they can work less, but because it allows them to arrange their own schedules: Because unlike the private sphere, a university, fortunately, allows you to take personal time. If my child is ill, I can stay at home or I can ask a colleague to help out or I can postpone or I can do it via e-mail. A university offers greater flexibility. A university offers a woman wanting a family greater possibilities. (COD_23; Associate Professor, ENG)

Where working hours are more flexible, the practices developed by men and women are more collaborative and negotiating. The rigidity of doctors’ working hours, however, does not help with the renegotiation of household responsibilities. Male professors resort to delegation as their main strategy for managing household duties, whilst female professors have to resort to external help. The asymmetric possibility of resorting to one’s partner as an ally in managing one’s home life is also due to the persistence of a traditional family model that allows men, in more than 20 per cent of cases, to rely on a homemaker. More than 50 per cent have a wife or partner who works part-time. In the light of how household duties are shared, it is no wonder that women devote less time to their work, even if they are scientists (see Figure 5.1). If 45 per cent of the women interviewed claim to work more than 40 hours a week, it is easy to understand why, in most cases, these women have no children or only one. Conversely, three-quarters of male professors are able to take on a heavier workload, thanks to the alliance they have forged at home with their wives. A detailed analysis of gender and field shows that women engineers work on average more hours per week than women medics (57 per cent of women engineers say they work more than 40 hours a week, versus 43 per cent of female medics). In their male counterparts, the gap is smaller and in this case, medics have a heavier workload. Flexibility of working hours seems to be an incentive for women to work harder, leading to a higher level of satisfaction and a greater chance of remaining competitive in their career paths.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 98

13/12/2019 15:47



The leaky pipeline phenomenon in academic careers ­99

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

ENG

MED M More than 40 hours Between 25 and 34 hours

ENG

MED F

Between 35 and 40 hours Less than 24 hours

Figure 5.1  W  orking time: frequency distribution of question 10: ‘Average working hours per week’ by gender and unit of analysis

5.5 CONCLUSIONS This chapter has aimed to explore the dynamics of women’s career paths in academia as related to the context at macro and meso level by using the embedded case study approach. The embedded case study and the triangulation of data sources highlight the ways in which the three analytical dimensions act and retroact in defining individual career paths. At the micro level, the cultural constraints related to gender and science have led to the construction of a personal identity that seems to be separated from that of most females, in terms of attitude, but also in terms of personal choice (being or not being a mother seems to be perceived as a crucial point in order to define a personal identity compatible with scientist identity). The women involved in this study defined a personal gender identity that defied the typical notions of femininity: they ­perceived and described themselves as tomboys. Furthermore, we observed that the social construction of scientific fields, their reputation and their gender compatibility, is strictly connected with horizontal (and this is clear in scientific literature) but also with vertical segregation (due to a mainstream politics subject-related for assignments, tasks and roles). At the meso level, the life histories illustrated that females are very motivated to test and to bet themselves in the public sphere, as a way of

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 99

13/12/2019 15:47

100

Gender, science and innovation

realizing themselves; even though, when asked about the reasons for their success, they use the rhetoric of benevolent fate. This rhetoric seems to be very closed with the rules of the game, that become to be perceived as obscure and uncontrollable. At the same level, it becomes evident that the persistence of traditional gender roles and activities in the private sphere have a negative impact on time spent working, which is worsened by the lack of effective care services for children and other dependants offered by the Italian welfare (Ajzenstadt and Gal, 2010). This is the reason why the workloads have to be carefully considered. This study has revealed that greater flexibility on its own is not enough to retain female talent looking for a 360° life. Women doctors teaching at the university end up with a quadruple workload (their work also includes family responsibilities) which it is almost impossible to keep up with. This workload could become more sustainable if more significant action were taken at national level and/or through different working standards and ­appropriate ­reconciliation ­policies developed by and for each faculty and ­university. Women engineers tend to ‘vanish’, focusing on qualified scientific work outside of academia, because of their inability to plan their careers and the ­perception that success at work does not depend on them and their level of commitment; instead, it depends on other criteria and rules. This is the reason why it is crucial to carefully analyse the changes introduced in the selection criteria justified by the rhetoric of increasing transparency as a result of new public management, which cannot be seen merely as a positive datum. Indeed, transparency is accompanied by other mechanisms of discrimination, ranging from a tendency to quantification (bibliometric indicators) and the persistence of elitist strategies in the allocation of scientific resources, which work against women and minority groups (Addis, 2010). The analysis of the life paths of women scientists has identified the peculiarity of the context being analysed in terms of the trends observed elsewhere. The aforementioned replacement of instrumental strategies with more balanced ones that would serve new generations, as a kind of guarantee for women’s academic success, has been essentially thwarted as an argument. The life histories have shown how first-generation women succeeded in reconciling the role of scientist with that of mother (and wife), thanks to fast-track careers that allowed them to invest in both spheres of their lives. The most typical model used by this generation to strike a balance seems to be sequential: that is, securing a stable position or career advancement was followed by the birth of a child. Today, this option is no longer available for the younger generations, for whom length of time to access academia has grown considerably (just think that the

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 100

13/12/2019 15:47



The leaky pipeline phenomenon in academic careers ­101

age at which some full professors secured this position is the same age at which the luckier women of today are promoted to a Grade C position, the first permanent position in a typical academic career).5 At present, as a result of the Gelmini Education Reform (Law 240 of 2010),6 the situation is even more dramatic, with the transformation of a Grade C position (named ricercatore) from a permanent position to a two different kind of fixed-term positions. Nowadays, there are two types of contract, ricercatore di tipo A and ricercatore di tipo B, of which only type B is tenure-track. The contract for type A lasts for three years and can be extended for only two more years, but is not a career path towards an associate professor position; while the contract for type B, which lasts for three years with no possibility of an extension, has the opportunity provided that, if in the meantime, the person has been considered idoneo (employable, or fit for service) to a professorship position by a national committee within a specific discipline.7 With the current rules, to move up to a professorship position, a ricercatore di tipo A, or an external candidate, needs to be considered idoneo by the above-mentioned national committee.8 Once the committee has provided the list of candidati idonei, those candidates can proceed to the second step and apply for a position at a local university, within a period of six years. If the candidate does not get a position within this period, they must apply again for the idoneità. Unfortunately, the time required to apply the law prevented observation of the effect of the reform on the ricercatori di tipo B. Due to a national delay, the first recruitment procedures for type B researchers was started at the end of 2016, but the results of the analysis conducted suggest that the Gelmini Education Reform could have a relevant gender effect as it impacts on two crucial points, at the macro level, which have proven to be crucial for (female) career paths: the workload distribution, and the ability to control and to plan. Firstly, greater attention should be paid to the workload distribution practices that usually see teaching or administrative tasks being assigned to women, by monitoring the practices to assign teaching duties that are now required by law. It would be crucial to consider the time required to  http://www.unive.it/media/allegato/AREA%20RICERCA/Equivalences_2016​ .pdf. 6  https://www.perfar.eu/policies/gelmini%E2%80%99s-reform. 7   Both contract types involve teaching duties; in the past, the permanent researcher position did not include teaching, which was voluntary. 8   Candidates who do not pass the national competition have to wait for one year to reapply. 5

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 101

13/12/2019 15:47

102

Gender, science and innovation

carry out the other activities connected with the course (student reception, exams, and so on), influenced by the numbers of students and by the kind of course (required or elective), and their impact on the possibilities to collect the requirements necessary to access the national selection procedure. Furthermore, the nationalization of the first step of the procedure has not been followed by an adequate timeline for applying it,9 with the result of significantly increasing the uncertainty associated with a university career. Scheduling the time frame during which applications can be submitted would allow for better career planning in the lives of candidates. The uncertainty is further increased due to variability of the requirements necessary to access the national selection procedure, and of the evaluation criteria,10 that prevents the creation of more effective (female) curriculum orientation strategies. As the embedded case study has already underlined, the certainty of the rules of the game and the timing are two crucial dimensions for women choosing to take the plunge and embark on an academic career. This could very well increase the appeal of a career that otherwise risks becoming a poor substitute – especially in the scientific and technological disciplines – in terms of remuneration, career opportunities and social prestige, not only for women, but also for men.

REFERENCES Addis, E. (2010), Gender and Scientific Excellence: Meta-analysis of Gender and Science Research – Topic Report, 7th RTD Framework Programme of the European Union (RTD-PP-L4-2007-1). Aisenberg, N. and Harrington, M. (1988), Women of Academe: Outsiders in the Sacred Grove, Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press. Ajzenstadt, M. and Gal, J. (2010), Children, Gender and Families in Mediterranean Welfare States, New York: Springer. August, L. and Waltman, J. (2004), ‘Culture, climate, and contribution: career satisfaction among female faculty’, Research in Higher Education, 45 (2), ­ 177–92. Balbo, L. (1978), ‘La doppia presenza’, Inchiesta, 32, 3–6. Bartley, S.J., Blanton, P.W. and Gillard, J.L. (2005), ‘Husbands and wives in dual  Looking at the past: the first call was organized between 2012 and 2013 with a single application period; the second was planned in summer 2016, and between the end of 2016 and the beginning of 2018, four-month time application periods were introduced. 10   The ministerial Acts related to the first call (2012‒2013) and to the second call (2016‒2018) established different access thresholds and various evaluation criteria.  9

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 102

13/12/2019 15:47



The leaky pipeline phenomenon in academic careers ­103

earner marriages: decision-making, gender role attitudes, division of household labor, and equity’, Marriage and Family Review, 37, 69–74. Berryman, S.E. (1983), Who Will Do Science? Minority and Female Attainment of Science and Mathematics Degrees: Trends and Causes, New York: Rockefeller Foundation. Blickenstaff, J.C. (2005), ‘Women and science careers: leaky pipeline or gender filter?’, Gender and Education, 17 (4), 369–86. Booth, A.L., Francesconi, M. and Frank, L. (2003), ‘A sticky floors model of promotion, pay and gender’, European Economic Review, 47 (2), 295–322. Caprile, M., Addis, E., Castaño, C., et al. (eds) (2012), Meta-analysis of Gender and Science Research, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_gender_equality/meta-analysis-ofgender-and-science-research-synthesis-report.pdf. Cervia, S. and Biancheri, R. (2017), ‘Women in science: the persistence of traditional gender roles: a case study on work–life interface’, European Educational Research Journal, 16 (2/3), 215­–29. Clark, S.M. and Corcoran, M. (1986), ‘Perspectives on the professional socialization of women faculty’, Journal of Higher Education, 57, 20–43. Coltrane, S. (2000), ‘Research on household labor: modeling and measuring the social embeddedness of routine family work’, Journal of Family and Marriage, 62 (4), 1208‒33. Connell, R. (1987), Gender and Power: Society, the Person, and Sexual Politics, Cambridge: Polity Press. Cook, S.G. (2001), ‘Negotiating family accommodation practices on your campus’, Women in Higher Education, 10 (4), 25–6. Coser, L.A. (1974), Greedy Institutions: Patterns of Undivided Commitment, New York: Free Press. Dubois-Shaik, F. and Fusulier, B. (eds) (2015), Academic Careers and Gender Inequality: Leaky Pipeline and Interrelated Phenomena in Seven European Countries, Trento: University of Trento. Eagly, A.H. and Carli, L.L (2007), ‘Women and the labyrinth of leadership’, Harvard Business Review, 85 (9), 63–72. Epstein, D., Elwood, J., Hey, V. and Maw, J. (1998), Failing Boys? Issues in Gender and Achievement, Buckingham: Open University Press. Etzkowitz, H. and Ranga, M. (2011), ‘Gender dynamics in science and technology: from the “leaky pipeline” to the “vanish box”’, Brussels Economic Review, 54 (2/3), 131–47. Etzkowitz, H., Kemelgor, C., Neuschatz, M., et al. (1994), ‘The paradox of critical mass for women in science’, Science, 266 (5182), 51–4. Etzkowitz, H., Kemelgor, C. and Uzzi, B. (2000), Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science and Technology, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. European Commission (EC) (2014), Gender Equality Policies in Public Research, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. European Commission (EC) (2016), She Figures, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Fox, M.F. (2005), ‘Gender, family characteristics, and publication productivity among scientists’, Social Studies of Science, 35 (1), 131–50. Frattini, R. and Rossi, P. (2012), ‘Report sulle donne nell’università italiana’, Meno di zero, 3, 8–9.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 103

13/12/2019 15:47

104

Gender, science and innovation

Frehill, L.M., Abreu, A. and Zippel, K. (2015), ‘Gender, science, and occupational sex segregation’, in Willie Pearson, Lisa M. Frehill and Connie L. McNeely (eds), Advancing Women in Science: An International Perspective, New York: Springer, pp. 51‒92. Giddens, A. (1991), The Consequences of Modernity, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Ginther, D.K. and Kahn, S. (2006), Does Science Promote Women? Evidence from Academia 1973–2001, Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Greenfield, T.A. (1995), ‘Sex-differences in Science Museum exhibit attraction’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 925–38. Gupta, N., Kemelgor, C., Fuchs, S. and Etzkowitz, H. (2004), ‘The “triple burden”: a cross-cultural analysis of the consequences of discrimination for women in science’, in European Commission (ed.), Gender and Excellence in the Making, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Community, pp. 41–50. Haas, M., Keinert, C., Köszegi, S.T. and Zedlacher, E. (2011), ‘Breaking patterns: how opportunistic sponsorship and women’s moral compass shape careers of female scientists’, in André Béraud, Anne-Sophie Godfroy and Jean Michel (eds), Gender and Interdisciplinary Education for Engineers, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, pp. 401–3. Hewlett, S.A., Luce, C.B., Servon, L.J. and Sherbin, L. (2008), The Athena Factor: Reversing the Brain Drain in Science, Engineering, and Technology, New York: Center for Work–Life Policy. Hochschild, A. and Machung, A. (1990), The Second Shift, New York: Avon Books. Hunter, L.A. and Leahey, E. (2010), ‘Parenting and research productivity: new evidence and methods’, Social Studies of Science, 40 (3), 433–51. Hymowitz, C. and Schellhardt, T.D. (1986), ‘The glass-ceiling: why women can’t seem to break the invisible barrier that blocks them from top jobs’, Wall Street Journal, 24 March. Joecks, J., Pull, K. and Backes-Gellner, U. (2014), ‘Childbearing and (female) research productivity: a personnel economics perspective on the leaky pipeline’, Journal of Business Economics, 84 (4), 517–30. Kahle, J.B., Parker, L.H., Rennie, L.J. and Riley, D. (1993), ‘Gender differences in science education: building a model’, Educational Psychologist, 28 (4), 379–404. Kaufman, D.R. (1978), ‘Associational ties in academe: some male and female differences’, Sex Roles, 4, 9–21. Long, J.S. (1990), ‘The origins of sex differences in science’, Social Forces, 68 (4), 1297–316. Maes, K., Gvozdanovic, J., Buitendijk, S., et al. (2012), ‘Women, research and universities: excellence without gender bias’, LERU Gender Working Group. Osborne, J., Simon, S. and Collins, S. (2003), ‘Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications’, International Journal of Science Education, 25 (9), 1049–79. Rosser, S.V. (1999), ‘Different laboratory/work climates: impacts on women in the workplace’, in Cecily Cannan Selby (ed.), Women in Science and Engineering: Choices for Success, New York: Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, pp. 95–101.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 104

13/12/2019 15:47



The leaky pipeline phenomenon in academic careers ­105

Rosser, S.V. (2004), The Science Glass Ceiling: Academic Women Scientists and the Struggle to Succeed, New York: Routledge. Rosser, S.V. and Lane, E.O. (2002), ‘Key barriers for academic institutions seeking to retain women scientists and engineers: family-unfriendly policies, low numbers, stereotypes, and harassment’, Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 8 (2), 161–90. Rossiter, M.W. (1995), Women Scientists in America: Before Affirmative Action 1940–1972, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Schiebinger, L. (1999), Has Feminism Changed Science?, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Settles, I.H., Cortina, L.M., Malley, J. and Stewart A.J. (2006), ‘The climate for women in academic science: the good, the bad, and the changeable’, Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30 (1), 47–58. Shelton, B.A. and John, D. (1996), ‘The division of household labor’, Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 299–322. Simard, C., Henderson, A.D., Gilmartin, S.K., et al. (2008), Climbing the Technical Ladder: Obstacles and Solutions for Mid-level Women in Technology, Stanford, CA: Michelle R. Clayman Institute for Gender Research, Stanford University, and Anita Borg Institute for Women and Technology. Stack, S. (2004), ‘Gender, children and research productivity’, Research in Higher Education, 45 (8), 891–920. Stake, R. (2005), ‘Qualitative case studies’, in Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln (eds), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 443‒66. Sullivan, S., Riger, S., Raja, S. and Stokes, J.P. (1997), ‘Measuring perceptions of the work environment for female faculty’, Review of Higher Education, 21 (1), 63–78. Valian, V. (1998), Why so Slow? The Advancement of Women, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Wennerås, C. and Wold, A. (1997), ‘Nepotism and sexism in peer-review’, Nature, 387, 341–43. Wharton, A.S. (2005), The Sociology of Gender: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. Xie, Y. and Shauman, K.A. (2003), Women in Science: Career Processes and Outcomes, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Yin, R.K. (2009), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 4th edition, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Zuckerman, H., Cole, J.R. and. Bruer, J.T. (1991), The Outer Circle: Women in the Scientific Community, New York: Norton.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 105

13/12/2019 15:47

6. Feminization of the medical profession Rita Biancheri 6.1  INTRODUCTION: HEALTH AND GENDER ‘Medicine is at heart a polygamist’, to quote an eloquent metaphor (Merton et al., 1957): that is, medicine is married to a number of sciences from which contributions and visions are derived in order to build a dynamic category of health that takes into account many possible dimensions, including these three terms and their multifaceted meanings: disease, illness and sickness. To shift from a bio-medical approach to a broader scenario, it is also necessary to shift interest towards a holistic idea of psychosocial well-being, thus overcoming the dualities that have divided the body from the mind and the individual from their daily life. In this way, numerous elements and related causes are considered relevant in a renewed concept of health, ranging from environmental quality to food consumption, from individual behaviours to safety in the workplace (Biancheri, 2014). It follows that, from an integrated and non-reductive perspective, gender can proffer a heuristic value to bypass the so-called neutrality of science in which males are perceived as an invariant, a performative structure that actually leads to a natural form of female subordination. By looking at gender differences from another point of view, we can reveal concealed horizons of an important articulation of knowledge that can help us to improve the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions. We are dealing with disadvantages deriving from the dynamics of power, the availability of material resources and disparities in welfare systems,1 as well as prevailing values ​​and beliefs in the public sphere. In addition, we are faced with a widely accepted view of the attribution of the essential maternal function which reproduces the traditional and asymmetric man  The Italian welfare system is based essentially on the concepts of work and compensation, flanked by the Catholic vision of subsidiarity; that is, the importance of the family and social policy (Esping-Andersen, 2009). 1

­106

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 106

13/12/2019 15:47



Feminization of the medical profession ­107

agement of domestic chores and caregiving activities (Biancheri, 2014, 2016). Conditions, therefore, have been historically assigned to different identities and reproduced by the socialization processes and educational models deriving from the very characteristics of sexual belonging and the social implications that this entails (Decataldo and Ruspini, 2014). In our study,2 in which we adopt a gender-based approach to health from a multidisciplinary perspective, we create comparative groups to deconstruct those certainties considered axiomatic, which are instead the result of ‘historical structures of the male order’. In our work we try to demonstrate the contamination of science by society, its values and principles, to understand the mechanisms underlying the production of knowledge, in order to analyse the initial stigma that excludes women as both objects and subjects of study. A hermeneutic approach allows us to focus on the organization, norms and values of the scientific community; to pave the way for the inclusion of underestimated but significant factors that influence female careers.

6.2  RETHEORIZING SEX AND GENDER To create an osmosis amongst types of knowledge (Remuzzi and Maturo, 2005; Oliffe and Greaves, 2012), we must look to the introduction of multidisciplinary keys. These models can be used to develop more inclusive theories and practices in the medical field and help to identify the multifarious connections between the two disciplines and broaden our gnoseology (philosophy of knowledge). Indeed, the critical reflection on the definition and classification of diseases, considered scientific but instead strongly influenced and founded in the historical context and the cultural climate

2   With regard to defining the reference population of our study, we (that is, my fellow researchers at the Univsersity of Pisa and I) decided to focus on successful life histories, as this means we can identify the elements favouring careers (at individual, relational and organizational-systemic level), but also reveal the dark side of successful life histories and the price paid by women at the top. Moreover, when examining the successful life histories of our interviewees, we were able to identify positive outlooks, moments of tension between private and professional life, sacrifices and failures in a woman’s career. With the use of this strategy, we were able to conduct 25 interviews, thereby covering 67 per cent of full professors, and 46 per cent of associate processors. We were unable to interview three women at the top, three full professors, because they were off-site in the period we were conducting our interviews. Given the low number of interviewees, openly sharing the departmental and scientific field of the respondents would make them easily identifiable. We therefore opted to exclude such details.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 107

13/12/2019 15:47

108

Gender, science and innovation

that produced them, highlights how gender differences have been codified within an historically exclusively male community that perceived female inferiority and subordination as natural. Many of the diagnoses were, in fact, based on an ideological approach, and little attention was devoted to the etiology, the numerous and possible explanatory variables, thus forgetting the social and psychological causes of the afflictions of women. Science, affirms Fox Keller (1985), is defined by those who practise it, by a dominant point of view that hides the artificiality and partiality of a viewpoint behind objective results (Cammarota, 2005). The habitus present in scientific thinking, as explained by Bourdieu (1999), formulated the meanings considered and legitimized as natural but which, on the contrary, are still indelible footprints of social devices. The answer to the matter of gender differences and how these have been codified within an historically exclusively male community that perceived female inferiority and subordination as natural (which explains why many diagnoses were based on an ideological approach as opposed to an etiological one) lies in increasing the presence of women in research and thus overcoming the symbolic order, in refuting the model of scientific rationality by criticizing the claim of truth in favour of emotions, or those devalued aptitudes for empathy because they dwell in feelings and are therefore considered unsuitable for the effective development of cognitive processes.3 In other words, it is essential to give space to la raison des femmes (Fraisse, 1992), to the ability for self-signification; it is essential that women become a source of other knowledge, that is, that they can enjoy the right to access knowledge that goes beyond the top positions in academia. This involves legitimizing gender studies and therefore promoting a consistent presence in various sectors. This objective must be a crucial point, as recognized by the European Union in its goals for projects focused on structural change and research and innovation. Within feminist thinking, the orientation of ideas is embedded in historical and social terrain; it is for this reason that the path needs to be considered diachronically, since we cannot but refer to those who have produced the ideas and the situations in which they originate. Consequently, the legitimacy of what Kuhn (1962) defined as ‘normal science’ is based on results of the past, a theoretical position within a certain intellectual tradi  Here, we wish to underline the value attributed to the scientific method as the only method, to men as the only recognized individuals whose identity is congruent to the objectivity of the knowledge produced and, consequently, the noninvolvement of women where the rules and methods of Western science are defined as a ‘world without women’ (Noble, 1992). 3

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 108

13/12/2019 15:47



Feminization of the medical profession ­109

tion (Merton, 1965) sometimes expressed as an attribution of paternity, from which all female thinking is excluded. In her renowned book Le Deuxième Sexe (The Second Sex), Simone de Beauvoir (1949, p. 24) wrote: Woman has ovaries, a uterus: these peculiarities imprison her in her subjectivity . . . Man superbly ignores the fact that his anatomy also includes glands, such as the testicles . . . He thinks of his body as a direct and normal connection with the world, which he believes he apprehends objectively, whereas he regards the body of woman as a hindrance, a prison, weighed down by everything peculiar to it . . . Thus humanity is male and man defines woman not in herself but as relative to him; she is not regarded as an autonomous being.

So how can we change such a consolidated process in science? To help to answer this question, a broad debate on female identity has emerged: from essentialism to constructivism, many theories have been compared and opposed. According to Irigaray (1974), women cannot recognize themselves in a ‘Universal Subject’ that excludes them. She questions how we can get away from metaphors, stratified ornaments, from these ‘mortgages’, as we (men and women) are all trapped in the same ‘credit regime’, an unchanging logos in its certainty.

6.3 THE FEMINIZATION OF THE MEDICAL PROFESSION The literature addressing these topics has developed two research paths that have often travelled on parallel lines, but which, on the contrary, could intersect: that is, the use of the gender paradigm in health, and the feminization of the medical profession. As was the case in the human sciences, the large number of female students and then graduates in these disciplines confuted the theories that had overshadowed any differences. By introducing a gender-sensitive perspective in research practices, female scholars fuelled new threads with keys for interpretation that in the past were not applied, in addition to the recognition of feminist thinking (Fox Keller, 1985; Merchant, 1980). Gender studies have therefore opened up to heterogeneous cognitive trajectories by attributing a scientific status to explanatory elements, which in the sexist way of thinking were taken for granted, because they were considered natural and not the result of social phenomena. As for health, we can argue that in recent years, and in particular through female contributions, the concept of gender medicine has become progressively important and that this can be seen as the outcome of a process that began with the review of certain clinical trials, leading to

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 109

13/12/2019 15:47

110

Gender, science and innovation

questions on the adopted research methodology and, as we shall see later, to new horizons in medical training.4 Driven largely by female contributions, many scientific communities have shifted in this direction and have begun reviewing prevention, diagnostic and treatment protocols. Significant results have been achieved, in part thanks to pharmacological research, where individual variability is now shared.5 However, in practice, still today, what are considered are physical, biological and hormonal factors to which gender, a cognitive category, must refer.6 Indeed, there is no shortage of interesting anecdotes in the history of women in medicine, tales that portray significant examples of women’s longstanding and untiring dedication to this field of knowledge. Myths like those of Panacea and Igea, the emblematic names of important female physicians, emphasize the long line of a tradition, which although exclusionary, supports this profession with competence and original contributions.7 In the healthcare sector, the first women doctors were certainly   In 1991, Bernardine Healy, a cardiologist and the first female National Institutes of Health Director, published an editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine entitled ‘The Yentl syndrome’, in which she expressed her concerns regarding the United States health system and how it was treating women as if they were men (Healy, 1991). Yentl is the main character of Isaac Singer’s short story Yentl the Yeshiva Boy (Singer, 1983). Because of her social environment, Yentl is forced to dress as a man to continue with her education. By choosing this title, Healy was trying to say that, ‘Sex does matter. It matters in ways that we did not expect. Undoubtedly, it also matters in ways that we have not begun to imagine’ (Biancheri, 2014). 5   As is well known, women take more prescription drugs than men and report the highest number of adverse reactions; but until the 1990s no experiments included women, and still today they are a minority group. This undoubtedly affects the efficacy and safety of a product. 6   For example, it has now been determined that the diagnosis and treatment of acute myocardial ischemia in women was often underestimated or unrecognized. Indeed, the symptomatology was seen as ‘atypical’, that is, different from what was described in the standard reports derived almost exclusively from men. Healthcare workers were not aware of any differences and did not recognize these symptoms in women, or associated them with other pathologies, resulting in delayed hospitalization and less effective treatment. Although some steps have been taken in the area of prevention, ​​ we are still lagging behind when it comes to creating a social and health welfare system that can provide concrete, integrated responses, for example, to the important issue of reconciling family and work time and the consequences of the stress related to the double presence (see Biancheri and Cervia, 2016). 7   It was with uninhibited frankness that Maria Fischmann, the first graduate in medicine at the University of Pisa, wrote about future gender issues: ‘the depressed state in which a woman finds herself in today’s society . . . being married and under 4

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 110

13/12/2019 15:47



Feminization of the medical profession ­111

spurred on by charitable sentiment towards the more vulnerable, moved by humanitarian principles and the breaking down of pre-existing models. Their work has had an exemplary influence, including on the establishment of welfare measures.8 What is still present today, as evidenced by empirical data, is the continuity in vertical and horizontal segregation, the low presence in decision making and prestigious roles, and in positions of power and management at the political and organizational levels (Cherubini et al., 2011). This means that the slow but unstoppable increase in numbers, which started in Italy with the significant growth in the number of graduates in medicine, has not been met with an increase in equal opportunities in the profession. Since the 1970s, the number of matriculated students in medicine in Italy has increased. The numbers peaked round about the same time that admissions were restricted. If we are aware of the trends in registration, we can notice that the numbers, like most statistics, are not disaggregated by gender. As is well known, it was only much later that systematic studies were adapted to analyse the differences between women and men. If, however, we look closely at the percentages, we can confirm the significant presence of female students, including an increase and no interruptions (even now, with the feminization of all sectors), in all specializations, and not just in those of paediatrics and gynaecology, considered more suited to a woman’s maternal instincts. The rise of young women has been gradual; indeed, until the end of the 1920s the percentage of female PhDs remained at around 2 per cent. In the the control of her husband, she is always in an inferior position that oppresses her, she cannot defend herself, fight – like social traditions, laws dictate that a woman suffer in silence . . . the influence of disposition on the functioning of the intestine is not a utopia’ (Peretti, 2010, p. 36). 8   There are other differences in the feminization of medicine. In the 1950s and 1960s, Italian female doctors preferred working in hospitals rather than going into private practice, when hospitals did not have so many specialists and still represented the old humanitarian and welfare dimension. In the 1980s, after the introduction of the National Health System, the percentage of women who chose to go into private practice increased, and today, 60 percent work within the NHS, both in general medicine and regional medicine. . . In France, private practice is the prevalent choice for women (57 percent) and for men (60 percent) . . . For English doctors, hospitals are a mirage that rarely turns into reality. Still today, private medicine has a strong male connotation . . . In the 1980s, British female doctors focused largely on public health . . . the reasons for this choice were based on the growth of group practices, which allowed women to choose paid, part-time work or a lower share in the profits . . . but part-time work, which is useful for reconciling work and family life, is also the cause of the continuous subordination of women in the workplace. (Malatesta, 1996, p. 45)

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 111

13/12/2019 15:47

112

Gender, science and innovation M 80%

Members of the Medical Association’s Management Committee

20%

94%

Chairmen

0%

20%

40%

W

6%

60%

80%

100%

Source:  Data from the Medical Association’s Management Committee, 2016.

Figure 6.1  M  embers of the Medical Association’s Management Committee 1940s, the percentage had already risen to 5 per cent and continued to register rapid growth in the second half of the twentieth century. The current evolution is defined as pioneering; yet, there are several obstacles deriving from the social and political culture of today (Vicarelli, 2008). Such resistance is underlined by Anna Kuliscioff who, in 1891 in La questione femminile e altri scritti (Kuliscioff, 1981 [1891]), denounced the stereotypes being disseminated by every possible means about the inability of women to apply themselves consistently and assiduously to intellectual work. Moreover, with the establishment of the Medical Association in 1910, the male stronghold was consolidated, with a widespread misogyny concealed by regulations; which, as Figure 6.1 illustrates, still shows an irrefutable prevalence of male control.9 Data from the Italian Ministry of Education, Universities and Research 9   Article 2 of the Italian law of 1910 establishing the Medical Association provided that women enjoying civil rights and in possession of a professional diploma could also register with the Association. This was explained by Malatesta (2006, p. 301):

From a gender point of view, healthcare and technical professions were more open and made use of more cultural mechanisms of exclusion than institutional ones . . . the strategy of silence used by doctors functioned as a tool of exclusion not so much in terms of access but as exclusion from the profession. The opening of medicine to women at the end of the nineteenth century is attributable to the

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 112

13/12/2019 15:47



Feminization of the medical profession ­113 W

M

90%

100%

Sciences

Social

Healthcare

Humanities 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Source:  Morana and Sagramora (2016).

Figure 6.2  N  umber of registered students for scientific fields, academic year 2015/2016 (Morana and Sagramora, 2016) on university matriculation confirm that there are still more female (54.6 per cent) than male students (45.4 per cent). The percentage in healthcare continues to increase, although there is an evident difference between the humanities and scientific disciplines (Figure 6.2). Following the introduction of numerus clausus in the medical faculty, it was determined that compared to the number of applications, a lower number of female students was being admitted successfully (Figure 6.3, men in the lower part of the diagram). Figure 6.4, however, shows that a higher number of female students graduate with excellent grades and in a shorter time frame10 (males on the left of the diagram).­ To analyse the reasons for the increase in the number of female medical students – to determine whether it is related to expressive motivations or fact that medical dominance was, at the time, not very institutionalized within the state, whereas it was strongly institutionalized in civil society. 10   In the last 30 years, statistical output in Italy has shifted, from indirect indicators created by separating the entire population from the male population, to gender indicators. The latter have produced measures to indicate effectively the asymmetries still affecting the biographies of women and men, highlighting the socio-economic disparities that continue to exist. For example, the comparison between women acquiring an education and the positions they secure in the labour market has highlighted the disparities in their careers and highlighted the dynamics that hinder them.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 113

13/12/2019 15:47

114

Gender, science and innovation

100% 90% 80%

15.802

4.097

31.187

4.859

37.973

4.711

43.925

4.497

10.090

2.627

22.759

3.366

23.022

3.782

28.241

4.180

70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10%

0 09

/2

01

0 20

20

09

/2

01

9 /2 20

08

00 /2 08 20 M

00

9

4 /2 03 20

20

03

/2

00

00

4

9 /9 98 19

19

98

/9

9

0%

W

Source:  Based on data from MIUR.

Figure 6.3  A  comparison of the percentage of male and female students applying and registering to study medicine changes in women’s lives – qualitative surveys are needed. A comment from one of the women we interviewed for our survey best explains the above:11 This increase in numbers at the Medical School . . . I don’t know . . . maybe . . . it’s probably a bit related to the fact that medicine . . . provides the tools to do a profession that allows you to be close to others, to help others, etc. etc. . . . which is typical of, you know, women . . . but it can also relate to men . . .   Within the framework of the TRIGGER project (Transforming Institutions by Gendering Contents and Gaining Equality in Research), co-funded by the 7th Framework Programme of the European Union, my colleagues and I analysed (from a qualitative perspective) the career cycle and life course of female researchers and professors in medicine and engineering. We used a series of open-ended questions to identify the work‒life balance strategies they adopted to overcome gender-based obstacles and move up the ranks in academia. We also studied the socialization processes they engaged in, their background (including education, presence or lack of a strong female role model), their career progress, and so on. 11

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 114

13/12/2019 15:47



Feminization of the medical profession ­115

% 70

62.1

60

62.8

59.1

58.8

56.8

M

W

50 40 30 20 10 0

2004 tot = 2022

2005 tot = 2574

2013 tot = 5279

2014 tot = 5494

2015 tot = 7190

Source:  Based on data from MIUR.

Figure 6.4  S  econd-cycle Master’s degree or second-cycle integrated Master’s degree graduates in medicine and surgery perhaps they have always seen medicine more as . . . power . . . as . . . an economic element . . . enrichment, etc. etc., and perhaps now some women are also starting to reason in the same way. (Int. No. 10)12

6.4 THE TRIGGER PROJECT13 AND RESEARCH AT THE UNIVERSITY OF PISA The University of Pisa is one of the oldest (it was founded in 1343, although a number of scholars claim it dates back to the eleventh century) and largest Italian universities, boasting 52 000 enrolled students and 1552 professors. It is a well-structured organization, steeped in tradition. When we joined the TRIGGER project, it was decided that the focus of our research would be the six departments constituting the engineering and medical faculties of the university. The latter comprise the Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, the Department of Surgical, Medical and Molecular Pathology and Critical Care Medicine, the Department of Translational Research and of New Surgical and Medical Technologies. Women in medicine at the University of Pisa account for 65 per cent of   All quotations have been translated from Italian into English.   The TRIGGER project is devoted to the development of study and research activities regarding women in science, work‒life balance, gender, work and equal opportunities, gender and social policies. See: http://triggerproject.eu/. 12 13

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 115

13/12/2019 15:47

116

Gender, science and innovation

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Graduates

PhD students

Postdoc positions

Grade C

Grade B

UNIPI M

UNIPI F

Medicine M

Medicine F

Engineering M

Engineering F

Grade A

Note:  UNIPI 5 University of Pisa; M 5 male; F 5 female. Source:  UNIPI database (as at 31 December 2013).

Figure 6.5  T  he leaky pipeline: proportion of men and women students, academic staff and academics undergraduates, 67 per cent of graduates, and 49 per cent of researchers; the numbers drop to 24 per cent for female associate professors and a mere 11 per cent for full professors. In 2016, the candidates for the medical science course’s entrance exam were 62 695 at national level, with only 9224 vacant positions. According to university data, the candidates applying for the entrance exam in medicine and dentistry were 1586 for 245 vacancies, divided as follows: 228 applications for medicine and 17 for dentistry (Censis, 2016). If we analyse the academic careers of women at the University of Pisa, both the leaky pipeline phenomenon (Berryman, 1983) and scissor effect are particularly evident (see Figure 6.5 and Figure 6.6). Indeed, they reveal the distorted effects of selection processes and career access in the world of science, which are far from gender-neutral and systematically penalize women. A scientific career is a normative sequence of educa-

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 116

13/12/2019 15:47



Feminization of the medical profession ­117 70

M

F

60

Staff

50 40 30 20 10

15

14

20

13

20

12

20

11

20

10

20

09

20

08

20

07

20

06

20

05

20

04

20

03

20

02

20

01

20

20

20

00

0

Years

Figure 6.6  P  ro-Rectors and heads of department: the presence of women in the School of Medicine (1 woman out of 28) tional and employment stages, comparable to a pipeline. The pipeline ‘leaks’, because at each moment of transition from one educational or professional stage to the next, the pipeline loses more women than men. In Italy, workloads are strenuous and inflexible, making the field of medicine all the more delicate. Professors in the Medicine Department have to teach and do research, and also perform hospital duties. This means that female professors in particular are overburdened, and forced to manage what Italian scholars refer to as the ‘double presence’ (Balbo, 1978) and their American counterparts as the ‘shift presence’ (Hochschild and Machung, 1990): in addition to their careers, which in their case is divided between research and teaching and hospital work, they have household duties too. As for the ‘scissor effect’, the trend recorded at the University of Pisa (UNIPI) is very similar to the scissor effect recorded at European level (EC, 2012). The scissors cross when students start their PhDs, and attrition continues from this point on, sharpening at each stage and only slowly improving over time. In the field of medicine, the scissors cross at Grade C (the first permanent position in a typical academic career) and the drop is quite steep. As underlined by one of our interviewees: If you dedicate yourself heart and soul, even though you are a woman you might get there . . . but I still think it’s very difficult . . . and not because women

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 117

13/12/2019 15:47

118

Gender, science and innovation

are not collaborative, intelligent, able to express themselves . . . there is a legacy . . . a cultural one . . . which in my opinion needs to be eliminated. (Int. No. 3)

There are discernible inequalities present in the services that have nothing to do with either the know-how or the now recognized professional skills of women. In other words, women are at a systematic disadvantage: in the past they were not present in the classroom, a situation that has since been overturned. However, time, as many people think, will not be the only variable to modify such asymmetries. According to Irigaray’s (1984) definition, based on the concept of ‘double syntax’, this asymmetry between the sexes must be recognized as a factual and historical reality, to be channelled into something positive.14 Such a disconcerting phenomenon raises questions about the elimination of barriers that have stopped the rise of women: for this reason, the TRIGGER project, in addition to providing and monitoring the data on female presence in the University of Pisa, aims to draw attention to the positive consequences of a higher presence in scientific professions and the indispensable rethinking of conceptual categories, tools and methods of research, by going beyond the ontological limits of traditional paradigms. A constant emerging from career studies is the slowness with which changes take place. Fox Keller (1985) reminds us of the status of the socalled ‘hard sciences’, which may be relevant if we are to comprehend the factors that make the labour market so awkward and that exclude professionals from top positions.15 By adopting a qualitative methodology and by interviewing the professors of the departments of medicine of the University of Pisa, we sought to understand how young women and the few female full professors live their presence in academic communities and in the profession, how aware they are of gender bias, how the chilly climate that female scientists encounter 14   Describing the experience of women means referring to an identity that is not streamlined and that is continuously being constructed; it means talking about different motivations – not just ideological – starting with the fight for rights and access to education. This multidimensionality needs to verify the plurality of registers, of the different layers that have determined a form of emancipation from patriarchy, from subordination, under which women have become thinkers with freedom of choice. 15   In her critical essay, Fox Keller seeks to identify alternative languages, claiming that two strands – on the one hand, the sociology of science that modifies the way we think about the relationship between science and society; and on the other, the feminist theory that interfered with the way we think about the relationship between gender and society – must be integrated in order to bridge certain gaps. Indeed, ‘together, they allow us to identify the critical role of gender mediating between science and social sciences’ (Fox Keller, 1985, p. 18).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 118

13/12/2019 15:47



Feminization of the medical profession ­119

in an unfriendly scientific environment affects their careers and drop-out rate. Lastly, to what extent does the education offered in these predominantly gender-blind contexts contribute towards a sense of awareness of the discriminating mechanisms that accompany women throughout their entire careers in a public domain? We know that this kind of sensitivity helps those undertaking a university career not to blame themselves for the difficulties encountered, but rather to understand better the formal and informal dynamics of the system, particularly those generations who never had to fight for women’s rights or who never had to deal with discrimination in education, meaning they could pursue their aspirations consciously and work towards realizing their life dreams with excellent results.16 These important questions deserve to be examined from a longitudinal and comparative perspective; in particular, it is important that we look to those countries where services, work‒family reconciliation policies and targeted rules to overcome the gender gap have been implemented. Furthermore, the best data on employment and fertility rates show the effectiveness of not only welfare systems but also the dynamics of more equal couples who, together with symbolic and cultural change, are implementing those equity goals achieved with interventions characterized by dual binary strategies; that is, empowerment and mainstreaming. For Braidotti (1995), in addition to confuting the theory of male universalism, which is the first stage of non-representation expressed in The Second Sex of Simone de Beauvoir, we need to find appropriate forms of representation, alternative figures to overcome dominant conceptual frameworks (de Beauvoir, 1949). Braidotti affirms that we have to use our warehouse of images and representations, as these have been codified by our culture, without omitting any stage, and verify all forms of action, together with their mobile structure that reflects complexity, without drowning in them. The result is that the persistent exclusion is caused by multifarious factors, not only institutional determinants but also, in the case of the University of Pisa, by adhering to informal strategies, learnt, unwritten grammar, by belonging to strong networks, by assessment criteria for scientific production and appointment mechanisms used in university governance. 16   Since the TRIGGER project commenced, we have focused on the importance of revealing the disconnection between acquired skills and career opportunities, highlighting the organizational and cultural barriers, of providing statistical data every year; for this reason, we have organized courses for young women r­ esearchers on topics such as: ‘Woman and Science: Beyond the Leaky Pipeline: How to Promote the Presence of Women in Academia’ (see www.triggerproject.eu).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 119

13/12/2019 15:47

120

Gender, science and innovation

The analysis of university careers as opposed to labour market surveys requires critical reflection: indeed, we do not find ourselves facing the structural obstacles of female participation, as high qualifications are accompanied by paid work, but we do find more culturalist explanations related to a hierarchical vision and the self-production of power. One of our interviewees underlines that: until not so long ago, there was no good predilection to reward merit . . . in general . . . unfortunately . . . regardless of gender . . . and I have noticed it often . . . It must be said that in medicine, because of the way it is, there has always been a male preponderance . . . until recently there were authoritative personas who ruled over the faculty for many, many, many years. And so they probably managed recruiting a little too . . . and perhaps they were not particularly pro women. (Int. No. 14)

Although there is a dearth of literature combining educational levels with employment conditions (Barbieri and Fullin, 2014), in our case it is important to highlight the peculiarities of the context and how the mechanisms promoting the shift to higher levels work. In other words, how great is the impact of gender, family of origin and current position? What is the effect of regulatory changes, the national teaching certification system and the procedures for local calls? We cite a number of extracts from our interviews to better understand the above: I personally think that I have seen the feminine aspect prevail, but very often women who make a career for themselves adopt a male-like attitude. (Int. No. 5) I don’t know how long it will take to debunk the myth that if you are worth it, you are . . . a woman who is more like a man. (Int. No. 17) Yes, because in fact . . . you really have to be a lot more! For men, it’s always much easier . . . it seems a lot easier. (Int. No. 8) But, well, I really count a lot on myself, on my abilities, on my commitment! When others have to give you a helping hand . . . well . . . I have noticed that there is a stronger coalition among men than among women . . . (Int. No. 9)

Here again, for most of our female interviewees, it is a woman’s reproductive choices that impact upon her career: I basically think this . . . that . . . a university career in medicine is really very, very tiring. Why? Obviously, wanting to do everything well, like . . . in the best way! You have to follow up on patients, you have academic activities: meetings, faculty meetings and teaching. So . . . how can a female doctor ‘move forward’

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 120

13/12/2019 15:47



Feminization of the medical profession ­121 if she wants to have a family, I mean children? How do you reconcile these three activities? Professional medical care, academia, research and family life? (Int. No. 20) So even this is important if a woman has time constraints for example, because at six o’clock she has to be home . . . because it’s normal . . . and there’s nothing wrong with that . . . this too becomes difficult! (Int. No. 2) A lot of women with a career had to sacrifice having a family . . . for a man it’s easy to have both a family and a career, because he has a wife. (Int. No. 4) I think the motivations are always the same, that men have more chances, not because of their brains, because the female brain can handle more things at once and even come up with more solutions, whereas the male brain tends to be more unidirectional. If there were more women, things would be planned and organized better, but unfortunately biology penalizes us a little. I have colleagues for example, who when they return from maternity leave find a replacement doing their job, and so they have to come up with new things to do, because in the months they were away, when their work had to be continued, someone else was taken on. Always having to reinvent oneself creates fractures in women’s career paths. (Int. No. 14) But I also feel that perhaps certain situations create dynamics that compel women to hold back, that favour the husband, which is fair within a family . . . society used to expect men to build a career and women to be a few steps behind, supporting the man’s career. Sometimes, it is also a necessary, comfortable choice that pays off for everyone. That’s not to say that these women are unhappy, dissatisfied. (Int. No. 8) I still believe that in Italy it’s accepted that the husband has a career and the wife just goes with it. (Int. No. 13) Probably the burden of caregiving that always falls on women . . . that’s then what spurs on the prejudice that women just can’t manage in some way . . . (Int. No. 10) In my opinion, it’s related to the family, to children essentially. To being a mother or basically to being busy, that leads, for objective reasons, to a lack of time or tiredness . . . when children are little, it’s difficult to be productive. Women with children can’t travel, they can’t go to congresses . . . unless they have particularly open, intelligent and collaborative husbands . . . (Int. No. 4) Because I think men can be 100 percent devoted to their work and women, I’m afraid they just can’t be 100 percent there. Sometimes, when I see a female executive, I wonder if she is married, if she is divorced, because often women who reach the top of their careers are not married or are separated. It’s difficult to find one who is married and has lots of children and combines both things. I’ve always had that impression. (Int. No. 27)

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 121

13/12/2019 15:47

122

Gender, science and innovation

Even when I talk to my colleagues I always say that you can’t be a good mom and a good researcher. You try to do everything and do everything to the best of your ability . . . but you can’t. (Int. No. 16)

The testimonies we collected allowed us to analyse both the sociocultural and institutional factors that have conditioned both the brakes and the accelerations in a complex, far from linear journey moving from the early pioneering days to today. What is noteworthy among the critical issues is the problem of hours, which is still a decisive factor when selecting a job. Vicarelli (2008) states that more women choose to work as General Practitioners (GPs) or in hospitals where more flexible working hours are almost a guarantee. Time management therefore gains significant importance in academic careers, coupled with a lower rate of mobility for women, which affects participation in conferences but, above all, time spent abroad.17 In the different female biographies we recorded, these transverse elements ‒ that is, a one-person household (a choice that does not limit autonomy) or a family nucleus ‒ reveal an awareness of the cultural resistance that interferes with the definition of gender contracts, despite the fact that the conditions imposed by the traditional separation of roles have changed. In the broad debate that has utilized different theories to identify possible explanations for persisting work inequalities, it is certainly useful to refer to sets of micro-individual and macro-structural variables to overcome the methodological dualism that has often compartmentalized and limited comparison. In other words, if educational differences in the family have been reduced and access to education is no longer hindered, then university choices, with a high density in the humanities and caregiving sectors, and professional choices, where significant efforts are made to reconcile family and work, support the theories of socialization (Connell, 2002). Nonetheless, institutional factors, the organizational culture, the regulations and values that make up the backbone of academic life are present in various contexts and in the lives of female researchers. We must view such dynamics from a processual dimension and always refer to a diachronic perspective if we want to consider the multiple facets that intertwine and form the various obstacles resulting in the evident difficulties of   The European Commission report She Figures 2015 states that, ‘working abroad can be an important way for researchers to advance in their careers. Considering the overall labour market, there are some concerns that women may be less mobile than men at certain stages of life, particularly due to the uneven distribution of childcare responsibilities’ (EC, 2016, p. 105). 17

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 122

13/12/2019 15:47



Feminization of the medical profession ­123

a discriminatory process that is largely documented by the ‘leaky pipeline’ phenomenon. In our research, we wanted to emphasize this multidimensional character by opting for a further epistemological key, for structural change that does not see these scientific contents that are more attentive to differences as a form of female specialization (for example, women’s health) but as a transversal paradigm in building knowledge in medicine (Biancheri, 2014, 2016).

6.5 CONCLUSIONS The divide in the feminization of the profession shows some ray of light but still too many shadows. The same can be said of the dissemination of the gender perspective in health. The proposed itinerary was to combine two contiguous themes – that are often read separately – in an attempt to break disciplinary fences that are resistant to a more comprehensive approach. Certain stakeholders have recently sought to develop this approach, based on the conviction that the presence of women and their identity experiences can produce cultural models that diverge from dominant ones. Our qualitative research on life histories, conducted through in-depth interviews with women doctors, confirmed the barriers that weaken or block access to higher qualifications; these are particularly evident when teaching is combined with clinical practice.18 The women’s stories underline the persistence of divided family roles that has yet to be overcome and, consequently, the difficulty in reconciling work and family where no care-giving services are available.19 These issues are summed up in the European Commission’s gender equality studies and in the numbers published in the report She Figures 2015 (EC, 2016), which reveal the slow   We selected the cited extracts from the transcripts of the recorded interviews through a hermeneutic analysis of the material, which was divided into a grid summarizing the main issues that were addressed. Our aim was ‘to give our subjects a voice’, to identify ‘relevant and significant fragments’ and follow a functional articulation of the topics we dealt with (Decataldo and Ruspini, 2014, p. 29). 19   According to Levinson (1996, p. 408): 18

the current intensification of gender conflict is one aspect of the historical transition from patriarchy and the traditional marriage enterprise to a new and still imaginable form of individual and social life . . . It will probably take another century, not a few decades, to see how far the gender transformation will go and what various meanings may be ascribed to gender in various cultures, social institutions and individual lives.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 123

13/12/2019 15:47

124

Gender, science and innovation

progress that has been made in all countries, as demonstrated by the Glass Ceiling Index, including in Italy, where it is 1.76.20 Another element that needs to be addressed, as already underlined in other studies, is the phenomenon defined as the ‘masculinization’ of the women engaged in research who are forced to choose between ‘production’ and ‘reproduction’; especially the younger cohorts, who are forced to postpone motherhood or to give up an overly invasive, intimate family life for a job that demands all their time (Biancheri, 2012). Indeed, ‘every working woman has thousands of similar examples to report, and that is why the number of women in top positions is still low today, and why 30 percent of those who do obtain such positions are single’ (Ronco and Tartaglia, 2015, p. 107). It may be very useful to improve the provision of social policies, even through a different perspective that looks at the implementation of agency and capabilities.21 Furthermore, as we have already seen through the critical contribution of feminist thinking, a wider framework is needed to identify the conditions and processes that are at the basis of the reproduction of the characteristics inherent to the history of scientific thought and the places of science, where a symbolic order eccentric to female identities becomes evident. Invoking the consistency of female presence, starting with education, is therefore an important step in recognizing women’s contributions to this field of study and research and evokes new areas of analysis. By the same token, it is desirable to increase the number of surveys by integrating the methodologies which, through gender-sensitive approaches, can refute distortive readings and stereotypes and use more knowledge and different paradigms to deal and discuss with future questions about the effects of this massive presence in the medical field and the functioning of health systems. With a certain amount of optimism and willingness, we can all agree   ‘The data presented confirm that even in the European scientific field, women still have to deal with not only horizontal but also vertical segregation. They still occupy the bottom steps of the hierarchical ladder and their presence in top positions remains low’ (MIUR, 2016, p. 15). 21   Hobson talks of the need to analyse policies and norms for work‒life balance (WLB) in a: 20

complex and multi-layered universe of constraints and possibilities and of rights and capabilities to exercise them . . . The framework is inspired by Amartya Sen’s capabilities approach . . . which offers theoretical space for capturing the growing divide between the aspirations of working parents for WLB and quality of life and the economic, social, and normative constraints that limit their possibilities for achieving it. (Hobson, 2014, p. 2)

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 124

13/12/2019 15:47



Feminization of the medical profession ­125

with Levinson’s research when he argues: ‘what about the future? The long-term evolution of human society is leading, I believe, toward a reduction in gender splitting, and increasing gender equality, and a fuller participation of women in all aspects of social life’ (Levinson, 1996, p. 408). Let us conclude on a hopeful note that such change will come about, as illustrated in an extract from one of our interviewees: I’d love it if one day a dad came up to me and said: ‘I can’t come in to work, because my child is sick’ . . . I’m sure that, very slowly, it will happen more and more. It’s up to us women . . . I’m convinced that in 10 years’ time, the scissor will be reduced, I’m sure of it. It’s a social problem, a cultural model that has to change. (Int. No. 12)

Therefore, it is only by supporting renewed research and university opportunities and incorporating the gender perspective in various disciplines, including the scientific ones, that we will be able to create new prospects for science and overcome the barriers and/or ‘encrustations’ that have thus far restricted our path.

REFERENCES Balbo, L. (1978), La doppia presenza, Inchiesta, 32, pp. 3‒6. Barbieri, P. and Fullin, G. (eds) (2014), Lavoro, istituzioni, diseguaglianze, Bologna: Il Mulino. Berryman, S. (1983), Who Will Do Science? Minority and Female Attainment of Science and Mathematics Degrees: Trends and Causes, New York: Rockefeller Foundation. Biancheri, R. (2012), Famiglia di ieri, famiglie di oggi: Affetti e legami nella vita intima, Pisa: ETS. Biancheri, R. (ed.) (2014), Genere e salute tra prevenzione e cura, Salute e Società, n°1. Milano: FrancoAngeli. Biancheri, R. (ed.) (2016), Culture di salute ed ermeneutiche di genere, Salute e Società, n°3. Milano: FrancoAngeli. Biancheri, R. and Cervia, S. (eds) (2016), La costruzione della salute nel welfare socio-sanitario, Pisa: Pisa University Press. Bourdieu, P. (1999), Il dominio maschile, Milano: Feltrinelli. Braidotti, A. (1995), Soggetto nomade: Femminismo e crisi della modernità, Roma: Donzelli. Cammarota, A. (2005), Femminismi da raccontare: Un percorso attraverso le lotte e le speranze delle donne di ieri e di oggi, Milano: FrancoAngeli. Censis (2016), Le guide Università 2016–2017, Roma: Centro Studi Investimenti Sociali, accessed 1 May 2017 at http://www.censis.it/5?shadow_evento=121121. Cherubini, A.M., Colella, P. and Mangia, C. (2011), Empowerment e orientamento di genere nella scienza. Dalla teoria alle buone pratiche, Milano: FrancoAngeli. Connell, R.W. (2002), Gender, Cambridge: Polity Press.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 125

13/12/2019 15:47

126

Gender, science and innovation

De Beauvoir, S. (1949), Le Deuxième Sexe, Paris: Gallimard. Decataldo, A. and Ruspini, E. (2014), La ricerca di genere, Roma: Carocci. Esping-Andersen, G. (2009), Incomplete Revolution: Adapting Welfare States to Women’s New Roles, Oxford: Polity Press. European Commission (EC) (2012), She Figures 2011, Brussels: DirectorateGeneral for Research and Innovation. European Commission (EC) (2016), She Figures 2015, Brussels: DirectorateGeneral for Research and Innovation. Fox Keller, E. (1985), Reflections on Gender and Science, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Fraisse, G. (1992), La Raison des femmes, Paris: Plon. Healy, B. (1991), ‘The Yentl syndrome’, New England Journal of Medicine, 325 (4), pp. 274‒6. Hobson, B. (ed.) (2014), Work Life Balance: The Agency and Capabilities Gap, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hochschild, A. and Machung, A. (1990), The Second Shift, New York: Avon Books. Irigaray, L. (1974), Speculum de l’autre femme, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Irigaray, L. (1984), Éthique de la différence sexuelle, Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit. Kuhn, T.S. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Kuliscioff, A. (1981 [1891]), La questione femminile e altri scritti, ed. by M. Boggio and A. Cerliani, Venezia: Marsilio. Levinson, D.J. (1996), The Seasons of a Woman’s Life, New York: Ballantine Books. Malatesta, M. (ed.) (1996), I professionisti, Storia d’Italia Annali 10, Torino: Einaudi. Malatesta, M. (2006), Professionisti e gentiluomini, Torino: Einaudi. Merchant, C. (1980), The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution, San Francisco, CA: HarperCollins. Merton, R.K. (1965), On the Shoulders of Giants: A Shandian Postscript, New York: Free Press. Merton, R.K., Reader, G.G. and Kendall, P.L. (eds) (1957), The Student-Physician: Introductory Studies in the Sociology of Medical Education, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Universita e della Ricerca (MIUR) (2016), Direzione Generale per i contratti, gli acquisti e per i sistemi informativi e la statistica, Uffico VI Statistica e Studi. Morana, M.T. and Sagramora, S. (eds) (2016), Focus: Le carriere femminili nel settore universitario, Roma, Miur Servizio Statistico, available at ustat.miur.it/ media/1091/notiziario_1_2016.pdf (accessed April 2017). Noble, D.F. (1992), A World without Women: The Christian Clerical Culture of Western Science, New York: Alfred A. Knopf / Un mondo senza donne e la scienza occidentale, Torino: Bollati-Boringhieri. Oliffe, J.L. and Greaves, L. (2012), Designing and Conducting Gender, Sex, and Health Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Peretti, A. (2010), Storia di donne non comuni: Le prime laureate della Facoltà di medicina, Pisa: Edizioni PLUS-Pisa University Press. Remuzzi, G. and Maturo, A. (2005), Tra Igea e Panacea: Riflessioni su medicina e società, Milano: Franco Angeli.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 126

13/12/2019 15:47



Feminization of the medical profession ­127

Ronco, C. and Tartaglia, F. (2015), Donne e medicina: Amore, genere, cura, Padova: Libreriauniversitaria. Singer, I.B. (1983), Yentl the Yeshiva Boy, New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux. Vicarelli, G. (2008), Donne di medicina: Il percorso professionale delle donne medico in Italia, Bologna: Il Mulino.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 127

13/12/2019 15:47

7. Resistance to women in academic medicine* 1

Laurel D. Edmunds 7.1 INTRODUCTION The paucity of women in the higher reaches of academic medicine is distressing. Not only is there a loss of intellectual capital (Shah et al., 2010), but there are also potential losses in diversity in research agendas and hence future clinical practices (Carnes et al., 2008; Penny et al., 2014). The Chief Medical Officer (CMO) for the United Kingdom (UK), Dame Sally Davies, expressed concern in a letter to all medical schools stating that the advancement of women needed to be improved and that future funding may be in jeopardy if these improvements were not forthcoming (Davies, 2011). The CMO was in a powerful position to instigate change, as any loss of funding would be a major driver to improve women’s career prospects in medical research organisations for the next round of funding applications in 2016. Much of this medical research funding comes from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), which the CMO leads. NIHR funding is channelled through biomedical research centres (BRCs), which are bridging organisations between academia and the National Health Service. The aim of BRCs is to encourage research that benefits patients so that clinicians can perform relevant research which can be translated into treatment: ‘bench to bedside’ research. For example, the NIHR Oxford BRC is a joint organisation between the University of Oxford and the Oxford University Hospitals Foundation Trust. For the funding period of 2012 to 2017, the NIHR awarded it £100 million. The CMO used Athena SWAN awards to judge eligibility for funding and made it clear that only schools and departments with Silver awards could apply. The Athena SWAN Charter for Women in Science was formed in *  The author was supported by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme award STARBIOS2 under grant agreement No. 709517 and by the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre. ­128

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 128

13/12/2019 15:47



Resistance to women in academic medicine ­129

2008 by the amalgamation of the earlier Athena Project and the Scientific Women’s Academic Network (Phipps, 2008). The Charter is underpinned by ten key principles and university scientific schools and departments apply for either Bronze, Silver or Gold awards depending on how well they provide evidence to meet structural changes in line with these principles (Equality Challenge Unit, 2017). The awards can be given and removed, and so Athena SWAN has become the established vehicle for assessing the progress and implementation of improvements to women’s advancement in science. This approach is now being implemented in Australia, Ireland, Canada and the United States of America (USA). There is also an equivalent charter for the social sciences. Gender equality is also a research theme in European Commission funding and the ADVANCE programme in the USA (see Chapter 4 in this volume). Thus, in the UK there have been definite improvements in the workplace for women scientists, including those in academic medicine. Admittedly these changes may be too recent to have impacted upon the literature, but to date the influences on women in the academic medicine workplace that reduce its appeal as a career path appear to be linked to culture and work–life balance. This chapter explores some of these influences, particularly those related to work–life balance, including how women regard the culture and how the culture regards them from a psychological perspective. The studies here were identified through accepted systematic review strategies (see Box 7.1). Studies were included if they reported empirical evidence, including work–life balance, and by gender. This overview does not include every relevant study, as the aim was to illustrate some of the influences emerging from the literature on women’s experience of working in academic medicine, together with important psychological considerations, rather than a full systematic review.

BOX 7.1  SEARCH STRATEGIES MEDLINE, CINAHL, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), Dissertations and Theses and PsycINFO were searched for peer-reviewed, English language studies published between 2000 and 31 March 2016. The search terms included ‘gender OR women OR female OR femin*) AND academic medicine OR physician scientist OR physician researcher OR clinician scientist OR clinical researcher OR clinical academic OR sex factors OR research personnel OR biomedical researcher AND career OR advance* OR development OR promotion OR progress OR leadership OR disadvantages OR discrimination OR aspirations OR barrier* OR facilitator*’ (* indicates alternative endings).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 129

13/12/2019 15:47

130

Gender, science and innovation

7.2 ENTERING ACADEMIC MEDICINE, WORK–LIFE BALANCE AND LEAVING It is a seeming paradox that the number of women entering medical schools has been increasing, representing 40 per cent of students by 1992 in the USA and by 1980 in the UK. By 2013, the equivalent figures for women entering medical schools were 47 per cent and 55 per cent, respectively (Centre for Workforce Intelligence, 2012; Medical Schools Council, 2014; Association of American Medical Colleges, 2014). Despite approximate gender equity in admissions, academic medicine has not seen a similar increase. From 2004 to 2014 women faculty rose from 30 per cent to 38 per cent in the USA, and from 21 per cent to 28 per cent in the UK (Lautenberger et al., 2014). Additionally, most senior positions in academic medicine are occupied by men; for example, posts held by women in USA clinical sciences during 2013–2014 were: 57 per cent instructors, 45 per cent assistant professors, 34 per cent associate professors, and 21 per cent full professors (Association of American Medical Colleges, 2014). A previous review looking at the empirical evidence related to why women choose to enter academic medicine (or not) found eight themes (Edmunds et al., 2016). The themes were presented as statements: ‘women are interested in teaching more than in research’, ‘participation in research can encourage women into academic medicine’, ‘women lack adequate mentors and role models’ and ‘women experience gender discrimination and bias’, which all had consistent supporting evidence. And, ‘Women are less interested in research than men’, ‘women lose commitment to research as their education and training progress’, ‘women are deterred from academic careers by financial considerations’ and ‘women are deterred by concerns about work‒life balance’, which all had evidence that was both for and against. Although there were few empirical explanations for these results, as many were from surveys, there were indications that the culture is often unhelpful to women. In addition to experiencing discrimination and bias (eight studies), they may be more interested in teaching (seven studies) as this career is more predictable in terms of time commitment. Fewer women in senior positions results in fewer role models and mentors (14 studies); that is, women who have successfully navigated the culture, careers and work‒life balance. Most of the evidence for work‒life balance itself (ten studies versus two) supported this being a concern (Edmunds et al., 2016). Work‒life balance, career advancement and having children are often conflated. Women in academic medicine tend to have more fully employed, and often academic, partners compared with male physician scientists. For example, Girod et al. (2011) in a large USA faculty survey

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 130

13/12/2019 15:47



Resistance to women in academic medicine ­131

found that 23 per cent of men had stay-at-home partners, compared with only 5 per cent of women (Girod et al., 2011). The lion’s share of childcare responsibilities remains, disproportionately, the remit of women (Sonnad and Colletti, 2002; DeCastro et al., 2013), and they typically spend nine hours more than men per week on household tasks (Shollen et al., 2009). Repeated surveys of 1351 US paediatricians found that women faculty, compared with men, were more likely to choose their track to accommodate work‒life balance and to avoid the pressure of achieving tenure, regardless of their own professional goals (Waljee et al., 2015). Women are also more likely to work part-time, at the cost of being criticised for doing so (Brown et al., 2011) and a reduction in their professional standing (Sonnad and Colletti, 2002). Their main reason for part-time working is caring responsibilities, whereas for men it is to earn extra income (Pollart et al., 2015). Hence, having children is perceived as detrimental to career progression. However, Sadeghpour et al. (2012) in their US national survey of academic dermatologists found that men and women working full-time progressed through promotions at the same rate; and Taylor et al. (2009), tracking cohorts of UK physicians, showed that working part-time had a similar impact on men’s career advancement as it did on women’s. So it is not the children per se who are causing the slowdown in careers, it is less time at work. Many medical schools and research organisations have flexible working policies and parental leave polices to accommodate these needs, but the culture does not always make it easy to take advantage of them. For example, a sub-analysis of non-parental leave-takers from a large Canadian faculty survey (n 5 3107) found attitudes illustrating that ‘having children was a personal decision for which colleagues, universities, and society should not pay’, and there were suggestions that women take advantage of this leave (Phillips et al., 2000, p. 25). Another US survey found that on average women took only eight weeks’ maternity leave so as not to overburden their colleagues (Shollen et al., 2009). There may also be financial restraints here, as the USA only allows 12 weeks’ unpaid maternity leave, which is not mandatory, and no paternity leave (OECD, 2017). This is one of the least family-friendly policies in the world. Lastly, having made the decision to go into academic medicine, what influences women’s desire to leave? Studies, again from the USA, show that women are more likely to quit than men (Sadeghpour et al., 2012; Sonnad and Colletti, 2002). For some this was due to conflicts between work and family responsibilities (Levine et al., 2011; Shollen et al., 2009; Westring et al., 2014), and for others this was due to feeling unappreciated (Levine et al., 2011; Waljee et al., 2015; Wai et al., 2014) and lack of career progression (Shollen et al., 2009; Wai et al., 2014). The Wai et al. (2014)

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 131

13/12/2019 15:47

132

Gender, science and innovation

survey of 1356 surgeons also reported women having less sense of fit or belonging, receiving less respect at work and having a lower perception of equal opportunity (Wai et al., 2014). While surgery may be an extreme environment, a qualitative study covering many specialties with 100, mainly women, recipients of National Institute of Health career awards described experiences of criticism, as well as personal and professional rejection, as reasons for leaving (DeCastro et al., 2013).

7.3  ACADEMIC MEDICINE CULTURE The culture of academic medicine appears to be experienced very differently by each gender. In a survey of 26 US medical schools, Pololi et al. (2013a), using the validated C-Change Survey instrument, compared how the culture was experienced by men and by women. They found women to have significantly lower scores for a sense of belonging and workplace relationships, self-efficacy for career advancement, the perception of gender equity, or that their workplace was family-friendly, and they also reported less congruency between personal and institutional values. However, there were no differences between the genders for levels of engagement, leadership aspirations or perceptions of how the faculty was committed to career advancement and efforts to change the institutional culture (Pololi et al., 2013a). Additionally, they found that of the 2381 who responded, 21 per cent had seriously considered leaving academic medicine due to feelings of dissatisfaction (such as lack of engagement, negative perceptions about the culture and moral distress at work), and a further 5 per cent gave personal or family issues as reasons (Pololi et al., 2012). These results were not presented by gender, but 53 per cent of the sample were female. Another analysis of this study looked at the dimensions of vitality in faculty at academic health centres and found four strong predictors: work‒life integration, relationships/inclusion, values alignment and institutional support (Pololi et al., 2015). Women also report significantly more gender-based harassment in academic medicine environments (Carr et al., 2000; Schroen et al., 2004; Tacconelli et al., 2012; Yedidia and Bickel 2001), and women junior faculty reported significantly greater susceptibility to gender-stereotype threat than men on all items, including perceptions of relative potential and sense of belonging (Fassiotto et al., 2016; Pololi and Jones, 2010). The academic medicine work environment is currently likely to be influenced by leaders from the Baby Boomer Generation (that is, born between 1945 and mid-1964) who have a ‘work related primary focus’ compared with the subsequent Generations X (1965 to 1980) and Y (after 1980) who

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 132

13/12/2019 15:47



Resistance to women in academic medicine ­133

have a ‘greater lifestyle focus’, which holds for even younger generations (Money et al., 2014). Not only did Baby Boomers typically have partners who raised the family, but working heroic hours was treated as a measure of devotion to one’s organisation and a key component of masculine work identity (Williams et al., 2016). Kellogg (2011) showed that surgeons were resistant to reducing their hours down to 80 per week (from 1001 hours), even when this was mandated. The average age of physician scientists is rising in the USA, and ‘gathering places for physician-scientists look mostly like clubs for older white men’ (Milewicz et al., 2015, p. 3742), while the time taken for younger researchers to achieve faculty appointments or independent research status is lengthening (ibid.). Fewer women are applying for MD-PhD programmes in the USA (Milewicz et al., 2015). While there are more women in medical schools generally (Lautenberger et al., 2014), they may not be research active. The culture may be stagnating if ageing leaders are reluctant to retire. Working excessive hours, and loyalty to an employer, are highly valued traits by current leaders, but these views are less likely to be shared or revered by younger employees of either gender (Money et al., 2014).

7.4 PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES ON CULTURE While the study findings above illustrate outcomes of the perceptions and experiences of women, they consider the psychological aspects and impacts of women in the academic medicine workplace and its culture less well. How much time individuals spend in different activities involves more than work‒life balance decisions. These decisions are influenced by how one is treated within the workplace, the perception of identity-fit with the organisation, and judgements about what else could be done instead. One of the first Self Theorists, T.H. Cooley, showed how individ­uals form their concept of themselves as an individual imagines how they appear to others, and then imagines the judgements about them made by others, and hence their identity is built from such judgements of others – ‘the looking glass self’ (cited in Harter, 1988). It is not difficult to envision that if an individual is in an environment where they are frequently perceiving negative messages, these will have a detrimental impact on sense of self-worth, self-competence and self-confidence. Feelings of lower self-confidence and competence have been shown for women in academic settings among US residents (Leonard and Ellsbury, 1996) and physicians/educators (Carr et al., 2003), physicians in Japan (Nomura et al., 2010), medical undergraduates in Ireland (Burgoyne et al.,

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 133

13/12/2019 15:47

134

Gender, science and innovation

2010) and Canadian gastroenterologists (Heathcote et al., 1997). Other women felt undervalued at work because their views on what constituted professional success were not aligned with the institutional norms (Levine et al., 2011), while others felt they had to work harder to be taken seriously and be ‘perceived as legitimate’, and that they were constantly under scrutiny as a result (Shollen et al., 2009, p. 87). An extension of this ‘identity-fit’ was tested in two studies of UK surgical trainees, where men and women were compared with the surgical consultant prototype (Peters et al., 2012). The first study showed that women felt a lack of fit with the masculinity of the surgeon prototype. The second showed that this was greater for women than for men, and consequently a lack of identification with occupational fit was subsequently associated with several negative workplace outcomes (Peters et al., 2012). This begs the question: how do women fare when they become leaders in masculine environments? If individual women aspire to and gain leadership positions, they do so typically by being competitive and as tough as those at the top. However, women collectively are expected to provide different leadership styles and models, being more inclusive and collegiate. When organisations do not support women leaders adequately, they are likely to be perceived as feminine and offered positions that are more precarious and more likely to fail (the ‘glass cliff’ effect), or they emphasise their masculine characteristics to fit in with the existing leadership and become less identified with their gender (Ellemers et al., 2012, p. 163). As one female physician scientist who had attended professional development programmes stated: ‘the men are playing golf on Sunday and making deals. I want to spend Sundays with my kids. It is discouraging, and I think the women who get to the highest levels got there by being men’ (Helitzer et al., 2017, p. 4). Neither of these options is beneficial to women’s career progression, and they do not offer valuable role modelling to those below them. Another aspect of the masculine work environment is work identity and the cultural expectation of working long hours. Traditionally, societal attitudes are that a ‘good’ male worker is seen as one who is available to work any time, whereas a ‘good’ female worker is available for her family any time as well as for her employer. This not only creates a conflict, but also if she is perceived as being more available for her family she may be judged negatively by others and at greater personal identity threat (Williams et al., 2016). Work identity is particularly important in careers that are all-encompassing such as academic medicine. Those who have succeeded in the established culture are likely to feel the prospect of a change in culture personally threatening regardless of gender, and so do not embrace these changes (Williams et al., 2016). This risks slowing the progress of culture change.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 134

13/12/2019 15:47



Resistance to women in academic medicine ­135

Such challenges to the self will inevitably also have an impact on resilience. Improving self-confidence, resilience and sense of fit are objectives of interventions aiming to improve women’s career advancement in academic medicine, such as the successful ‘Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine’ programme (ELAM) (Dannels et al., 2008). Additionally, good mentoring is an important strategy for these aspects of women working in academic medicine (DeCastro et al., 2013; Sambunjak et al., 2006). However, these interventions tend to support individuals coping with the culture rather than changing the culture; that is, they tend to be focused on ‘fixing the women’. The C-Change learning action network has adopted a comprehensive and psychological approach (understanding organisational change, raising self-awareness, motivation, resilience, interpersonal connections, personal growth and emotional literacy), which has proved to be effective (Pololi et al., 2013b). Policies aiming to change the culture may be more efficacious if they are underpinned by such approaches, as they tend to put individual needs rather than organisational needs at the centre of the intervention. Women additionally reported feeling a sense of isolation significantly more than did men (Schroen et al., 2004; Carr et al., 2003), or a sense of ‘not belonging . . . perceiving themselves as cultural outsiders and feeling isolated and invisible’ (Pololi and Jones, 2010, p. 438). Women in academic medicine tend to have different socialisation patterns at work. Social support from networks may be particularly important for strengthening resilience and persistence (DeCastro et al., 2013). Women’s networks are often diverse and a mix of personal and professional ties, whereas men tend to have larger networks with more casual ties (Cooper, 2005). Women are less encouraged than men to network and tend to be excluded from informal networks, which could support collaboration (Sonnad and Colletti, 2002) and promotion prospects (Yedidia and Bickel, 2001). Women also report a dearth of networks (SchuellerWeidekamm and Kautzky-Willer, 2012). Creating networks for women may be useful in providing a sense of belonging, but may not be as useful for supporting their advancement unless the organisation signals that they are an agent of change (Hersby et al., 2008). Some of the above may help to explain why more women are overrepresented in the lower ranks in academic medicine (Tacconelli et al., 2012), or why they opt for part-time working: not because they have children per se, or caring responsibilities, but because they would rather spend their time with their families. Some choose less demanding career tracks rather than work long hours with little expectation of professional reward (Waljee et al., 2015). Women face the choice of giving childcare reasons ‒ that is, being a ‘good’ mother, which is socially acceptable, for lessening

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 135

13/12/2019 15:47

136

Gender, science and innovation

the impact of the culture on their well-being ‒ or less professionally expedient reasons such as working in a disaffecting environment. Despite these findings, women are not necessarily less ambitious (Fassiotto et al., 2016; Pololi et al., 2013a). However, if the benefits of investing time in a career are not likely to achieve advancement, regardless of whether they have families or caring responsibilities, why would women sacrifice their time or remain in workplaces where they perceive lack of identity-fit with the dominant culture, and few prospects for promotion?

7.5  CULTURE CHANGE There has been concern for many years from physician scientists that academic medicine needs revitalising for the twenty-first century, to maintain its relevance to practice and to recruit and retain sufficient numbers of physician scientists, including more women (Tugwell, 2004). Clearly, to accomplish this there is a need for change, and for senior leaders to be supportive of any changes to the culture in order to give the changes credibility. Equally, there is a need for role-modelling of these changes in order for them to become culturally accepted, regardless of gender, as there are relatively few women in senior leadership positions (Sonnad and Coletti, 2002). There is also a need for an openly meritocratic environment where reliance on patronage and networks is less important. There is some evidence of a generational change in attitudes, as men are become more involved with their families and as early career physician scientists are less tolerant of the traditional culture (Isaac et al., 2014; Brown et al., 2011): ‘The days of people living to work and only doing work are gone’ (male surgical respondent) (Brown et al., 2013, p. 156). While this comment is laudable, it illustrates the danger of a greater divide between the top and the bottom of academic medicine, one that Athena SWAN programmes are aiming to bridge. The impacts of Athena SWAN programmes have been described in a top UK research university where women (37 interviewees and 42 survey respondents) and men (17 survey respondents) commented on the impact of such programmes in the medical sciences departments (Ovesiko et al., 2017). Neither study focused on Athena SWAN, and so these findings are based on spontaneous mentions of their perceptions. Both women and men reported that the programmes had resulted in some important structural and cultural changes: improving support for women’s careers, ­family-friendliness, and challenging discrimination and bias. Many perceived that the ‘linkage of Athena SWAN to government research funding’ (ibid., p. 12) was key to the occurrence of these changes, while

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 136

13/12/2019 15:47



Resistance to women in academic medicine ­137

others perceived unintended consequences. They also expressed concerns as to whether Athena SWAN was able to address: longstanding and entrenched power and pay imbalances, persisting lack of work‒life balance in academic medicine, questions about the sustainability of positive changes, belief that achieving the award could become an end in itself, resentment about perceived positive discrimination, and perceptions that further structural and cultural changes were needed in the university and wider society. (Ovseiko et al., 2017, p. 12)

Table 7.1 illustrates the issues that emerge when trying to change the culture in a real-world setting, based on the Ovseiko et al. (2017) paper. Policy changes that have been made or suggested in the literature, and often map on to Athena SWAN programmes are shown in Box 7.2. The empirical studies here were searched in the same way as a narrative review of why women choose to enter academic medicine (Edmunds et al., 2016). In common with this earlier review, much of the evidence presented has come from studies conducted in the USA, which begs the question: how generalisable are these findings? Evidence here also comes from Canada, Europe and Japan, all of which are considered high-income countries by the World Bank. So there is clearly a need for high-quality studies conducted in a range of countries. However, there was evidence from two studies cited in the narrative review that the issues for women are similar regardless of location. The first was a survey from Saudi Arabia, where female undergraduate medical students were asked about the perceived barriers to becoming physician-scientists; these ‘were largely identical to the Western literature with few differences and more influence of cultural reasons’ (Edmunds et al., 2016, p. 8). The second was a qualitative study of female physicians considering their career choices. Participants were from two middle-income countries (Mexico and Pakistan), and they reported similar themes to those found in the USA (Edmunds et al., 2016).

7.6 CONCLUSION The culture of academic medicine presents a challenging environment for women; changing that culture is similarly challenging. Change poses a threat to personal work identities that have been built up over many years, and the existing culture is likely to attract individuals who aspire to emulate this culture and support the established cultural norms. However, younger generations are likely to be less tolerant of the status quo, and if more women are to be encouraged into academic medicine and to remain there, the culture will need to be perceived as one that is more female- and

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 137

13/12/2019 15:47

­138

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 138

13/12/2019 15:47

Linkage to research funding

Increased career support

Structural and cultural changes

Unintended consequences

Incentives for positive change

Challenging discrimination and bias

Greater appreciation of caring responsibilities

Subthemes

Themes

Mentors and role models Career seminars Personal development reviews Encourage applying for grants and promotions Internal grants and fellowships Meeting times in core hours More part-time and flexible working Better maternity care and support Increased awareness of diversity issues Well-structured process to improve equality Better communication and transparency Unconscious bias training Diversifying portraiture Changes would not have happened otherwise Leaders engaged and supportive Feel cynical but will take it anyway Focus on awards not changes Too much box-ticking and administration Burden on senior women to prepare applications Loss of warmth in department Suspicion that problems swept under carpet

Coding

Table 7.1  T  hematic analyses of spontaneous mentions of Athena SWAN from two studies conducted in a researchintensive university in the UK

­139

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 139

13/12/2019 15:47

Resentment about perceived positive discrimination

Good start but needs extending and improving

Wrong target?

Limited ability to address pay and power imbalances

Source:  After Ovseiko et al. (2017).

Concerns about implementation

Concerns about design

Power still with 501 year-old white men Not many people of colour in senior roles Gender pay gap remains Need for wider changes in the university Enable men to take on more childcare Need for wider societal changes Changes in men’s attitudes Changes in household labour Disconnect between stated aims and reality Lack of work–life balance Older women not recognised Admin and support staff excluded Colleges make little effort Women expediently promoted Jobs created for women Men’s achievements hidden People with children treated preferentially Women not wanting to be seen as militant Achievements now less sweet for women

140

Gender, science and innovation

BOX 7.2 POLICY CHANGES IDENTIFIED IN THE LITERATURE ● ● ●

●

● ● ●

Working less than full-time while still eligible for tenure track (Waljee et al., 2015; Yedidia and Bickel, 2001). Institutions being prepared for absences (consideration of colleague workloads, replacement staff (Brown et al., 2013; Phillips et al., 2000). Stopping or extending the tenure clock for the duration of a leave or reduced hours to care for children or other personal reasons (Helitzer et al., 2016; Yedidia and Bickel, 2001). Transparent institutional parental leave (Brown et al., 2013; Phillips et al., 2000; Shollen et al., 2009; Waljee et al., 2015) (paid parental leave was not proposed). On-site childcare facilities or sponsorship of childcare (Shollen et al., 2009; Waljee et al., 2015; Yedidia and Bickel, 2001). Flexible working such as working from home, job sharing (Sonnad and Colletti, 2002; Helitzer et al., 2016). Meetings held via teleconferences or in core hours (Yedidia and Bickel, 2001).

family-friendly, in which they can fit and that is worthy of their personal investment; that is, fairer, more shared values, more inclusive, and not just family-friendly but people-friendly, from which everyone will benefit. The costs for women who work in academic medicine are many and varied. Whilst creating policies that make parental leave, working hours and tenure tracks more flexible, the underlying problem is the long-hours, machismo culture of academic medicine. Even when there are familyfriendly policies in place, women do not always feel able to use them (Brown et al., 2013). Simply allowing women to work less or more flexibly, welcome though this is for some, is unlikely to solve the issue of equity in career progression for women without a concomitant culture change. Athena SWAN efforts in the UK and the C-Change Program in the USA, for example, provide ongoing interventions that may facilitate these changes for the better. There remain two threats to academic medicine without such a change in the culture. The first is that women will continue to make work‒life balance decisions in favour of those they care for when they perceive a lack of identity-fit and future career success (Peters et al., 2012; Williams et al., 2016). The second relates to the loss of potential resources: the research interests, skills and attributes associated with women in academic medicine (Penny et al., 2014).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 140

13/12/2019 15:47



Resistance to women in academic medicine ­141

REFERENCES Association of American Medical Colleges (2014), ‘The state of women in academic medicine: the pipeline and pathways to leadership, 2013–2014, distribution of full-time faculty by department, rank and gender’, accessed 2 May 2017 at https://www.aamc.org/members/gwims/statistics/. Brown, J.B., Fluit, M., Lent, B. and Herbert, C. (2011), ‘Seeking balance: the complexity of choice-making among academic surgeons’, Academic Medicine, 86, 1288–92. Brown, J.B., Fluit, M., Lent, B. and Herbert, C. (2013), ‘Surgical culture in transition: gender matters and generation counts’, Canadian Journal of Surgery, 56 (3), 153–8. Burgoyne, L.N., O’Flynn, S. and Boylan, G.B. (2010), ‘Undergraduate medical research: the student perspective’, Medical Education Online, 10, 15–25. Carnes, M., Morrissey, C. and Geller, S.E. (2008), ‘Women’s health and women’s leadership in academic medicine: hitting the same glass ceiling?’, Journal of Womens Health, 17, 1453–62. Carr, P.L., Ash, A.S., Friedman, R.H., et al. (2000), ‘Faculty perceptions of gender discrimination and sexual harassment in academic medicine’, Annals of Internal Medicine, 132 (11), 889–96. Carr, P.L., Szalacha, L., Barnett, R., et al. (2003), ‘A “ton of feathers”: gender discrimination in academic medical careers and how to manage it’, Journal of Women’s Health, 12, 1009–18. Centre for Workforce Intelligence (2012), ‘Shape of the medical workforce: starting the debate on the future consultant workforce’, accessed 20 October 2015 at http://www.cfwi.org.uk/publications/leaders-report-shape-of-the-medical-work​ force/attachment.pdf. Cooper, B.L. (2005), ‘The social network structures of women in academic medicine’, Doctor of Education dissertation, George Washington University, Washington, DC. Dannels, S.A., Yamagata, H., McDade, S.A., et al. (2008), ‘Evaluating a leadership program: a comparative, longitudinal study to assess the impact of the Executive Leadership in Academic Medicine (ELAM) Program for Women’, Academic Medicine, 83 (5), 488–95. Davies, S.C. (2011), Letter 29 July 2011, accessed 7 November 2016 at http://www. medschools.ac.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/Letter_from_Dame_Sally_Davies_​ -_Wo​men_in_Science.pdf. DeCastro, R., Sambuco, D., Ubel, P.A., et al. (2013), ‘Batting 300 is good: perspectives of faculty researchers and their mentors on rejection, resilience, and  persistence in academic medical careers’, Academic Medicine, 88 (4), 497–504. Edmunds, L.D., Ovseiko, P.V., Shepperd, S., et al. (2016), ‘Why do women choose or reject a career in academic medicine? A narrative review of the empirical evidence’, Lancet, 388 (10062), 2948–58. Ellemers, N., Rink, R., Derks, B. and Ryan, M.K. (2012), ‘Women in high places: when and why promoting women into top positions can harm them individually or as a group (and how to prevent this)’, Research in Organizational Behavior, 32, 163–87. Equality Challenge Unit (2017), ECU’s Athena SWAN Charter Awards Handbook,

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 141

13/12/2019 15:47

142

Gender, science and innovation

accessed 2 May 2017 at http://www.ecu.ac.uk/equality-charters/athena-swan/ athena-swan-resources/. Fassiotto, M., Hamel, E.O., Ku, M., et al. (2016), ‘Women in academic medicine: measuring stereotype threat among junior faculty’, Journal of Women’s Health, 25 (3), 292–8. Girod, S., Gilmartin, S.K., Valantine, H. and Schiebinger, L. (2011), ‘Academic couples: implications for medical school faculty recruitment and retention’, Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 212 (3), 310–19. Harter, S. (1988), ‘The construction and conservation of the self: James and Cooley revisited’, in D.K. Lapsley and F.C. Power (eds), Self, Ego and Identity: Integrative Approaches, New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 43–70. Heathcote, J., Cauch-Dudek, K. and Rhyne, D. (1997), ‘The professional lives of women in gastroenterology: a Canadian comparison study with men’, Gastroenterology, 113, 669–74. Helitzer, D.L., Newbill, S.L., Cardinali, G., et al. (2016), ‘Narratives of participants in national career development programs for women in academic medicine: identifying the opportunities for strategic investment’, Journal of Women’s Health, 25 (4), 360‒70. Hersby, M.D., Ryan, M.K and Jette, J. (2008), ‘Getting together to get ahead: the impact of social structure on women’s networking’, British Journal of Management, 20, 415–30. Isaac, C., Byars-Winston, A., McSorley, R., et al. (2014), ‘A qualitative study of work‒life choices in academic internal medicine’, Advances in Health Sciences Education, Theory and Practice, 19, 29–41. Kellogg, K.C. (2011), ‘Operating room: relational spaces and microinstitutional change in surgery’, American Journal of Sociology, 115 (3), 657–711. Lautenberger, D.M., Dandar, V.M., Raezer, C.L. and Sloane, R.A. (2014), ‘The state of women in academic medicine: the pipeline and pathways to leadership, 2013–2014’, accessed 20 October 2015 at https://www.aamc.org/members/ gwims/statistics/. Leonard, J.C. and Ellsbury, K.E. (1996), ‘Gender and interest in academic careers among first- and third-year residents’, Academic Medicine, 71 (5), 502–4. Levine, R.B., Lin, F., Kern, D.E., et al. (2011), ‘Stories from early-career women physicians who have left academic medicine: a qualitative study at a single institution’, Academic Medicine, 86, 752–8. Medical Schools Council (2014), ‘A survey of staffing levels of medical clinical academics in UK medical schools as at 31 July 2013’, accessed 20 October 2015 at http://www.medschools.ac.uk/AboutUs/Projects/Documents/2014-ClinicalAcademic-Survey-Medicine-July-2013-data.pdf. Milewicz, D.M., Lorenz, R.G., Dermody, T.S. and Brass, L.F. (2015), ‘Rescuing the physician-scientist workforce: the time for action is now’, Journal of Clinical Investigation, 125, 3742–47. Money, S.R., O’Donnell, M.E. and Gray, R.J. (2014), ‘In the time of significant generational diversity – surgical leadership must step up!’, Surgeon: Journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland, 12 (1), 3–6. Nomura, K., Yano, E. and Fukui, T. (2010), ‘Gender differences in clinical confidence: a nationwide survey of resident physicians in Japan’, Academic Medicine, 85 (4), 647–53. OECD (2017), ‘OECD Family Database’, accessed 8 May 2017 at https://www. oecd.org/els/soc/PF2_1_Parental_leave_systems.pdf.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 142

13/12/2019 15:47



Resistance to women in academic medicine ­143

Ovseiko, P.V., Chapple, A., Edmunds, L.D. and Ziebland, S. (2017), ‘Advancing gender equality through the Athena SWAN Charter for Women in Science: an exploratory study of women’s and men’s perceptions’, Health Research Policy and Systems, 15, 12. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01091-0. Penny, M., Jeffries, R., Grant, J. and Davies, S.C. (2014), ‘Women and academic medicine: a review of the evidence on female representation’, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 107, 259–63. Peters, K., Ryan, M., Haslam, S.A. and Fernandes, H. (2012), ‘To belong or not to belong: evidence that women’s occupational disidentification is promoted by lack of fit with masculine occupational prototypes’, Journal of Personnel Psychology, 11 (3), 148–58. Phillips, S.P., Richardson, B. and Lent, B. (2000), ‘Medical faculty’s views and experiences of parental leave: a collaborative study by the Gender Issues Committee, Council of Ontario Faculties of Medicine’, Journal of the American Medical Women’s Association (1972), 55 (1), 23–6. Phipps, A. (2008), Women in Science, Engineering and Technology: Three Decades of UK Initiatives, Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Books. Pollart, S.M., Dandar, V., Brubaker, L., et al. (2015), ‘Characteristics, satisfaction, and engagement of part-time faculty at US medical schools’, Academic Medicine, 90 (3), 355–64. Pololi, L.H. and Jones, S.J. (2010), ‘Women faculty: an analysis of their experiences in academic medicine and their coping strategies’, Gender Medicine, 7 (5), 438‒50. Pololi, L.H., Civian, J.T., Brennan, R.T., et al. (2013a), ‘Experiencing the culture of academic medicine: gender matters, a national study’, Journal of General Internal Medicine, 28 (2), 201–7. Pololi, L.H., Evans, A.T., Civian, J.T., et al. (2015), ‘Faculty vitality ‒ surviving the challenges facing academic health centers: a national survey of medical faculty’, Academic Medicine, 90 (7), 930–36. Pololi, L.H., Krupat, E., Civian, J.T., et al. (2012), ‘Why are a quarter of faculty considering leaving academic medicine? A study of their perceptions of institutional culture and intentions to leave at 26 representative US medical schools’, Academic Medicine, 87 (7), 859–69. Pololi, L.H., Krupat, E., Schnell, E.R. and Kern, D.E. (2013b), ‘Preparing culture change agents for academic medicine in a multi-institutional consortium: the C-change learning action network’, Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 33 (4), 244–57. Sadeghpour, M., Bernstein, I., Ko, C. and Jacobe, H. (2012), ‘Role of sex in academic dermatology: results from a national survey’, Archives of Dermatology, 148 (7), 809–14. Sambunjak, D., Straus, S.E. and Marusić, A. (2006), ‘Mentoring in academic medicine: a systematic review’, Journal of the American Medical Association, 296 (9), 1103–15. Schroen, A.T., Brownstein, M.R. and Sheldon, G.F. (2004), ‘Women in academic general surgery’, Academic Medicine, 79 (4), 310–18. Schueller-Weidekamm, C. and Kautzky-Willer, A. (2012), ‘Challenges of work‒ life balance for women physicians/mothers working in leadership positions’, Gender Medicine, 9 (4), 244–50. Shah, D.N., Volpe, N.J., Abbuhl, S.B., et al. (2010), ‘Gender characteristics among academic ophthalmology leadership, faculty, and residents: results from a cross-sectional survey’, Ophthalmic Epidemiol, 17, 1–6.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 143

13/12/2019 15:47

144

Gender, science and innovation

Shollen, S.L., Bland, C.J., Finstad, D.A. and Taylor, A.L. (2009), ‘Organizational climate and family life: how these factors affect the status of women faculty at one medical school’, Academic Medicine, 84 (1), 87–94. Sonnad, S.S. and Colletti, L.M. (2002), ‘Issues in the recruitment and success of women in academic surgery’, Surgery, 132 (2), 415–19. Tacconelli, E., Poljak, M., Cacace, M., et al. (2012), ‘Science without meritocracy. Discrimination among European specialists in infectious diseases and clinical microbiology: a questionnaire survey’, British Medical Journal Open, 2 (6), pii: e001993. Taylor, K.S., Lambert, T.W. and Goldacre, M.J. (2009), ‘Career progression and destinations, comparing men and women in the NHS: postal questionnaire surveys’, British Medical Journal, 3 (338), 1735‒47. Tugwell, P. (2004), ‘The campaign to revitalise academic medicine kicks off’, Lancet, 363, 836. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(04)15772-3. Wai, P.Y., Dandar, V., Radosevich, D.M., et al. (2014), ‘Engagement, workplace satisfaction, and retention of surgical specialists in academic medicine in the United States’, Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 219 (1), 31–42. Waljee, J.F., Chang, K.W., Kim, H.M., et al. (2015), ‘Gender disparities in academic practice’, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 136 (3), 380e–87e. Westring, A.F., Speck, R.M., Dupuis Sammel, M., et al. (2014), ‘Culture matters: the pivotal role of culture for women’s careers in academic medicine’, Academic Medicine, 89 (4), 658–63. Williams, J.C., Berdahl, J.L. and Vandello, J.A. (2016), ‘Beyond work‒life “integration”’, Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 515–39. Yedidia, M.J. and Bickel, J. (2001), ‘Why aren’t there more women leaders in academic medicine? The views of clinical department chairs’, Academic Medicine, 76 (5), 453–65.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 144

13/12/2019 15:47

PART II

Networking, Mentoring and Support

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 145

13/12/2019 15:47

8. Networking, gender and academia: an ecosystems approach* 1

Colette Henry, Helen Lawton Smith, Viviana Meschitti, Lene Foss and Pauric McGowan 8.1 INTRODUCTION As a socio-economic activity, the ability to create, develop and manage effective networks is important (Österle et al., 2001). In academia, networks are particularly important because they can create opportunities for individual academics to collaborate on national and international research projects, and these, in turn, may lead to commercialisation and entrepreneurship opportunities (Siegel and Wright, 2015). Networks also provide cost-effective advice, access to finance, emotional support and social legitimacy (Hanson and Blake, 2009). Furthermore, networks can act as important vehicles for career advancement (Gersick et al., 2000; Arthur and Rousseau, 1996; Forret and Dougherty, 2004), helping academics to highlight their achievements and identify new job opportunities, thus facilitating career progression (Van Emmerik et al., 2006). While scholars have explored networking in a range of contexts – for example, entrepreneurship (Foss, 2010), firm performance (Watson, 2011), differences in networking behaviour (Klyver and Grant, 2010), innovation (Foss, 2010), small firms (Zeng et al., 2010) and high-tech (Moensted, 2007) – networking in the context of gender and academia has not been the subject of concerted academic attention. Indeed, while men’s success in gaining promotion has been attributed to their effective use of networks (Cannings and Montmarquette, 1991; Forret and Dougherty, 2004; Mulvey, 2011), women have not benefited to the same extent (Lawton Smith et al., 2017; O’Brien and Hapgood, 2012). This chapter seeks to address this research gap, because if women develop less *  This chapter draws on research carried out for the TRIGGER project G.A. No. 611034 funded under the Seventh Framework Programme, Specific programme ‘Capacity’, Work programme ‘Science in Society’, FP7-SCIENCE-INSOCIE​TY-2013-1. ­146

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 146

13/12/2019 15:47



Networking, gender and academia ­147

effective network relationships than men they are likely to ‘miss essential ingredients important for career success’ (Van Emmerik et al., 2006, p. 58). Drawing on qualitative empirical data from the €3 million European Union (EU)-funded gender equality project, ‘Transforming Institutions by Gendering Contents and Gaining Equality in Research’, TRIGGER, and adopting ecosystems as a theoretical lens (Isenberg, 2010), in this chapter we aim to explore critically the perceived barriers and potential benefits of networking for women academics. We seek, as a consequence, to contribute to extant scholarship by further developing and expanding the ecosystems concept and generating new evidence in this field. Our core research question is: how can women academics build and utilise their networks to maximise access to the academic ecosystem and advance their careers? Our findings contribute to knowledge and understanding in this field by offering insights into the benefits of networking for women academics and highlighting networking as a critical component of the academic ecosystem. The remainder of this chapter is structured as follows: the next section reviews the background literature in the area of academic networks. This is followed by our theoretical framework: the ecosystems concept as it applies to academia. The subsequent section discusses our methodological approach. This is followed by our findings, which are discussed in the context of the ecosystems framework. Finally, conclusions are presented, and avenues worthy of future academic attention are identified.

8.2  BACKGROUND LITERATURE 8.2.1  Networks and Network Structures According to Leitch and Harrison (2014), there is a fundamental lack of clarity in the literature about the terminology, units of analysis and research focus in relation to networking. As they highlight, networks and networking are different constructs, the former being the outcome of the latter. Networking enables the creation of networks; networks are the entities, and networking is the behaviour that sustains them. Networks have been defined as the interactive relationships or alliances that people seek to develop (Hampton et al., 2011), with a network being composed of ‘a set of actors connected by a set of ties’ (Borgatti and Foster, 2003, p. 992). Network composition has been examined from both structuralist and connectionist perspectives (Borgatti and Foster, 2003) exploring the size, diversity, density, reach and strength of network ties (Hoang and Antoncic, 2003), as well as their benefits (Jack et al., 2008). Connectionist

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 147

13/12/2019 15:47

148

Gender, science and innovation

studies tend to focus on the benefits of network ties, whereas structuralist perspectives consider the characteristics of networks in terms of resource acquisition (Borgatti and Foster, 2003; Hampton et al., 2011). Whatever the context, networking is about developing social capital ‒ that is, knowing others and being known to them (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998) ‒ and the ties between actors can be both formal and informal (Hoang and Antoncic, 2003). Formal networks are seen to comprise professional contacts providing essential ties for business and career development. Informal networks, however, are viewed as comprising family and friends who provide necessary emotional and social support to individuals in their daily lives. 8.2.2  Gender and Networking Extant literature suggests that women and men’s networking behaviours differ (Foss, 2010; Klyver and Grant, 2010; Minniti, 2017), and that women may be disadvantaged compared to their male counterparts in this regard (Foss, 2017). There are a number of further longstanding assumptions about networking in the literature, including that: women have different networking priorities (Hampton et al., 2011); their networks are smaller (Ibarra, 1993), with more family and friends (Greve and Salaff, 2003) and fewer ‘weak ties’ (Ibarra, 1993); women prefer ‘strong ties’ (Granovetter, 1992), have fewer networks, and their network contacts are more homogenous and not as extensive as men’s (Watson, 2011). One possible explanation for this latter point may be that women tend to have a preference to interact with individuals of the same sex (Ibarra, 1993). According to Minniti (2017), expanding relational efforts and increasing their depth is a fundamental component of network building. Supporting existing studies, she further posits that personal networks are important because they can increase the speed of creating reputation and influence. A longitudinal study by Gardiner et al. (2007) shows how networking benefited women academics when used as part of a mentoring programme. The women participants received a higher level of promotion, more grant income and had better perceptions of themselves as academics. Based on their study of women’s career experiences Mavin and Bryans (2010) suggest that engaging in a process of critical reflection could be a helpful strategy to support women academics in challenging existing boundaries and moving on with their careers. In the United States (US), Hult et al. (2005) reported on the general dissatisfaction among women academics in science, engineering and technology (SET) faculties, where female academics held fewer senior posts and were less likely to be full professors then their male colleagues. Their study revealed several gender differences

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 148

13/12/2019 15:47



Networking, gender and academia ­149

between male and female academics’ perceptions of obstacles to success and sources of dissatisfaction with their careers. For example, women academics were more likely to report negative experiences with the process of evaluation, promotion and tenure, overwhelming workloads, and difficulties balancing work and family commitments. 8.2.3  Networking Challenges for Women According to Van Emmerik et al. (2006), although women have been found to engage more in networking than men, they often profit less from it in terms of career satisfaction. In their study, Van Emmerik et al. (2006) found that while more engagement in formal and informal networking is associated with increased career satisfaction for both men and women, training could be needed for women to help them improve their exposure to others. They concluded that having a mentor and a network of developed relationships could be essential to achieving intrinsic career success. Within science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine (STEMM) disciplines, networking may be more difficult due to the inherent specialist nature of these fields. Furthermore, commercialisation and entrepreneurship processes in which STEMM academics seek to engage are potentially more complex, due to funding and intellectual property issues (Lawton Smith et al., 2017). Indeed, women academics in STEMM areas have been found to perform worse on average than their male counterparts in terms of promotion and standard research metrics (O’Brien and Hapgood, 2012). Potential barriers preventing women from developing effective networks include: family responsibilities and the difficulties associated with trying to balance work‒family commitments, a lack of confidence, and early childhood socialisation. Additional barriers may include the following: ●●

●●

●●

●●

Lack of academic management experience and/or length of academic service: limiting networking opportunities and networks resulting in possible exclusion from important relationships needed for future career progression (Robb and Coleman, 2010). Break in service: where women miss out on networking opportunities due to maternity leave, career break, or part-time or parental leave arrangements. University position: women may be excluded from particular networks, as a consequence, because they are not at a senior managerial or professorial level. Lack of information: women may be unaware of the existence of particular networks.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 149

13/12/2019 15:47

150 ●● ●●

Gender, science and innovation

Network avoidance: women might perceive particular networks as unsupportive or not beneficial and to be avoided. Largely or totally male networks may be hard to join.

Generally, the literature suggests that women are less effective than men in their networking activities. Foss (2017), in her review of extant scholarship, highlights three reasons: 1. Women have different perceptions of networking, and will have different networking priorities and requirements at different stages in their academic careers. 2. We need discrete criteria for measuring network standards for women’s networking vis-à-vis men. 3. We need to challenge existing assumptions about the effectiveness of women’s networks and to find networking strategies that actually work for women. Significantly, Foss suggests that future research needs to contextualise women’s networking and to examine how their networks are built, developed, maintained and changed within different institutional contexts.

8.3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: NETWORKS AND THE ECOSYSTEM Originally conceptualised by Tansley (1935) as a self-sustaining, biological community of interacting organisms, the ecosystems concept has since been applied beyond the ecological context (Stam, 2015), and several different ecosystems models have been developed (Mason and Brown, 2014). An economic ecosystem as a structure is important because it provides for the necessary human, financial and professional resources critical to business survival, and includes access to valuable networks and markets (Isenberg, 2010; Mason and Brown, 2014). Whether involving an organisation or an individual, an ecosystem can be described as an economic community supported by a foundation of interacting organisations and individuals (Moore, 1990). For the purposes of this chapter, we adopt Mazzarol’s (2014) entrepreneurial ecosystem framework (see Figure 8.1), to allow us to conceptualise the academic ecosystem and explore the role of the university in supporting academics, providing them with a range of additional (soft) supports including, in particular, networking opportunities. Mazzarol’s framework has been used in business and economic studies to examine the type and

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 150

13/12/2019 15:47



Networking, gender and academia ­151 Government Policy Regulatory Framework & Infrastructure

Local & Global Markets

Human Capital & Workforce

Entrepreneurial Ecosystem

Education & Training

Funding & Finance

Culture

Universities as Catalysts

Mentors, Advisors & Support Systems

Source:  Mazzarol (2014).

Figure 8.1  Mazzarol’s entrepreneurial ecosystem level of support available to entrepreneurs in a particular country, region or sector. It comprises nine components which we apply here (in Figure 8.2) to academia to explore the type and level of support available to academics. In our ‘academic’ application we group Mazzarol’s nine components into four categories: ‘hard’ (funding and finance, and universities in the context of their physical facilities, that is, incubators, laboratories and equipment), ‘soft’ (that is, education and training, mentors and advisors, human capital and workforce, access to markets), ‘compliance’ (policy, regulatory frameworks) and ‘culture’ (the embedded culture of the particular academic institution as well as that of other institutions within the academic ecosystem). 8.3.1  Hard Components Within the academic ecosystem the university is identified as a particularly important component in providing the academic with physical support

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 151

13/12/2019 15:47

152

Gender, science and innovation HARD • the academic’s own university • facilities at other universities/ associated bodies • funding and finance

CULTURE • in the academic’s own university • in other universities/associated bodies • in networks

COMPLIANCE • university policies, rules and regulations • promotional criteria • funding and research regulations

SOFT • education and training • mentors and advisors • introductions to key individuals • access to job markets • commercialisation opportunities

Figure 8.2  The academic ecosystem (applying Mazzarol’s framework) including space, structure and security that are necessary to conduct their work. Physical supports provided by the university to an academic also extend beyond an office to include labs, meeting spaces and incubator facilities. With specific regard to the last of these, the literature suggests that there are significantly fewer women who access university incubation facilities or related support (Foss and Gibson, 2015) or, indeed, commercialise in technology or STEMM-based sectors (Anna et al., 2000) and who would typically avail of such supports. Funding and finance are also critical ecosystem components within the academic context. These refer here to the availability of financial capital, which may be in the form of loans, venture capital and other types of formal and informal debt and equity facilitating the establishment and growth of new and existing ventures. In the context of academia, this component is equally critical as it provides the funding required to support research projects, enabling scholars to ‘buy out’ their time to conduct their research, conduct field work, purchase lab equipment, and fund travel costs associated with attending national and international conferences to

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 152

13/12/2019 15:47



Networking, gender and academia ­153

present work and develop valuable new research contacts. Where appropriate, financial capital will also be needed to support the commercialisation process. In the United Kingdom (UK) academic ecosystem, national research funding councils such as the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC), Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC), as well as the Leverhulme Trust and other various project opportunities including those within the European Union, are important funding sources. Such funding sources are valuable given the extensive literature reporting the significant challenges women face in accessing finance to start and grow their businesses (Orser et al., 2006). 8.3.2  Soft Components Within Mazzarol’s (2014) framework, there is a considerable number of ‘soft’ components, including education and training, mentors and advisors, and access to markets. In the academic context, while all of these components are important to both internal and external stakeholders, they can play a particularly important role in terms of supporting women academics’ career progression. For example, while women may be appropriately academically qualified in their field, they may not have had the opportunity to hold a management role in their careers and gain the skills necessary for promotion (Mukhtar, 2002). Hence they would benefit from management and leadership training to compensate for gaps in their experience. Having some type of mentor, professional advisor or role model has also been shown to be particularly beneficial to women in facilitating career progression. Access to local and global markets is also important in Mazzarol’s (2014) framework because, in an entrepreneurship context, businesses need to connect to both domestic and international client bases for long-term survival and growth. Similarly, in order to keep up to date in their particular field of expertise and to get on to the ‘grapevine’ where they hear about funding bids, develop partnerships for collaborative projects and learn about potential new career opportunities, academics need to develop connections with other academics. Building such a network of academic peers facilitates exchange of experiences, at both national and international levels, and creates a platform for individuals to learn from others, enabling the augmentation of their knowledge base and showcasing their work.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 153

13/12/2019 15:47

154

Gender, science and innovation

8.3.3  Compliance Components Policy and regulatory frameworks are deemed the most important components of Mazzarol’s ecosystem because policy directly affects individuals and – in the entrepreneurial context – their ventures. Furthermore, policy is a broad term, comprising a wide cross-section of sub-policies relating to infrastructure, taxation, labour markets, immigration, and so on (Mazzarol, 2014, pp. 9‒10). In the academic context, policy and regulatory frameworks affect every aspect of the academic ecosystem and do not operate in isolation. Areas affected include individual academic contracts in terms of pay, working hours, progression requirements, ‘right to work’, as well as maternity and leave policies. Funding available for academic research may also be affected, as some funding calls may require a certain level of seniority, a minimum length of service, a network of international collaborators or a degree of matched funding; requirements which some academics – particularly women – may have difficulty meeting or convincingly financing. In terms of commercialisation, some funds may favour high-tech knowledge-based sectors that have traditionally been maledominated (Anna et al., 2000). 8.3.4  Culture Components According to Tylor (1974), culture can have a profound impact on women; culture is an embedded phenomenon shaped by generations and thus is not easy to change. In the academic context, several different independent cultures may be at play: that of the academic’s own university, the related organisations with which academics interact, the professional bodies to which they are affiliated, and the various other actors’ institutions in their personal network. A university’s expectations of their academic staff, institutional norms and traditions, and how the academic is perceived within both their own institution and the wider academic ecosystem, all combine to create the academic culture. When applied in an academic context, it is clear that Mazzarol’s nine ecosystem components are not entirely mutually exclusive: they interconnect, overlap and are mutually impactful (Isenberg, 2010; Mazzarol, 2014). While in theory they are accessible to all academics, regardless of gender, in practice some may be less accessible to women. In the following section we draw on empirical data from the TRIGGER project to explore critically the perceived barriers and potential benefits of networking for women academics. Arising from our review of literature, our core research question focuses on: how can women academics build and utilise their networks to maximise access to the academic ecosystem and advance their careers?

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 154

13/12/2019 15:47



Networking, gender and academia ­155

8.4  DATA AND METHODS The TRIGGER project is part of a five-country European consortium aiming to better understand the under-representation of women in STEMM and to champion the role of female academics in these discipline areas. The project provides recommendations for promoting organisational change and includes nine action areas designed to foster gender equality, including networking, the focus of this chapter. Twelve semi-structured TRIGGER academic networking events were delivered in the UK, Ireland and Sweden. Collectively they involved a total of 50 speakers and 300 participants. The events specifically targeted women academics and included either a single keynote speaker or a panel of expert speakers on themes relating to gender equality. Data are drawn from those events focusing specifically on gender equality as it relates to academic career development and progression. For consistency, a focus on the London-based events (n 5 4), held between March 2015 and June 2017 was adopted. These events involved 25 expert speakers and 105 participants. Table 8.1 provides relevant background data on the four networking events in this study. Each event involved a chaired thematic panel discussion session, with between five and seven speakers drawn from academia, industry, public sector and non-profit academic community bodies. Each event incorporated a structured question and answer (Q&A) session with the panellists, as well as an exchange of experiences with the audience. Informal networking opportunities followed events. During each event, questions relating to gender equality and career progression in academia were put to the panellists and then discussed with the audience. Discussion questions included the following: what are the challenges facing women’s career development in academia? What initiatives have industry and policy organisations implemented to address these challenges? What can academia learn from these experiences? The panel events lasted approximately three hours in total, with the panellists’ Q&A and ‘audience exchange’ sections lasting one and a half hours. For our study, we focused exclusively on the perspectives of the expert panellists who had been invited to speak at these networking events. Given their seniority and experience of networking, we felt they could offer unique and valuable insights into the challenges to and the benefits of networking. An e-mail survey was designed for this purpose. In the survey, we sought the speakers’ views on the following three key areas: the main barriers to networking for women in academia, especially in STEMM areas; the importance and the benefits of networking for women academics in terms of career progression; and the role of networking in the academic ecosystem for women academics keen to progress their careers.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 155

13/12/2019 15:47

156

Gender, science and innovation

Table 8.1  Summary background data on networking events No.

Thematic focus

1

Improving gender equality in work: what can we learn from London’s business and policy organisations? 2 Improving gender equality in career development in STEMM disciplines: what can we learn from academia and the corporate sector? 3 Gender equality in academic community bodies: causes and possible solutions 4 Gender and career development: building on the TRIGGER experience Totals

Date

Location

March 2015

London

7

40

November 2016

London

6

20

March 2017

London

7

25

June 2017

London

5

20

25*

105

4 events

No. of panellists

No. of participants

Note:  * Two of the panellists took part twice (that is, in two events), hence the total number of discrete panellists surveyed over the four London events was 23: 18 female and 5 male. Of these, 17 responded to the survey in full (14 female and 3 male), and 2 (1 female and 1 male) provided separate comments.

8.4.1 Analysis Responses from the survey were analysed according to question headings; responses were coded thematically and an Excel spreadsheet compiled to summarise findings. These were then reviewed by the author team, and critically reflected upon in the context of the relevant literature. Recurrent themes were identified and further refined from the survey data (Miles and Huberman, 1994). Relevant and insightful fragments of narratives derived from the survey responses were extracted to provide examples of some of the key sentiments of the respondents, and are included here in the

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 156

13/12/2019 15:47



Networking, gender and academia ­157

reported findings. Findings are presented under relevant thematic headings in the section below.

8.5 FINDINGS 8.5.1  Barriers to Networking From the speakers’ perspectives, the main barriers to networking for women were time and timing. There was a sense that women simply did not have the time to network or to attend networking events. Furthermore, the actual timing of networking events was often problematic, as – ­excluding TRIGGER events – many tended to be held in the evening, after working hours and often ‘off-site’, with some networking events held early in the morning as breakfast events. Challenges around time and timing were perceived to arise because of family and other caring commitments. However, other barriers mentioned included problems due to career breaks, lack of opportunity to network, and a lack of mentors to support networking activity and facilitate introductions. A lack of confidence was also identified as a factor, with one of the female speakers suggesting that women often have difficulty ‘selling themselves’, taking the view that when it comes to networking ‘a man is confident when he does it, but a woman is pushy when she does it’. Additional perceived barriers highlighted by the speakers related to people’s assumptions and expectations with regard to networking events. Responses in the survey of speakers suggested that networking events, especially in the STEMM disciplines and industries, tended to be dominated by men. Speakers commented specifically on the ‘subconscious bias’ inherent in networking events. For example, one (female) speaker reported that, on first appearance, women academics are underestimated more often than men at networking events, and can be mistaken for junior faculty or students rather than senior academics or professors. This comment was supported by another (female) speaker who suggested that it can be daunting for women to break into a group of men who ‘may ignore you or assume you are there simply in a support capacity’. One speaker from the STEMM area commented that unconscious bias could prevent women from progressing, ‘especially strong women who were often seen as being difficult; if they were men, they would be viewed as strong’. There was also a sense that networking events have fewer women as headline speakers, potentially putting women off as they might feel they ‘do not belong’. One (female) speaker aptly commented that, in networking: ‘there are no barriers if there are no assumptions made

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 157

13/12/2019 15:47

158

Gender, science and innovation

around norms and expectations’. On a more positive note, one speaker commented that, in her view, women are better at networking than men. One of the (female) speakers added that ‘women build knowledge; men build networks’, suggesting that when women do attend networking events they do so because they want to learn, develop their knowledge and skills, and be seen as ‘credible’ before embarking on concerted networking activities. 8.5.2  Benefits of Networking The speakers were asked to reflect on the value of networking and whether, from their perspective, structured and semi-structured networking events such as those organised by the TRIGGER project were actually beneficial to women. The majority of the speakers (75 per cent) indicated that such events were beneficial mainly because they facilitated introductions not only between women academics (presumably their peers) in their discipline areas, but also between junior and senior faculty members. Other perceived benefits of these types of networking events mentioned by the speakers included: opportunities to build confidence, gaining practice in going up to strangers at an event, facilitating a level playing field, and meeting other women who could support each other in their career progression by acting as mentors and helping to make contacts in other sectors. One (female) speaker from a STEMM discipline commented on the value of networking as a sharing of experiences, providing a ‘mechanism for reflection and time to consider one’s career in the context of others’. The speakers were also asked whether they felt their engagement as panellists in the networking events was beneficial to attendees, and if so, how. The majority of speakers (70 per cent) believed their involvement to be beneficial, with the remainder indicating that they ‘hoped so’ or were ‘unsure’. All speakers indicated that they themselves benefited by participating as a panellist. Table 8.2 summarises the speakers’ views. The speakers reported that their sentiments were evidenced by the attendees’ responses to their commentaries, the questions they received from the floor, and the number of attendees who approached them afterwards to express their appreciation and comment on how much they valued hearing their views. According to one of the speakers, attendees reported being able to identify ‘how to approach such matters [equality issues] especially when the challenges are great and having to constantly prove oneself in a man’s world’. Another speaker commented that ‘the best bit was the networking afterwards’.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 158

13/12/2019 15:47



Networking, gender and academia ­159

Table 8.2  Speakers’ perceptions of benefits – to attendees and themselves Benefits to attendees

Benefits to speakers

Sharing an organisational story, actions   and outcomes.

Learned a lot – about academia; about the challenges; learning about the challenges and trajectories of others gives additional inspiration in continuing one’s own struggle. Hearing different views and experiences; new insights; new knowledge.

Sharing experiences and personal  perspectives that resonated with others: ‘Personal stories are a good way of drawing others along on the change journey in conjunction with research evidence.’ My own experiences could be helpful to   more junior women. Drawing attention to the complexity  of some issues; highlighting structural issues. Highlighting issues faced by minority  groups. Raising awareness of support available  through my organisation and sharing evidence from industry.

Exposed to a different audience; met different people; made new contacts. Picked up new members for my organisation. Made me feel less alone. I was honoured to be invited as a speaker.

8.5.3  The Role of Networking Within the Academic Ecosystem When asked for their views on the overall importance of networking and its role within the academic ecosystem, all of the speakers agreed that, regardless of gender, industry or discipline, networking is critical. A number of speakers referred to the adage that ‘It’s not what you know but who you know’ to make their point, suggesting that this is what helps people to progress their careers. Key words frequently used by the speakers included: ‘vital’, ‘critical’, ‘imperative’ and ‘fundamental’. They referred to networking as being able to facilitate invitations to speak at conferences, being part of committees, joining projects, growing contacts within their field or industry, opening doors, accessing grants, making people aware of who one is, and building one’s reputation; all of which, in turn, further develop one’s own network. According to one (female) speaker, ‘[one’s network is] the second most important aspect after the quality of one’s research’. Another speaker (female), referred to networks as ‘a vital ingredient; without them a woman would be far less likely to have the vital support needed to come

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 159

13/12/2019 15:47

160

Gender, science and innovation

down in her favour in grant applications or tenure selection commitment’. One speaker commented that networking is particularly important in fastmoving technology-based disciplines, suggesting that a lack of participation in key events could lead to ‘one’s work being overlooked or not being given the recognition that it deserves’. From the survey data, there was a belief amongst speakers that networking could help to profile a woman academic as an expert in her field, as someone who publishes. Networks were seen as a critical means of bringing an individual to the attention of people who make decisions about prizes, funding applications, publications and career appointments. While some speakers suggested that women have fewer opportunities to network than men, one (female) speaker felt that academia has historically been one of the most globalised, open and network-based professional areas, stating that the real challenge ahead was not in helping women to network, but in ‘reducing the gaps in speed of career progression and salary levels’. A valuable aspect of feedback from the speakers surveyed was their suggestions for how women academics can best utilise their networks to maximise their access to the wider academic ecosystem and progress their careers. Speakers emphasised the need for building personal confidence and being proactive in networking endeavours; widening one’s networks beyond academia into professional bodies, not restricting oneself to ‘comfortable and reliable’ networks; looking for supportive people for one’s network; actively looking for leadership, committee or non-executive role opportunities; helping each other; and embracing technology and making more use of virtual networks and social media platforms, which could be especially beneficial for women given possible time restrictions due to family commitments. One speaker specifically mentioned the need to ‘follow up on contacts’, while another suggested that women should have informal discussions with their network contacts when applying for new job opportunities. Box 8.1 summarises some of the substantive pieces of advice offered by the speakers. Finally, one (female) speaker stressed the importance of not passing up on opportunities to travel and present one’s work, meet new scholars, serve on conference committees or join editorial boards: even if it seems that such activities will just add to your existing high workload, it is important to make time for them and to be firm with your line manager in negotiating sufficient time within your total research‒teaching‒admin academic workload to allow these to happen. Also, even if it seems as if the event or journal is not particularly prestigious, it may be better to take up less prestigious opportunities that present themselves – which will hopefully evolve into more prestigious ones – than to pass up the opportunity altogether. (Female panel speaker: senior professor)

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 160

13/12/2019 15:47



Networking, gender and academia ­161

BOX 8.1  SUMMARY OF ADVICE OFFERED BY SPEAKERS ● ● ● ● ● ●

● ●

●

Be seen on the podium; be seen taking a substantial leadership role; this will help to dispel the myth that some women do not want ‘high office’ roles. Gather data to help make your case. Work toward ensuing gender parity in representation in key committees. Get involved, and be ready to give help when asked or needed. It is important to push people and enable them to have opportunities; women then need to take the initiative. It can be reassuring to see women’s achievements advertised and recognised within academic mediums; this creates a presence that could go a long way to planting the seed that women do indeed feature within the successes of academia. Women should consider organising regular networking events, both internal and external to their organisation. Make full use of opportunities by participating fully in academic seminars, workshops, conferences and panels, both internal and external to their organisation. Make greater use of social media networking to access mentors and highstatus individuals to make introductions and extend network reach beyond your own country.

8.6 DISCUSSION The findings from our speakers’ survey gave support to extant literature in several ways, specifically in relation to the challenges that women face in engaging in networking activity and the particular barriers they have to overcome (Foss, 2010; Robb and Coleman, 2010). The research appears to support the idea that women network differently to men and have different perceptions about networking, and that they face disadvantages when compared with men (Foss, 2017). Evidence for this can be found in the speakers’ perceptions about: women’s apparent lack of confidence compared to men, their failure to value their own knowledge and experience in the same way men appear to; the perceived lack of available mentors to make high-level introductions; the assumptions and expectations associated with networking, especially in events deemed to be male-dominated, such as STEMM-related networks; and the underlying ‘subconscious bias’ faced by women academics when participating in networking events. The speakers also emphasise ‘time’ and ‘timing’ as being key barriers challenging women in their efforts at networking. In terms of the perceived benefits of networking, the research again appears to support extant literature in relation to the value of networking

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 161

13/12/2019 15:47

162

Gender, science and innovation

in terms of facilitating career advancement (Gersick et al., 2000; Arthur and Rousseau, 1996; Forret and Dougherty, 2004). Panel speakers identified raising awareness and highlighting the complexity of equality issues; and sharing experiences and facilitating introductions between academic peers as well as junior and senior faculty as key benefits. They also drew attention to the fact that networking events provide opportunities to build confidence through practice and scope to meet other women who can, potentially, offer support by acting as mentors (Gardiner et al., 2007). 8.6.1  Adopting an Ecosystems Approach By adopting an ecosystems lens to our findings, we can view the academic ecosystem as a networked structure in itself; that is, we can acknowledge that all ecosystem components are ‘live’, and are inherently and inextricably connected to one another by a vibrant ‘network’. We begin, then, to realise that networking as an activity is critical. The network moves from its role as a single, discrete component of the academic ecosystem to becoming the key to unlocking all other components within that ecosystem. To maximise access to the academic ecosystem, and connect with as many live components as possible, networking as an activity must become a mandatory and frequent rather than an elective and occasional endeavour. If women choose not to network, are prevented from doing so, or if they are able to access only some of the ecosystem components in their network, then they are reducing the size and scope of the academic ecosystem accessible to them, likely limiting their career progression. Reflecting on the panel speakers’ responses, what is clear is that there is considerable potential for women to build and utilise their networks to maximise access to the academic ecosystem and advance their careers. In terms of the hard dimension of the academic ecosystem, the speakers highlighted the role of networking in helping academics to make connections with other academics not only from their own university but from others, with scope to access their facilities which include libraries, laboratories and incubators. The speakers recommended that women academics extend their network reach beyond ‘comfortable and reliable’ networks to include other support organisations such as professional bodies, discipline-specific academic and scientific communities of practice, and funding bodies, the last of these potentially providing much-needed research and commercialisation funding. There was also a recommendation to leverage social media networking to access mentors and high-status individuals who can make valuable introductions internationally. In terms of the culture dimension of the academic ecosystem, networking also allows for considerable exchange of knowledge and experiences,

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 162

13/12/2019 15:47



Networking, gender and academia ­163

exposing individual academics to cultures beyond their own university. This helps them to learn from others and to better understand and negotiate cultural difficulties that they may encounter in relation to gender equality or any hidden cultures that may be embedded in networks in terms of underlying assumptions and subconscious biases. The research revealed, in one speaker’s words, that ‘Personal stories are a good way of drawing others along on the change journey.’ With respect to the compliance dimension, networking can help women academics to learn about, better understand and effectively deal with the rules, regulations and politics of their university and those of other institutions in relation to employment contracts and promotional criteria. Such information is critical when renegotiating workloads, seeking to engage in grant applications or applying for promotional opportunities. As one speaker aptly commented: ‘[women academics need] to be firm with your line manager in negotiating sufficient time within your total research‒ teaching‒admin academic workload’. Finally, it is perhaps the set of components within the soft dimension of the academic ecosystem that potentially can be best leveraged through networking activity and can, arguably, offer the greatest benefits for women. Networks can provide access to a range of high-level soft supports such as education and training programmes, professional mentors and advisors, as well as facilitating introductions to key individuals, whether at the peer or senior level. They can also open doors to new job opportunities, or new markets for commercialising research. As the panel speakers suggested, women need to: make use of opportunities by participating fully in academic seminars, workshops, conferences and panels, both internal and external to their organisation; get involved; be seen on the podium; take on leadership roles and be ready to give help when asked. Such activities can open up opportunities for collaborative projects, research commercialisation, or simply enable women academics to use their networks to bring themselves and their achievements to the attention of people who make decisions about prizes, funding applications, publications and appointments. Hence, the benefits that women can derive from accessing the soft dimension of the academic ecosystem cannot be underestimated.

8.7 CONCLUSIONS This study sought to to explore critically the perceived barriers and potential benefits of networking for women academics. Our core research question was: how can women academics build and utilise their networks to maximise access to the academic ecosystem and advance their careers? To

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 163

13/12/2019 15:47

164

Gender, science and innovation

address this question, we drew on data from the EU TRIGGER project, and sought the views of the expert speakers who had participated as panellists in a series of semi-structured networking events in London. Our findings revealed several insights into the importance of networking, its potential benefits and its critical role in helping women to advance their careers and, where appropriate, exploit commercialisation and entrepreneurial opportunities. While the majority of our findings agree with previous research, adopting an ecosystems lens has enabled us to identify particular ways in which women academics can use networking to access the wider academic ecosystem, and has helped to illuminate the supports to be derived from the hard, compliance, culture and soft component ­dimensions therein. Such insights are important given the growing workload of academics, and the growing importance of research commercialisation. At the fundamental level, this research highlights an important yet simple barrier in relation to networking for women: that of timing. The fact that the TRIGGER events were all held in the afternoon rather than early morning or late evening was commented on as an advantage. Our findings have also emphasised the many benefits to be gained from networking: the fact that it is really an imperative for those academics in STEMM disciplines means that it is crucial for academics seeking to commercialise their research. More novel findings include the fact that everyone benefits from networking, including those deemed to be more experienced in the art; in this case our panel speakers commented how they learned a lot about the issues, were exposed to a different audience, were honoured to be invited to speak, and enjoyed the actual ‘networking bit at the end’. Also highlighted was the potential danger of networking events that were predominately female becoming ghettoised, reminding us that ‘men hate networking too’. This research reminds us that academics have a distinct advantage when it comes to networking, because academia is a globalised, open and network-based profession with opportunities to make international connections through conferences and online platforms. Despite this, complex equality issues still exist. While men’s career success has been attributed to their effective use of networks (Cannings and Montmarquette, 1991; Forret and Dougherty, 2004; Mulvey, 2011), women are still not benefiting to the same extent (Lawton Smith et al., 2017; O’Brien and Hapgood, 2012). More support, it seems, is needed to enable women to unlock all the components in the wider academic ecosystem.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 164

13/12/2019 15:47



Networking, gender and academia ­165

8.8  FUTURE RESEARCH The inherent limitations of this study are to be acknowledged, including the specific focus on only a selected number of networking events and drawing solely on data collected from the panel speakers. However, the insights provided in this chapter point to a number of avenues worthy of future research. First, while our study has focused on the perspective of the panel speakers, future scholarship would benefit from focusing on the participants’ and attendees’ perspectives. Such a focus would demonstrate what actually works – or does not work – for women academics themselves with regard to structured and semi-structured networking events. Second, additional insights could be derived from a structured longitudinal study with participants to determine the impact of networking over time. In this regard, concrete examples could be sought on how the networking activity was followed up and sustained. Third, comparative studies could be conducted with both speakers and participants across discipline areas and, potentially, across different regions and countries to look for differences and/or similarities, and to create opportunities to share experiences and learn from others. The latter focus would clearly have significant benefit not just for research scholarship but also for practice.

REFERENCES Anna, A.L., Chandler, G.N., Jansen, E. and Mero, N.P. (2000). Women Business Owners in Traditional and Non-Traditional Industries. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(3), pp. 279‒303. Arthur, M.B. and Rousseau, D.M. (1996). The Boundaryless Career: A New Employment Principle for a New Organisational Era. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Borgatti, S.P. and Foster, P.C. (2003). The Network Paradigm in Organizational Research: A Review and Typology. Journal of Management, 29(6), pp. 991‒1013. Cannings, K. and Montmarquette, C. (1991). Managerial Momentum: A Simultaneous Model of the Career Progress of Male and Female Managers. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 44(2), pp. 212‒28. Forret, M.L. and Dougherty, T.W. (2004). Networking Behaviors and Career Outcomes: Differences for Men and Women? Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), pp. 419‒37. Foss, L. (2010). Research on Entrepreneur Networks: The Case for a Constructionist Feminist Theory. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 2(1), pp. 83‒102. Foss, L. (2017). Revisiting Research on Gender in Entrepreneurial Networks. In: C. Henry, T. Nelson and K.V. Lewis (eds), The Routledge Companion to Global Female Entrepreneurship. Abington: Routledge, pp. 214‒32.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 165

13/12/2019 15:47

166

Gender, science and innovation

Foss, L. and Gibson, D. (2015). The Entrepreneurial University: Context and Institutional Change. London: Routledge. Gardiner, M., Tiggemann, M., Kearns, H. and Marshall, K. (2007). Show Me the Money! An Empirical Analysis of Mentoring Outcomes for Women in Academia. Higher Education Research and Development, 26(4), pp. 425–42. Gersick, C.J.G., Bartunek, J.M. and Dutton, J.E. (2000). Learning from Academia: The Importance of Relationships in Professional Life. Academy of Management Journal, 43(6), pp. 1026‒44. Granovetter, M. (1992). Problems of Explanation in Economic Sociology. In: N. Nohria and R.G. Eccles (eds), Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form, and Action. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, pp. 25‒56. Greve, A. and Salaff, J.W. (2003). Social Networks and Entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Fall, pp. 1‒22. Hampton, A., McGowan, P. and Cooper, S. (2011). Developing Quality in Female Networks: A Qualitative Analysis of Female Entrepreneurs in Science, Engineering and Technology-Based Firms. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 17(6), pp. 588‒606. Hanson, S. and Blake, M. (2009). Gender and Entrepreneurial Networks. Regional Studies, 43(1), pp. 135‒49. Hoang, H. and Antoncic, B. (2003). Network-Based Research in Entrepreneurship: A Critical Review. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2), pp. 165–87. Hult, C., Callister, R. and Sullivan, K. (2005). Is there a Global Warming Toward Women in Academia? Liberal Education, 91(3), pp. 50‒57. Ibarra, H. (1993). Personal Networks of Women and Minorities in Management: A Conceptual Framework. Academy of Management Review, 18(1), pp. 56‒87. Isenberg, D. (2010). How to Start an Entrepreneurial Revolution. Harvard Business Review, 88(6), pp. 40‒51. Jack, S., Drakopulou Dodd, S. and Anderson, A.R. (2008). Change and the Development of Entrepreneurial Networks Over Time: A Processual Perspective. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 20(2), pp. 125‒59. Klyver, K. and Grant, S. (2010). Gender Differences in Entrepreneurial Networking and Participation. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 2(3), pp. 213‒27. Lawton Smith, H., Etzkowitz, H., Mischitti, V. and Poulouvassilis, A. (2017). Female Academic Entrepreneurship and Commercialisation: Reviewing the Evidence and Identifying the Challenges. In: C. Henry, T. Nelson and K.V. Lewis (eds), The Routledge Companion to Global Female Entrepreneurship. London: Routledge, pp. 78‒92. Leitch, C.M. and Harrison, R.T. (2014). Women Entrepreneurs’ Networking Behaviours: Perspectives from Entrepreneurs and Network Managers. In: K.V. Lewis, C. Henry, E.J. Gatewood and J. Watson (eds), Women Entrepreneurs in the 21st Century: An International Multi-Level Research Analysis. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 215‒35. Mason, C. and Brown, R. (2014). Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and GrowthOriented Enterprises. OECD LEED programme. http://www.oecd.org/cfe/leed/ Entrepreneurial-ecosystems.pdf, accessed 28 November 2015. Mavin, S. and Bryans, P. (2010). Academic Women in the UK: Mainstreaming our Experiences and Networking for Action. Gender and Education, 14(3), pp. 235‒50. Mazzarol, T. (2014). Growing and Sustaining Entrepreneurial Ecosystems: What

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 166

13/12/2019 15:47



Networking, gender and academia ­167

They Are and the Role of Government Policy. Seaanz White Paper, Seaanz, Australia. Miles, M. and Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications. Minniti, M. (2017). Female Entrepreneurship, Role Models and Network Externalities in Middle-Income Countries. In: C. Henry, T. Nelson and K.V. Lewis (eds), The Routledge Companion to Global Female Entrepreneurship. London: Routledge, pp. 197‒213. Moensted, M. (2007). Strategic Networking in Small High Tech Firms. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 31(1), pp. 15‒27. Moore, G. (1990). Structural Determinants of Men’s and Women’s Personal Networks. American Sociological Review, 55(5), pp. 726‒35. Mukhtar, S.M. (2002). Differences in Male and Female Management Characteristics: A Study of Owner-Manager Businesses. Small Business Economics, 18(4), pp. 289‒310. Mulvey, J. (2011). Career Networking Benefits Men, Not Women. Business News Daily, 16 August. Available at: http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/1347-careernetworking-benefits-men.html, accessed 11 August 2017. Nahapiet, J. and Ghoshal, S. (1998). Entrepreneurs’ Networks and the Success of Start-ups: Social Capital, Intellectual Capital and the Organisational Advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), pp. 242‒66. O’Brien, K.R. and Hapgood, K.P. (2012). The Academic Jungle: Ecosystem Modelling Reveals why Women are Driven out of Research. Nordic Society Oikos, April, pp. 999‒1004. Orser, J., Riding, L. and Manley, K. (2006). Women Entrepreneurs and Financial Capital. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(5), pp. 643‒65. Österle, H., Fleisch, E. and Alt, R. (2001). Business Networks: Shaping Collaboration between Enterprises. New York: Springer. Robb, A. and Coleman, S. (2010). Financing Strategies of New Technologybased Firms: A Comparison of Women- and Men-owned Firms. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 5(1), pp. 30‒50. Siegel, D.S. and Wright, M. (2015). Academic Entrepreneurship: Time for a Rethink? Enterprise Research Centre (ERC), ERC Research Paper No. 32, June. https://www.enterpriseresearch.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/ERCResPap32_WrightSiegal.pdf, accessed 18 December 2017. Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Regional Policy: A Sympathetic Critique. European Planning Studies, 23(9), pp. 1759‒69. Tansley, A.G. (1935). The Use and Abuse of Vegetational Terms and Concepts. Ecology, 16(3), pp. 284‒307. Tylor, E.B. (1974) [1871]). Primitive Culture: Researches into the Development of Mythology, Philosophy, Religion, Art, and Custom. New York: Gordon Press. Van Emmerik, H., Euwema, M.C., Geschiere, M. and Schouten, M. (2006). Networking Your Way Through the Organisation: Gender Differences in the Relationship between Network Participation and Career Satisfaction. Women in Management Review, 21(1), pp. 54‒66. Watson, J. (2011). Networking: Gender Differences and the Association with Firm Performance. International Small Business Journal, 30(5), pp. 536‒58. Zeng, S.X., Xie, X.M. and Tam, C.M. (2010). Relationship Between Cooperation Networks and Innovation Performance of SMEs. Technovation, 20(3), pp. 181‒94.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 167

13/12/2019 15:47

9. Academic support for female entrepreneurs: the positive lasting effects of learning networks Aisling O’Neill and Bill O’Gorman 9.1 INTRODUCTION Until the early 2000s, entrepreneurship was considered to be a maledominant pursuit, with the term ‘entrepreneur’ typically being equated with a white middle-class man (Fielden et al., 2003), and entrepreneurshiprelated research principally centring on male business values (Brush et al., 2009). Indeed, in much of the early entrepreneurship literature, male practices were viewed as the norm, and female behaviour was portrayed as a deviation from and subordination to that norm (Friedan, 2010). This was not entirely surprising, given that women have been significantly under-represented in entrepreneurship compared to men; a phenomenon that has been consistent in most economies around the globe (Fitzsimons and O’Gorman, 2010; Henry and Kennedy, 2002; O’Gorman, 2007). However, more recently, as women’s engagement in entrepreneurship has begun to grow, and the considerable value they contribute to the economy has become recognised, more attention has been paid to encouraging women’s entrepreneurial potential and supporting their entrepreneurial endeavours (GEM, 2018). As a result, entrepreneurship education programmes that focus specifically on supporting female entrepreneurs have become increasingly popular. Academic institutions and their education and research teams can play an important role in designing, delivering and evaluating such programmes. Accordingly, by way of example, this chapter explores the value and lasting positive effects of a particular academic-led business learning network programme for entrepreneurs, the Sustainable Learning Networks in Ireland and Wales (SLNIW) programme. The main aim of SLNIW was to create six sustainable learning networks in Ireland and Wales – comprising one all-female, one all-male and one mixed network in each region – in order to study the dynamics of networking and to ­168

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 168

13/12/2019 15:47



Academic support for female entrepreneurs ­169

provide understanding of how to build sustainable, self-learning networks, especially for female entrepreneurs. Sustainability has been shown to provide lasting benefits for owner-managers of micro-enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and the regions in which they are located (O’Gorman and Fuller-Love, 2011). The longitudinal study presented in this chapter aimed to develop a specific understanding of the network construct of female entrepreneurs. The chapter is organised as follows: the next section presents the background literature to the study; a detailed description of SLNIW is then provided in section 9.3. Section 9.4 explains how the data were gathered and analysed, and section 9.5 presents the key findings, clearly articulating how the all-female networks performed compared to the all-male and mixed-gender networks. Finally, the chapter concludes with a discussion of the research findings detailing their importance, uniqueness, contribution and impact.

9.2  NETWORKS AND FEMALE ENTREPRENEURS Since the foundation of ‘business communities’ during the Industrial Revolution, male business owners have come together in networks to advance their social and business standing. These networks are often formal and sometimes have an aura of secrecy with an ‘old boys’ network’ connotation that excludes women. Female business owners set up and view their business needs and networking differently. Despite numerous studies on networking and small business, there is very little research on the impact of networking on female business owners. Even though there is strong evidence that supports an emphasis on male-orientated networking practices, it has not been until recently that many governments have provided support aimed specifically at female entrepreneurs. However, it still appears to be the case that women need help to cultivate good networking strategies. In their study of mixed-gender business owners, Miller et al. (2007) found that women-led businesses had fewer employees and generated less gross sales than their male counterparts, even though their involvement in network activities appeared to be similar to men’s, and their perception of benefits gained from belonging to networks were also similar. In today’s globalised business environment, organisations cannot be studied as independent entities because the landscape is strongly interconnected (Gulati et al., 2000). These linkages represent networks and take varying forms, with networking broadly defined as collaboration among individuals. Lawton Smith et al. (2012) highlighted the fundamental role

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 169

13/12/2019 15:47

170

Gender, science and innovation

played by networks in high-tech economies and the opportunities for regions to foster business networks that support entrepreneurial collaboration and growth through access to resources. They studied Oxfordshire in England, a region of innovation-led economic development, to illustrate the utility of networks for economic development; namely: (1) network logics – why enterprises engage with networks; (2) networks as services – the value of networks in facilitating the creation of competitive advantage; and (3) networks as a resource. Provan et al. (2007) found that there was relatively little network research and stated that more was necessary in order to develop an understanding of network dynamics focusing on a number of key issues such as network structure, network governance, network development and network outcomes. The study presented in this chapter, which is based on the SLNIW programme, contributes to the existing body of research on networks and networking as it examines all of these constructs longitudinally; but in particular because the research concurrently applies a gender lens. Villesèche and Josserand (2017) conducted an in-depth analysis of formal women-only networks by reviewing literature pertaining to women-only networks to determine how these networks provided value to members within both inter- and intra-organisational settings. Their paper provides observations into the implications and impact of engagement of women in these networks and how this influences their role in their organisation. They purport that women-only networks are of value to organisations, particularly for women in management and leadership positions. Linehan (2001) conducted research with 50 female managers across Ireland, England, Germany and Belgium on the challenges of pursuing international management careers. The major obstacle emerging was the lack of access to networking opportunities, highlighting that at that time (in 2001) these options were limited for women. Miller et al. (2007) conducted research into the value of business networks for both male-owned and female-owned small community enterprises (396 participants; 285 male, 111 female) to find that gender had little impact on the value gleaned from strategic networking. However, Forret and Dougherty (2004), who surveyed 418 business school graduates in a bid to determine the career outcomes of networking behaviours, found that the networking by males was more effective than that of females in determining advancement within organisations. As a result, they called for further research into the way women form networks, and their capacity for utilising contacts to advance their careers. Our research is centred on the learning network construct of groups of entrepreneurs, coming together to learn with and from each other for

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 170

13/12/2019 15:47



Academic support for female entrepreneurs ­171

the development of their businesses (Alasoini, 2008). Learning activities are directed by the needs of participants, thus making them highly contextual. Peer learning is highly effective in the entrepreneurial context, with entrepreneurs perceiving increased validity from peer information (Kutzhanova et al., 2009). Bessant and Tsekouras (2001) undertook a case study using eight learning networks to devise the key characteristics of learning networks’ formation and development with a specific focus on the utility of networks for learning. They outlined in their work how participants must enter having a learning need, and be motivated to fulfil it and therefore motivated to engage in learning behaviour. This is further supported by Williams (2005), who identified that motivation to engage in inter-organisational networking requires a common goal. This goal will determine entrepreneurs’ motivation toward volunteering their resources in network activities. Learning networks are generally small groups and rely on the development of relationships to realise value for participants, making them an ideal vehicle for overcoming feelings of isolation that owner-managers of SMEs commonly experience (Tell and Halila, 2001). Therefore we focus on the experience and context of female entrepreneurs within learning networks. The study of gender in entrepreneurship has received a lot of attention over the last two decades. For example, Bennett and Dann (2000) conducted a study into female entrepreneurs and the characteristics most common among them with a sample of 197 female entrepreneurs in Australia. They identified that the dominant traits of female entrepreneurs included: (1) internal locus of control; (2) risk-taking propensity; and (3) independence and a need for achievement. These traits are also commonly associated with male entrepreneurs, suggesting that the ‘gap’ between the traits of male and female entrepreneurs is diminishing. Subsequently, McGowan et al. (2015) determined that even though differences in leadership traits between male and female entrepreneurs are also reducing, entrepreneurial leadership remains more challenging for females. They used a qualitative research design, conducting exploratory, in-depth interviews with 18 female entrepreneurs in the United Kingdom. They found that, while predominantly male characteristics (confidence, aggression, self-direction) are now ‘accepted’ as female characteristics, there is still an expectation that female entrepreneurs also display more communal characteristics (sensitivity, concern for others, strength in verbal communication). Balancing this dichotomy is a real challenge for female entrepreneurs. Researchers within the network theory domain have highlighted the deficit of studies capturing the dynamic developmental processes of learning networks (Bessant and Tsekouras, 2001; Hoang and Antoncic, 2003).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 171

13/12/2019 15:47

172

Gender, science and innovation

McGowan et al. (2015) found that, while formal professional networks such as Chambers of Commerce are important, young female entrepreneurs respond more positively to peer support networks. They reported that in both mixed-gender and female networks, support was challenging to access. However, positive support for female networks was found in their study, with some participants believing that the female-specific environment is more supportive for female entrepreneurs. Their key conclusion was that while networks are an important source of support, learning and collaboration, they must be designed to be sensitive to the needs of young female entrepreneurs. Semrau and Werner (2014) analysed the network engagement of 379 entrepreneurs in Germany. Their study concluded that the highest value to entrepreneurs lay in the cultivation of meaningful relationships with a group of ‘essential ties’ (as opposed to striving for the power-networking approach of reaching out at surface level to maximise contacts). Resources secured through more meaningful relationships gave a higher return on investment. Thus there is a need for commitment and trust within learning networks. Zhang and Hamilton (2010), in the context of ‘action learning sets’, highlighted how incorporating a contract outlining the role and responsibilities of participants helped to ensure engagement which in turn facilitated the development of relationships among participants. Wenger’s (1998) concept of a ‘community of practice’ became a significant dimension of our research. Communities of practice are defined as ‘learning partnerships among people who find it useful to learn from and with each other about a particular domain’ (Wenger et al., 2011, p. 9). While traditionally, networks and communities of practice have been thought of as differing structures, Wenger et al. (2011) highlighted how characteristics strongly overlap with little differentiation. In their original work which established communities of practice, Lave and Wenger (1991) defined them as having three key principles: joint enterprise, which refers to the focus of the community; mutual engagement, meaning the manner in which the community functions; and shared repertoire, referring to the capabilities produced by community members over time. The SLNIW networks, and especially the female networks, evolved over time to become communities of practice.

9.3 THE CONTEXT: THE RECRUITMENT AND FORMATION PROCESS OF THE NETWORKS The longitudinal study presented in this chapter is based on the SLNIW programme, which was launched in November 2008. The programme

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 172

13/12/2019 15:47



Academic support for female entrepreneurs ­173

was part-funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), building cohesion between regions in the EU-28, through the INTERREG IVA Ireland‒Wales Programme 2007–2013. It involved two universities working together, one in South East Ireland and the other in West Wales. The collaborative academic team in Waterford Institute of Technology (South East Ireland) and Aberystwyth University (West Wales) devised an in-depth, longitudinal study to facilitate understanding of: (1) what attracts entrepreneurs to engage with business learning networks; (2) what encourages entrepreneurs to remain engaged with business learning networks; (3) whether there are gender differences in how networks form and perform; and (4) whether cultural differences have an impact on the formation and performance of networks. The focus in this chapter is on the formation and performance of the female networks in comparison to other networks. In February 2009, the SLNIW research team’s first activity was to gather and review previous research in order to design the SLNIW network process. This exercise allowed the team to devise their approach to network formation and development, and to set the parameters for participant eligibility. The preliminary research involved investigating network formation, the benefits of networks, the manner in which network members learn, and how entrepreneurs learn. The research established that learning in most networks is non-active and non-focused, and that most people attend network events primarily ‘to be seen’ or to make contact with others. To ‘learn from’ was secondary. Accordingly, a new approach and methodology of imparting knowledge to, and between, entrepreneurs and owner-managers of micro-enterprises and SMEs was needed. Thus the programme team concentrated on developing a creative and innovative approach to establishing sustainable, self-learning networks. However, bringing people together just to network alone was not a solution; rather it was to bring owner-managers of micro-enterprises and SMEs together to learn from each other: to learn how to maximise resources, to instil and maintain creativity and innovation in their respective organisations, to compete in global markets, and to grow and sustain their respective enterprises. The ultimate goal of SLNIW’s innovative approach was to assist microenterprise and SME owner-managers to identify their own and their organisations’ training and development needs in order to increase levels of innovation and creative capacity, and hence competitiveness, locally and globally. One essential aspect of the SLNIW learning networks was the direction by the participants with support from SLNIW, to determine their own training and development needs. This approach was unusual for the educational institutions involved in the programme, which are used to leading training and development programmes as opposed to being led by industry. The result of this approach was focused and timely learning

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 173

13/12/2019 15:47

174

Gender, science and innovation

that was implementable in the participating businesses immediately and meaningfully. As the learning networks were participant-led, the only academic input was to equip the micro-enterprise and SME owner-managers with the tools and guidance to assist them to develop holistic learning plans for their enterprises, through utilising the expertise of established business owners within their network. 9.3.1  Recruiting Participants Critical to the success of SLNIW was that the recruitment process focused on selecting participants who appreciated the advantages of learning from each other and were willing to share their experiences, talents and resources for the benefit of their fellow participants. This type of transfer of learning is appropriate in a business learning network, as exposure to expertise and experiential knowledge and support enhances an entrepreneur’s ability to learn quickly. However, it was made clear that sharing knowledge and experience and working together takes time, energy and commitment to build relationships and trust. Therefore the selection criteria to become a member of one of the SLNIW networks were: ●● ●●

●●

●● ●● ●●

The business had to be a wholly owned Irish or Welsh micro-­ enterprise or SME based in South East Ireland or West Wales. The applicant (person committed to attending the network sessions) needed to be the owner-manager or senior decision maker in their organisation. The business needed to have been trading for at least three years (this was to ensure that all applicant enterprises had already passed through the start-up ‘valley of death’, and were experienced and established at the time of joining the networks). There should be at least one other employee in their organisation. The owner-manager (applicant) must demonstrate clearly that they have the desire to grow their enterprise. Potential participants needed to state clearly their commitment to the network engagement process and to agree to allocate appropriate time to the process.

Recruitment was initially performed using: the programme website; distribution of brochures to relevant enterprise support organisations; seminars to launch the programme and recruitment campaign; advertising in newspapers and on radio stations; and presenting at relevant workshops, conferences and network events. However, after three months, the number of

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 174

13/12/2019 15:47



Academic support for female entrepreneurs ­175

applications was extremely low. Therefore it was decided to change tactics and use direct contact. This was both time-consuming and expensive, but it was effective. Once it was clearly explained to entrepreneurs and owner-managers what the SLNIW network process was about, they became interested. A major advantage to this was that the process gave the SLNIW team an insight into participants and their businesses. This helped in allocating businesses into the different networks. The net result was that an additional 82 entrepreneurs and owner-managers applied for the last 36 places in the networks. Due to the demand, the number of participants per network was increased. 9.3.2  Difficulty in Recruiting Female Entrepreneurs An unforeseen aspect of recruitment was the difficulty in recruiting women to join the all-female networks. Potential participants had been asked to state which network they would prefer to join, with the vast majority of applicants preferring the mixed-gender networks. Accordingly, many applicants were assigned to all-male or all-female networks. With a couple of exceptions, the males had little problem with joining an allmale network. They were more concerned about having a good industrymix. But by complete contrast, the vast majority of females were initially very unhappy to join an all-female network, and many female applicants refused to take part in the programme if they were assigned to the allfemale network. Reasons expressed included: ●● ●● ●● ●● ●●

They already belonged to an all-female network. They wanted the diversity of a mixed-gender network. They did not want to be classified as a female business person. They did not want to be segregated. They did not want to join a network to talk about hair, makeup and babies.

It was difficult to identify female-led businesses, as business ownership is not categorised by owner or founder gender. Also, there are typically fewer women business owners than men business owners (Fitzsimons and O’Gorman, 2010). Another difficulty was finding female-led businesses that fit the recruitment criteria. In fact, the only female academic entrepreneur to spin-out of Waterford Institute of Technology was ineligible to participate, as her company had only been founded the year before the SLNIW networks were recruited, and thus her company did not meet the ‘must be at least three years old at the point of network recruitment’ selection criterion.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 175

13/12/2019 15:47

176

Gender, science and innovation

9.3.3  Network Construct There were approximately 200 applications from owner-managers of micro-enterprises and SMEs, from which a total of 104 participants (57 male, 47 female) were recruited across the six networks. The participants came from a diverse range of businesses such as: (1) technology ‒ including information and communication technology (ICT), software, renewable energy, and research and development (R&D) enterprises; (2) services ‒ including education and training, consultancy and designing enterprises; and (3) manufacturing ‒ including hardware manufacturing, engineering and food production enterprises. Heretofore the vast majority of research studies on network construct, formation and performance had participants from a single industry sector. The breakdown of business types by network revealed a majority of services-based businesses for the female networks (61 per cent in Ireland and 75 per cent in Wales), with more balanced sector distribution across the male and mixed networks. 9.3.4  Starting the Network Process The three objectives of SLNIW were to: (1) develop networks to become self-directing, self-facilitating and self-perpetuating; (2) research, observe and analyse how these networks formed, evolved and performed; and (3) observe the influence of gender on the formation, development and ­performance of the networks. Each of the networks underwent a ­formation and development process designed by SLNIW (see Figure 9.1). The structure was designed to equip network participants with the skills for the networks to become sustainable and self-facilitating. Accordingly, induction included skill-building in the areas of: Creative and Innovative thinking; Team Building and Group Dynamics; Communications and Managing Conflict; Change Management; and

Induction Phase – 5 facilitated meetings

Observed Self-Facilitation Phase – 11 meetings

Self-Sustaining networks

Source:  O’Neill (2016).

Figure 9.1  SLNIW network formation and development process

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 176

13/12/2019 15:47



Academic support for female entrepreneurs ­177

Sustainable Development. This phase lasted five months (one day per month); and then, after these five facilitated structured meetings, the networks became self-facilitating. All participants were requested to attend all five ‘facilitated meetings’ during the Induction Phase, especially Team Building and Group Dynamics. The all-female network participants in Ireland mostly took part in all five. Members of this network engaged with and gained most from the Team Building and Group Dynamics facilitated meeting. This contributed to the successful performance of the Irish all-female network compared with all the other networks. The longitudinal study lasted for a period of three years with three phases, as illustrated in Figure 9.1.

9.4  STUDYING THE SLNIW NETWORKS The academic research team administered an online survey to indigenous micro-enterprise and SME owner-managers in South East Ireland and West Wales. Approximately 5000 surveys were issued. The total number of valid, usable responses was 305 (6 per cent) (52 per cent from Ireland, 48 per cent from Wales; 53 per cent male and 47 per cent female). The majority of respondents (61 per cent) were owner-managers, with 56 per cent of businesses being limited companies (39 per cent had a turnover of less than €100 000 pa). The general perception was that networking, and in particular business networks, is a positive force for individuals and regional development. Women expressed considerably more interest in networking than men (64 per cent of females were involved in a network compared to only 36 per cent of males). Females (16 per cent) were more likely to belong to a gender-specific network than males (1 per cent). Irish business owners (61 per cent) are more likely to belong to a network than Welsh ones (37 per cent). However, a higher proportion of Welsh respondents, 23 per cent, belonged to informal networks, compared to 14 per cent of Irish respondents. Business networks were the most popular type of network, with international networks the least popular. Regardless of gender or nationality, the main reason expressed for joining networks was to ‘make business contacts’. Other reasons expressed for joining networks were: ●● ●● ●●

The time and money saved in getting up-to-date data related to statutory regulations and employment law. The contact with peers and other owner-managers. A reduction of the feeling of being isolated and being alone.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 177

13/12/2019 15:47

178 ●●

Gender, science and innovation

Knowing that others in business are facing exactly the same problems; and learning from their experiences.

As regards their interest in SLNIW, 95 per cent of Irish respondents said they would take part, compared to 77 per cent of Welsh; 91 per cent of women and 83 per cent of men said they would take part in SLNIW. Irish business owners expressed more interest in taking part in the SLNIW networks than Welsh business owners. SLNIW then engaged in a three-year mixed-method longitudinal research study of the six learning networks. Some of the data collection and observations continued beyond the lifetime of SLNIW itself. Clear understanding of the differences in the development of the gender-specific networks compared with the mixed-gender networks and between the allfemale and all-male networks emerged. During the course of the study, each network met once a month for an average of three hours, observed by two SLNIW team researchers. After the first five facilitated sessions, all sessions were essentially self-facilitated. The observation process was as unobtrusive as possible, the researchers being aware of the potential pitfalls associated with close observations of people in groups in ‘their natural environment’. Observers did not interact with members of the network. Any questions raised or any need for guidance for networks and their members were handled by other members of the SLNIW team. During network meetings, the observers were neutral, impartial and nonengaging with the network members. The longitudinal data gathered are shown in Table 9.1, with the quantity of observations and data collection points presented in Box 9.1. Various stages of development of the networks were covered, from the initial induction sessions through to network maturity. Changes in network dynamics and performances were seen to evolve over time. The survey and questionnaire data provided a broad background, while the in-depth interviews, and particularly the direct participant observations, facilitated an appreciation of the depth of engagement of network participants and the extent to which gender and regional culture influenced the formation, development and performance of the networks.

9.5 THE POSITIVE EFFECTS OF LEARNING NETWORKS FOR FEMALE ENTREPRENEURS AND OWNER-MANAGERS Initial concerns about being a member of an all-female network faded with time. The participants of both female networks began working together

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 178

13/12/2019 15:47



Academic support for female entrepreneurs ­179

Table 9.1  Overall data-gathering methods Method

Purpose

Pre-start interviews

Interviews conducted to determine selection of potential applicants Observation of every network meeting Evaluations of individual network meetings by participants (i.e., agenda, network session evaluation and relevance, communication with network participants since previous meeting including mode and purpose of communication Questionnaire completed by network participants every six months (covering change/development of business, staff and employment, learning, advantages and disadvantages of network, profit, turnover, growth, constraints and motivations) Focus group for each network conducted at last observed network meeting Participants self-reported measures on a range of topics including trust, personality and commitment 32 semi-structured interviews

Observation Monthly evaluations

Six-monthly questionnaire

Focus groups Self-reported measures Semi-structured interviews

Source:  O’Gorman and Fuller-Love (2011).

BOX 9.1 METHODS EMPLOYED TO GATHER RESEARCH DATA Data Collection 350 hours of direct participant observation data. 104 initial interviews with participants. 19 exit interviews. 32 in-depth semi-structured interviews with participants at two time points. 46 personality inventories completed by participants. 170 questionnaires collected at six-monthly intervals. 223 monthly evaluation forms completed by participants.

very quickly, with strong bonds established. This strong connectivity distinguished the two female networks from the other networks and was recognised, admired, appreciated and even envied by the other networks

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 179

13/12/2019 15:47

180

Gender, science and innovation

in both countries. However, a dilemma did emerge in the Irish network concerning the appropriateness of discussing female-specific topics including family responsibilities; this did not surface in Wales. This reluctance to feel entirely comfortable in an all-female network, though low-key, permeated the Irish female network. Such a scenario is well known in the female entrepreneurship literature. A critical finding from the SLNIW research was the importance of routine, network ethos and the network’s adopted structures and procedures. These had a positive impact on network performance. Table 9.2 tabulates the routine, ethos, structures, processes and outcomes of each of the six networks studied. The table also states the ‘network status’ as of 31 December 2015 (more than two years after receiving any direct support and guidance from the SLNIW team). There was very positive engagement in the female network in Ireland throughout. A good structure led to the keen focus on learning and action in their networking activities. The female networks were managed with routine structures and processes and were more successful than those networks meeting on an ad hoc basis. The female network in Wales was slower to adopt routine but did so within a year; thereafter its network dynamics improved greatly. While, formally, the Welsh female network ceased to meet, strong business collaborations were formed between members of this network and they continued to work together (as of end December 2015). However, while structure and routine are facilitative for sustaining network activities, keen planning is required to ensure that there is still value derived from network engagement. Or, as was the case for the male network in Ireland, the network would not be sustainable without intervention (the amalgamation, in this case, of the three Irish networks). Female entrepreneurs were motivated to engage with learning networks for information-sharing and knowledge exchange. The focus on learning for female entrepreneurs in this study demonstrated the suitability of the learning network ethos. Female participants were more positively disposed toward learning as their motivation for engagement. In Ireland, 70 per cent of female participants were motivated for learning (this was 55 per cent for male participants). In Wales, 70 per cent of female participants were motivated for learning (as compared to only 27 per cent of male participants). Females were also more inclined to use networks to access new ideas, with 60 per cent of female participants in Ireland citing this (compared to 36 per cent of their male counterparts). In Wales the ratio was 57 per cent females compared to 45 per cent males. The fact that the majority of female participants entered into the network process enthusiastic about learning and accessing new ideas meant that the female participants were

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 180

13/12/2019 15:47

­181

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 181

13/12/2019 15:47

Routine

Same day, date, venue every month

Same day, date, venue every month

Same day, date, venue every month

Varied; routine from 11th month

Network Type

Female Ireland

Male Ireland

Mixed Ireland

Female Wales Support and learning Initially lacking structure; more formal with time; required SLNIW extension to motivate

Loosely structured with moderate planning Organised and structured with strong planning

Learning

Learning

Organised and structured with strong planning

Structures and processes

Learning, action and support

Ethos Network participants gleaned great value from the network and after significant discussion and organisation of facilitator to handle the process, agreed to amalgamate with the other Irish networks After 18 months, the network decided that it could only be sustainable if amalgamated with the other two Irish networks Committed network with two new members integrated successfully; open to the amalgamation of the networks as put forward by the Irish male network There was a strong core of nine participants in this network who were primarily motivated to engage to support one another; after initial SLNIW withdrawal, meetings were sporadic but the extension period motivated the group to continue for a time

Outcomes

Table 9.2  Overview of impact of structures and processes on sustained engagement

Still meeting as amalgamated group engaging in the same routine Still meeting as amalgamated group engaging in the same routine No longer meeting formally (ceased in August 2012)

Still meeting as amalgamated network engaging in the same routine

Network status as of 31 December 2015

­182

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 182

13/12/2019 15:47

Source:  O’Neill (2016).

Varied

Varied; routine from 11th month

Male Wales

Mixed Wales

Routine

Network Type

Table 9.2  (continued)

Learning and support

Learning

Ethos Initially lacking structure; more formal with time; issues with membership numbers Lacking structure and focus

Structures and processes

Ceased meeting as a network before end 2012; three participants attended training provided by SLNIW after cessation No longer meeting after support was withdrawn (May 2012)

Core of six members in this network who engaged well together but they lacked structure and focus and the group naturally fell away with no official cessation Network core reduced to six from very early in the process; there were two significant business developments within this network which occurred following feedback from their network peers

Network status as of 31 December 2015

Outcomes



Academic support for female entrepreneurs ­183

more open to the concept of learning networks. All participants initially favoured the mixed network option, except for one female participant. The vast majority had preconceived perceptions that female networks would focus on ‘makeup and babies’ and not business. However, the evidence from this research is that the all-female networks ‘meant business’ and outperformed the all-male and mixed-gender networks. It became apparent during the induction period that clarity of network purpose was significant. Initially the purpose of the networks was not clear to all participants. This is associated with the high levels of withdrawal from the networks (almost a third of the participants recruited had either limited or no engagement with the networks). In the first set of interviews (N 5 17), one year into network engagement, the lack of understanding of the purpose of the networks became clear. Only one interviewee was positive about their original understanding of what the networks were about. Furthermore, exit interviews conducted with withdrawing participants showed confusion in their respective networks. However, the induction period of the network formation process, focused on developing the skills to ensure that participants could gain value from their engagement, had helped some of the participants. Bessant and Tsekouras (2001) highlighted the requirement for learning network participants to have a specific learning need in mind. Thus, understanding and committing to the network purpose is paramount to positive network engagement. The female networks proactively defined their purpose and ensured that their network activities were aligned. This was a response to the concern that their network would be less effective than the mixed networks; the female networks therefore aggressively sought value, action and accountability from their engagement. It was noted that discussions on network purpose were revisited regularly by the female network in Ireland. This built solid foundations for network sustainability, as their networks were committed to ensuring their activities were kept in line with what they wished to achieve. After a year of network engagement, participants completed a ‘personality inventory’ and rated their engagement on a series of loyalty and attraction measures (see Figure 9.2). The female network in Ireland ranked highest on seven of the 11 measures and was the network most assured of sustainability (‘here to stay’). The two male networks ranked the lowest on sustainability with the male network in Wales particularly certain that their network would not continue. The female network in Ireland developed a very successful network environment for participants, as outlined in Figure 9.2. A successful learning network seeks to create an environment of openness, support, trust and reciprocity. The female networks in this study did this; as a result

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 183

13/12/2019 15:47

184

ay

d

o et er

H

Fi

lls

a

N

ct

St

io

ee

n

s fa

Im

pr

ov

em

en

C

ol

to

ve

ro

th

ya Lo

er

lty

n tio

bo la

a d

ec

om

m

en

at R

ra

al

ie Fr

w et N

V

k or

ity un m G

tis

Mixed Wales

Sa

Male Wales

Mixed Ireland

ue

Female Wales

Male Ireland

nd

Female Ireland

re

om C

Pe

rf

or

m

an

ce

Gender, science and innovation

Source:  O’Neill (2016).

Figure 9.2  Loyalty and attraction measures for each network participants benefited from valuable engagement. The female network in Ireland had the most success in developing its environment, with the outcome that participants still continued to meet five years after network formation. Ultimately, this network uniquely became a community of practice (see Table 9.3). In this study, the female learning networks were shown to outperform their mixed-gender and male-only network counterparts to realise significant value for the participants involved and their businesses. The female network in Ireland becoming a community of practice was achieved through commitment to action, value, learning and hard work, fostered through an environment of openness, sharing and trust. The researchers believe that a major contributory factor to their attitude, behaviour and successful performance was their much higher attendance at the five ‘facilitated meetings’ sessions during the Induction Phase, especially the Team Building and Group Dynamics sessions.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 184

13/12/2019 15:47



Academic support for female entrepreneurs ­185

Table 9.3  C  haracteristics of network environment in each SLNIW network Network

Accountability Peer-to-peer Learning engagement

Support

Sharing

Trust

Female Ireland Male Ireland

High Moderate

High High

High Moderate

High Moderate

High Moderate

Mixed Ireland Female Wales

Moderate None Observed Low

High High

High High

Moderate High

High High ‒ for some participants High High

High

Moderate

Low

Moderate

Moderate

Low

Moderate

Moderate

Moderate

High – Moderate for some participants

Male Wales Mixed Wales

High High

Source:  O’Neill (2016).

9.6 CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS This research demonstrated that it is possible to design a learning network model that can be used in the development of self-perpetuating, selflearning, self-directed, sustainable networks (O’Gorman and Fuller-Love, 2011). These networks can be local, regional, national or international. In addition, although the SLNIW networks are specifically business networks, the basic principles underpinning this network model can be used in any network situation, where people wish to come together in a self-directed learning environment and are prepared to take responsibility for the management of their network in order to learn and generate new knowledge in a cost-effective and efficient manner. Our findings support those of McGowan et al. (2015). In our opinion, learning networks, such as the ones developed, represent a positive, supportive networking environment of benefit to all entrepreneurs and owner-managers but especially to female entrepreneurs and female ownermanagers. Within this study, initially only one participant elected to be part of the female network but, despite this, the female entrepreneurs’ networks worked very well together, shared knowledge, supported each other and gained value from their networks. However, while the female networks were effective, the learning network ethos applied in the mixedgender networks yielded the most positive network context. Thus female

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 185

13/12/2019 15:47

186

Gender, science and innovation

entrepreneurs benefit from having extra support afforded by the learning network ethos, while still networking within a mixed-gender group. A clear example of the benefits of learning network support is characterised by business survival rates during the most recent worldwide recession. During the SLNIW programme (2008‒2011), the average rate of business failures in Ireland was 14 per cent and in Wales it was 12.9 per cent per annum (SLNIW, 2012). However, none of the participants who fully engaged with the SLNIW networks closed their businesses during this time frame. Furthermore, engagement with the business learning networks resulted in positive business development outcomes for the majority of participants. These outcomes included 55 per cent of participants increasing the products and services of their company, 32 per cent increasing turnover, 66 per cent of participants increasing employment, 50 per cent increasing their number of customers, 51 per cent expanding into new markets, 31 per cent reducing costs as a result of advice received in network meetings, and 37 per cent receiving additional (unsolicited) business from being involved with the business learning networks, through referrals from their peers (SLNIW, 2012). Once the other networks saw and adapted their network environments in line with the Irish female network, their levels of effectiveness and performance also increased. It is evident that business learning network environments present a conducive environment for the development of female entrepreneurs and their enterprises. However, the success of networks is based on relevant conditions being in place to ensure the successful formation and development of the network. In order to ensure clarity of purpose, it is recommended that a contract of engagement be drawn up for participants to ensure that they are fully committed to the process and understand what is involved in developing a successful learning network. Fostering an environment of openness, trust, sharing and learning requires dedication of time and knowledge resources that participants must be willing to give and share. The study presented in this chapter contributes to existing research and practice in several ways: (1) it furthers the understanding of the developmental dynamics of networks, especially all-female networks; (2) it provides significant data regarding the impact of gender on network development; (3) the longitudinal methods applied in this research enhance the existing body of research on network formation and development, especially as regards networks for female entrepreneurs and owner-managers; (4) this research provides insight into how female entrepreneurs view their business; and (5) also this research clearly demonstrates that female entrepreneurs have a different way of focusing on and attaining resources they need to develop their enterprises, compared to their male counterparts. In summary, the lessons learned from this research about how female

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 186

13/12/2019 15:47



Academic support for female entrepreneurs ­187

entrepreneurs develop business learning networks to attract resources to improve the sustainability of their enterprise can be used by: (1) enterprise support agencies to develop and deliver enterprise start-up and growth programmes specifically for female entrepreneurs; and (2) academics in higher education institutions who wish to develop and provide femalefocused entrepreneurship programmes at undergraduate and postgraduate levels.

REFERENCES Alasoini, T. (2008). ‘Building better programmes: learning networks in the promotion of workplace innovation’, International Journal of Action Research, 4(1), pp. 62‒89. Bennett, R. and Dann, S. (2000). ‘The changing experience of Australian female entrepreneurs’, Gender, Work and Organization, 7(2), pp. 75‒83. Bessant, J. and Tsekouras, G. (2001). ‘Developing learning networks’, AI and Society, 15(1/2), pp. 82‒98. Brush, C.G., Bruin, A. and Welter, F. (2009). ‘A gender-aware framework for women’s entrepreneurship’, International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 8‒24. Fielden, S., Davidson, M., Dawe, A. and Makin, P. (2003). ‘Factors inhibiting the economic growth of female-owned small businesses in North-West England’, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 10(2), 152‒66. Fitzsimons, P. and O’Gorman, C. (2010). Entrepreneurship in Ireland 2008 – Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: The Annual Report for Ireland, Dublin: Dublin City University Business School. Forret, M.L. and Dougherty, T.W. (2004). ‘Networking behaviors and career outcomes: differences for men and women?’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), pp. 419‒37. Friedan, B. (2010). The Feminine Mystique, London: Penguin Classics. GEM (2018). Global Entrepreneurship Report 2017/18. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association (GERA). https://www.gemconsortium.org/report/50012. Gulati, R., Nohria, N. and Zaheer, A. (2000). ‘Strategic networks’, Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), pp. 199‒201. Henry, C. and Kennedy, S. (2002). ‘In search of a new Celtic Tiger’, in Butler, J. (ed.), New Perspectives on Women Entrepreneurs, Hong Kong: Information Age Publishing, pp. 203‒24. Hoang, H. and Antoncic, B. (2003). ‘Network-based research in entrepreneurship: a critical review’, Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2), pp. 165‒87. Kutzhanova, N., Lyons, T.S. and Lichtenstein, G.A. (2009). ‘Skill-based development of entrepreneurs and the role of personal and peer group coaching in enterprise development’, Economic Development Quarterly, 23(3), pp. 193‒210. Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991).  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lawton Smith, H., Romeo, S. and Virahsawmy, M. (2012). ‘Business and professional networks: scope and outcomes in Oxfordshire’, Environment and Planning A, 44(8), pp. 1801‒18.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 187

13/12/2019 15:47

188

Gender, science and innovation

Linehan, M. (2001). ‘Networking for female managers’ career development: empirical evidence’, Journal of Management Development, 20(9), pp. 823‒9. McGowan, P., Cooper, S., Durkin, M. and O’Kane, C. (2015). ‘The influence of social and human capital in developing young women as entrepreneurial business leaders’, Journal of Small Business Management, 53(3), pp. 645‒61. Miller, N.J., Besser, T.L. and Riibe, J.V. (2007). ‘Do strategic business networks benefit male- and female-owned small-community businesses?’, Journal of Small Business Strategy, 17(2), pp. 53‒74. O’Gorman, B. (2007). ‘MNEs and new enterprise creation: Do MNEs have a direct impact on the amount of new indigenous high-tech start-ups in Ireland?’, Hendon: Middlesex University. O’Gorman, B. and Fuller-Love, N. (eds) (2011). Learning by Linking: A Guide to Establishing Sustainable Business Learning Networks, Cork: Oak-Tree Press. O’Neill, A. (2016). ‘Understanding what motivates entrepreneurs to engage and sustain engagement with learning networks over time: a longitudinal study’, PhD Thesis, Waterford Institute of Technology. http://repository.wit.ie/3185/. Provan, K.G., Fish, A. and Sydow, J. (2007). ‘Interorganizational networks at the network level: a review of the empirical literature on whole networks’, Journal of Management, 33(3), pp. 479‒516. Semrau, T. and Werner, A. (2014). ‘How exactly do network relationships pay off? The effects of network size and relationship quality on access to start-up resources’, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 38(3), 501‒25. SLNIW (2012). ‘A study of the regional economic development impact of the Sustainable Learning Networks in Ireland and Wales (SLNIW) project in South East Ireland and West Wales’, Centre for Enterprise Development and Regional Economy, Waterford Institute of Technology, Ireland. Tell, J. and Halila, F. (2001). ‘A learning network as a development method: an example of small enterprises and a university working together’, Journal of Workplace Learning, 13(1), 14‒23. Villesèche, F. and Josserand, E. (2017). ‘Formal women-only networks: literature review and propositions’, Personnel Review, 46(5), 1004‒18. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wenger, E., Trayner, B. and de Laat, M. (2011). ‘Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: a conceptual framework’,  Ruud de Moor Centrum, The Netherlands. Williams, T. (2005). ‘Cooperation by design: structure and cooperation in interorganizational networks’, Journal of Business Research, 58(2), 223‒31. Zhang, J. and Hamilton, E. (2010). ‘Entrepreneurship education for owner-­ managers: the process of trust building for an effective learning community’, Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 23(2), 249‒70.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 188

13/12/2019 15:47

10. Gender perspective in mentoring relationships: a case study of GENOVATE@UNINA Ilenia Picardi and Maria Carmela Agodi 10.1 INTRODUCTION Despite European and national policies promoted in recent decades to foster gender equality in science, data still show significant differences between career paths of women and men scientists (European Commission, 2000, 2002, 2011). The latest analysis in the She Figures 2018 report (European Commission, 2019) shows that women researchers are still significantly under-represented in the most advanced positions of scientific careers, notwithstanding the growing percentage of them in total research staff in Europe. In 2016, the average EU-28 percentages of women academic students (54 per cent) and women graduates (58 per cent) were higher than the percentage of men, whereas among doctoral students and postdocs women represented less than half of the total: 48 per cent and 46 per cent, respectively. In academic careers, women account for 46 per cent of researchers, 40 per cent of associate professors and only 24 per cent of full professors. The low presence of women in top-level positions is even more evident in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields, where the percentage of women among full professors falls to 15 per cent (European Commission, 2019). Furthermore, gender studies focusing on science and technology have highlighted how the lack of women in science strongly affects both the epistemological definition of scientific knowledge and research and innovation results. A gendered perspective may have a high impact on scientific research, while intervening in its priorities, directions and methods (Harding, 1986, 1998; Haraway, 1996; Wajcman, 2000, 2007; Barad, 2003, 2007; Garforth and Kerr, 2009; European Commission, 2013). To enhance gender equality in science, many universities and research centres have launched a variety of strategies and actions aimed at strengthening the presence of a gendered perspective in research and innovation. Among these initiatives, m ­ entoring ­189

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 189

13/12/2019 15:47

190

Gender, science and innovation

programmes are specifically aimed at supporting women’s career trajectories. This chapter reports the findings of an evaluation study of the GENOVATE@UNINA mentoring programme implemented at the University of Naples in the years 2014‒2016 to sustain womens’ careers in academia. Section 10.2 reviews the literature on mentoring that has inspired the evaluation of our project of mentoring from a gendered perspective. Feminist critiques of traditional mentoring programmes and the resulting proposal of a bifocal approach to mentoring by Jennifer de Vries (2010) have stimulated both aims and design of the evaluation project of mentoring described in section 10.3. Finally, the conclusions stress the relevance of the introduction of the gender dimension in the evaluation framework so as to consistently assess the effectiveness of mentoring programmes and their transformative impact on institutional culture and structures.

10.2 FROM INSTRUMENTAL TOWARDS TRANSFORMATIVE MENTORING: A CONTINUUM OF APPROACHES In its traditional version, within work organisations, mentoring is defined ‘as a relationship between an older, more experienced mentor and a younger, less experienced mentee for the purpose of helping and developing the mentee’s career’ (Ragins and Kram, 2007). Differences exist between informal mentoring, grounded in personal and individual activities, and formal mentoring, developed with organisational assistance or intervention (Ragins, 1999). Within organisations, mentoring programmes were first introduced as a lever for the socialisation of younger cohorts within the organisational culture. Later on, to avoid apparent biases in mentoring functioning, special programmes were developed with the explicit aim of supporting under-represented groups, such as women and racial minorities (particularly popular in the United States; see Ragins, 1996). In the last decades, mentoring programmes have been popular as a strategy to address gender inequality in work organisations and especially within academia.1 Very different approaches to mentoring have been developed and recognised within the literature on mentoring. To describe the wide ranges of   To mention some notable examples, we can consider ADVANCE-IT as one of the most successful mentoring programmes in the United States, and eumentnet as a significant experience of a network of mentoring programmes in Europe. 1

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 190

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender perspective in mentoring relationships ­191

perspectives that can be tackled by using these programmes, the ‘mentoring continuum’ concept has been introduced and worked through. The continuum spectrum of mentoring programmes starts with the instrumental approach as one extreme, and goes forward to the developmental approach at the other end (De Vries, 2010). In the instrumental mentoring perspective, the primary task of the mentor is to assist the career of the junior colleague. Thus the mentor uses their knowledge and experience to teach and/or advise the mentee. Lately, feminist scholars have given some warnings about the pitfalls of instrumental mentoring as a strategy for attaining gender equality (Gay and Stephenson, 1998; Colwell, 1998; Zachary, 2000; Chao, 2007; Greenhaus and Singh, 2007; Lankau and Scandura, 2007; McKeen and Bujaki, 2007; Jarvis and Macinnes, 2009). They refer to instrumental mentoring as mentoring for ‘organisational fit’. From this critical perspective, this mentoring model is grounded on asymmetrical power relationships and lacks a requirement for any critical stance on the part of the mentor toward the organisation. Instrumental mentoring programmes focus strictly on women’s careers, aiming to improve performance in a performative culture, while prioritising organisational goals rather than equity goals (Devos, 2008). In other words, they assist women to manage their paths within existing parameters that fit the needs of the organisation without interfering with its gendered structures (De Vries, 2010). On the other hand, the developmental mentoring approach favours collaborative and equal relationships. The mentor’s role is similar to that of a guide, supporting the development of a critical stance by the mentee, without providing predefined answers to their dilemmas. Both partners are involved in a learning process aimed at developing greater insight into the organisational structure and its functioning. This relationship is marked by less power distance than the instrumental approach, and is centred on the mentee needs (Colwell, 1998). In developmental mentoring, both the mentor and the mentee are involved in a reflective process aimed at fostering exploring attitudes, risk-taking choices and autonomy (Gay and Stephenson, 1998). However, both these approaches to mentoring programmes focus on women as their target group. In fact, they aim at increasing gender equality, while trying to overcome what is conceptualised as women’s weakness, rather than addressing the gendered organisation of academic institutions. In other words, according to some feminist scholars, mentoring programmes for women are a way of ‘fixing the women’ (Schiebinger, 2008). Their primary goal is to increase the number of women in science and the participation of women in academia; as a result, while individual women may become more successful within academic organisations, the overall situation for women as a whole may remain unchallenged and unchanged.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 191

13/12/2019 15:47

192

Gender, science and innovation

In this perspective, mentoring schemes could induce adaptive behaviours rather than triggering transformative practices towards gender equality in academia. Despite good intentions, the priority given to the short-term agenda (that is, support to individual women) over the long-term agenda (a transformation project for the organisation as a whole) causes the gender equality intent to be easily lost from sight (Cockburn, 1989, 1991; Ely and Meyerson, 2000; Meyerson and Fletcher, 2000). To give a response to these critical arguments to mentoring as a tool towards gender equality, Jennifer de Vries (2010) developed the ‘bifocal approach’, to highlight the need for mentoring programmes to focus on a dual mandate: ●● ●●

To develop women’s careers (according to the ‘fixing the women’ approach). To work for organisational change (according to the ‘fixing the institutions’ approach).

By playfully drawing on the notion of bifocal spectacles, the bifocal approach opens up the possibility of focusing on both the close-up vision (the shorter-term solution of developing individual women) and the distance vision (the need for longer-term organisational change). Accordingly, de Vries revised the mentoring continuum, adding the transformative approach to the spectrum of mentoring programmes. An explicit focus on the mentors and their development – as an awareness-raising process – is the main point of difference between the bifocal approach and other women-only mentoring approaches, almost exclusively focused on the outcomes for the mentee. The inclusion of the mentors as actual partners and not just as facilitators, in the change process fostered within the relationship, becomes the answer to the quest for making the mentoring process a truly developmental one.

10.3 THE PILOT MENTORING PROGRAMME GENOVATE@UNINA AS A CASE STUDY Critical analysis of the literature on mentoring led us to ask our main research question, focusing on: what conditions make it possible for mentoring to be part of a transformative programme towards gender equality in academia? In order to answer this research question, we analysed as a case study the implementation process of a Pilot Mentoring Programme at the University of Naples Federico II (UNINA) in Italy. This programme was one of the leading actions of the Gender Equality

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 192

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender perspective in mentoring relationships ­193

Action Plan (GEAP) implemented at UNINA within the framework of the FP7 project GENOVATE (‘Transforming Organisational Culture for Gender Equality in Research and Innovation’) funded by the European Commission within the FP7 programme (topic: SiS.2012.2.1.1-1 ‘Ensuring equal opportunities for women and men by encouraging a more genderaware management in research and scientific decision-making bodies’). GENOVATE2 (January 2013‒June 2017) was an action-research project coordinated by the University of Bradford and involving seven European universities. The project was based on the implementation of GEAPs in six universities with different experience with gender equality mainstreaming approaches, varying institutional and disciplinary backgrounds, and located in different national contexts. Each partner addressed the areas for intervention covered by the project ‒ (1) recruitment, progression and research support; (2) working environment, work‒life balance and institutional culture; and (3) standards and diversity in research excellence and innovation ‒ through individually tailored GEAPs and a contextualised approach supported by an ongoing knowledge-exchange system and shared learning for all partners. Thanks to this competence sharing among GENOVATE consortium members, UNINA gained the opportunity to learn from the experience of the University College Cork (UCC) team in mentoring practices. The ‘Through the Glass Ceiling’ project, implemented at UCC in 2012, emerged as an essential paradigm for the design of a mentoring programme suitable for the Italian university (O’Grada et al., 2012). The Pilot Mentoring Programme GENOVATE@UNINA3 can be considered a remarkable and innovative experience in the Italian academic context, where there is no tradition of mentoring programmes. While the practice of providing informal support to junior researchers by established professors is widespread in Italian universities, formal mentoring was introduced as a recognised practice in some business companies but not in universities, where – on the contrary – impersonal evaluation criteria are recently becoming more legitimised than any personal mediated practice. The introduction of a women-only mentoring programme as a tool for contrasting gender inequality in academia was, therefore, a specific challenge. Just lately, within the framework of actions implemented by other sister projects, other Italian universities have implemented some types of mentoring programmes. The University of Trento (GARCIA project) 2   Further information on the GENOVATE project is available at http://geno​ vate.eu/. 3   The scheme of the programme is reported in the next section. Further information is available on the website of the project, www.genovate.unina.it.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 193

13/12/2019 15:47

194

Gender, science and innovation

produced some online mentoring tutorials (Adam et al., 2016), and the University of Pisa within the TRIGGER project implemented an experimental mentoring programme for early career researchers in academia (Biancheri et al., 2015). However, the GENOVATE@UNINA mentoring programme is unique in Italy in being a women-only programme. 10.3.1  Why a Mentoring Programme for Women in Academia? Quantitative and qualitative analyses of scientific careers show the persistence of both vertical and horizontal segregation patterns in Italian academia (Picardi, 2017, 2018). The Pilot Mentoring Programme at the University of Naples aimed to address the disciplinary barriers and the differences in career advancement between women and men revealed by those analyses. Figure 10.1 presents the scissor diagrams comparing different trends in women’s and men’s scientific career advancement in Italian 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

MEN – Italian Academic

WOMEN – Italian Academic

MEN – UNINA

WOMEN – UNINA

Postdoctoral research fellow

Fixed-term assistant professor

Assistant professor

Associate professor

Full professor

Note:  IT academia 5 Italian academia. Source:  Authors’ elaboration of MIUR data, 2015 (Picardi, 2017). Data provided by MIUR (Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università, e della Ricerca – Italian Ministry of Education, Universities, and Research) are available at http://dati.ustat.miur.it/ dataset/2015-personaleuniversitario.

Figure 10.1  S  cissors diagram of career paths in Italian academia and at University of Naples Federico II

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 194

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender perspective in mentoring relationships ­195

academia and at UNINA. The UNINA data follow the national trends: notwithstanding women being more than half of the postdoctoral research fellows (51 per cent in Italian academia, 54 per cent in UNINA), they are under-represented in top-level positions, representing only 22 per cent of Italian academia and 20 per cent in UNINA of all full professors. Comparison among macro-sectors – science and technology, life sciences, humanities and social science – indicates the presence of considerable gender segregation across disciplines; this goes together with very different trends of the career progression curve within the three macrosectors (Figure 10.2). In particular, in the science and technology field, the percentage of men is always significantly higher than the percentage of women along the entire career path, during both the low-level position (65 per cent) and the top-level position (85 per cent) stages (Figure 10.2a). While there are obvious age differences between the populations and thus the diagrams are subject to a need to correct for different populations at different times, the overall trend is obvious. Nonetheless, as is the case for humanities and social sciences, where the gender gap is less pronounced at the early career level, a robust vertical segregation becomes evident as the scissors widen along the career path, whereby women holding a full professor position only reach 29 per cent (Figure 10.2b). Further statistical analysis revealed a new phenomenon connected to the enhanced precariousness resulting from new rules in the enrolment of academic researchers in Italy. The existence of a sort of ‘glass door’ effect at the entrance of the academic system was identified. It filtered access to tenured positions, making it more difficult for women than for men (Picardi, 2019a, 2019b). The main goals of the Pilot Mentoring Programme at UNINA were the following: 1. To help women to identify their own career goals and expertise needs and to help them focus on these objectives (instrumental goal). 2. To promote change (at the cultural, behavioural and organisational levels) designed to remove academic practices reproducing gender inequality in science (transformative goal). 10.3.2  Scheme and Implementation of the Programme The programme started in January 2014; its implementation required several steps: 1. Design of a Pilot Mentoring Programme scheme fitting the Italian and, more particularly, the UNINA contexts.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 195

13/12/2019 15:47

196

Gender, science and innovation 90%

85%

80% 70%

65%

71%

70% 61%

60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10%

35%

39% 30%

29%

MEN – Science and Technology Fields

15%

WOMEN – Science and Technology Fields

a 0% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40%

71%

58% 52%

53%

48%

47%

42%

55%

45% 29%

30% 20% 10%

b 0%

MEN – Humanities and Social Science Fields WOMEN – Humanities and Social Science Fields

90%

80%

80% 70% 60% 50% 40%

63%

68% 51%

50%

49%

50%

32%

37%

30% 20% 10% 0%

c

20%

MEN – Science Life Fields WOMEN – Science Life Fields Postdoctoral research fellow

Fixed-term assistant professor

Assistant professor

Associate professor

Full professor

Source:  Authors’ elaboration of MIUR data, 2016 (Picardi, 2018).

Figure 10.2  S  cissors diagram of science and technology fields; life sciences fields; humanities and social sciences fields

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 196

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender perspective in mentoring relationships ­197

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Involvement of UNINA stakeholders. Recruitment of mentors and mentees. Training of mentors and mentees. Matching of mentors with mentees. Scheduling mentoring activities. Scheduling and organising initiatives (workshops, seminars, debates, world cafés, and so on) aimed at increasing gender awareness in research. 8. Monitoring the programme implementation and evaluating the ­mentoring scheme. The ‘Through the Glass Ceiling’ project implemented at UCC in the years 2010‒2012 inspired the Pilot Mentoring Programme design. This reference model was slightly modified to fit the local context and to address the specific needs of women researchers at UNINA. The proposed scheme was a woman-to-woman mentoring (women-only) programme. The design established a maximum number of participants (20 mentors and 20 mentees) for this pilot project, selected through a call open to researchers within all disciplinary areas present at UNINA. Gender statistical analysis suggested considering women researchers at the first stages of their careers as the privileged targets of the programme. The programme was a 12-month scheme and participants were encouraged to meet every two months while the programme lasted. The scheme was oriented to combine aspects of both developmental and transformative mentoring approaches, according to de Vries’s (2010) definitions. According to the first perspective, the programme encouraged relationships aiming to enhance career development and reflective attitudes by the mentee. According to the second perspective, the programme was part of the equality gender agenda promoted by the GENOVATE@UNINA project and was an overt action aimed at reforming systemic structures and working rules in the UNINA academic organisation. Moreover, during its life cycle, the project team promoted events and initiatives designed to increase gender awareness in science and to strengthen a network of women committed to structural change in academia. The involvement of the UNINA top management and other stakeholders in the project was essential to fine-tune the design of the programme delivered by the project team, while taking into account the institutional needs, and at the same time gaining support at all the stages of implementation and promotion of the programme. They were involved in the Institutional Advisory Board (IAB) and in the Gender Equality Change Action Team (GeCATs) of GENOVATE@UNINA, which actively contributed to the ongoing design and implementa-

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 197

13/12/2019 15:47

198

Gender, science and innovation

tion of the programme. The IAB was composed of representatives of UNINA management, administrative personnel and stakeholders of GENOVATE@UNINA. Their involvement ensured the effectiveness of the project implementation. The GeCATs were ad hoc teams created within each department to support the programme goals. The engagement of GeCATs helped the capillary spread of the programme in the UNINA departments. An intensive recruitment campaign, supported by the institutional communication channels and by pre-existent women networks in academia, promoted the programme. Communication actions included advertisements on institutional websites, in-house media and mailing lists involvement, dissemination of press releases, participation of the team members in media broadcasts (radio, newspaper interviews, and so on), and the organisation of a launch event held with the involvement of UNINA management. In the recruitment stage, possible participants answering the call were invited to specify their scientific area and department, motivations and expectations from programme participation, their needs as mentees, and their expertise as mentors. This information was essential for both the applicants’ selection and the matching processes. Indeed, selection criteria for applicants were based on the assessment of: 1. Motivation towards the development of an academic career (on the part of aspiring mentees). 2. Concrete willingness to support women in science (on the part of aspiring mentors). 3. Interest in engaging in collective reflective activities about gender issues in science (for both mentors and mentees). Moreover, the analysis of mentees’ needs included the following four main goal areas that were also crucial in guiding the matching between mentor and mentee: (1) research system; (2) scientific career; (3) networking; and (4) gender issues in science. The matching process was aimed at: 1. Addressing the training needs of the mentees. 2. Maximising the use of the resources made available by the mentors. 3. Promoting relationships of critical support, rather than coaching relationships. 4. Providing a safe place to manage possible conflicts and negotiations in workplace relationships. 5. Providing an objective uninvolved perspective by the mentor. 6. Avoiding possible conflicts of interest.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 198

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender perspective in mentoring relationships ­199

To guarantee these conditions, the matching process had to respect two simple rules: 1. To match mentors with expertise in the goal area of the respective mentees. 2. To match mentors with mentees from similar disciplinary areas but from different departments. The mentoring programme was reinforced by several training activities on mentoring, on the relevance of the gender dimension in science, on leadership development, and on fundraising for young researchers. 10.3.3  The Assessment Process The programme was supported by ongoing monitoring activities aimed at: 1. Sustaining mentors and mentees in their participation in the programme. 2. Identifying strengths and criticalities of the mentoring scheme in the UNINA context. 3. Recognising conditions for transforming a project of individual support into a project contributing to organisational change. The evaluation process was designed and implemented as a learning process connected to the implementation of the mentoring programme, within the GENOVATE@UNINA team. This inevitably influenced the reading of the collected data, but at the same time it allowed for monitoring the programme in real time and for modifying the design of the project based on the analysis of the data collected, the feedback provided by the participants, and their needs as they became more explicit, step by step with the progress of the mentoring project itself. Furthermore, the purpose of the evaluation was not to define the quality or otherwise of the project carried out, but rather to understand under what circumstances this project works and for whom. The monitoring process involved a variety of methodological tools, such as questionnaires, interviews, focus groups and the editing of a programme logbook. The analysis of the collected data4 was aimed at understanding the results of the mentor‒mentee relationships, and at identifying relevant

4   Text and discourse analyses supported by the software Nvivo were used to classify, code, compare, explore and analyse the gathered data.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 199

13/12/2019 15:47

200

Gender, science and innovation

variability dimensions in personal biographies, contexts and mechanisms producing a variety of possible outcomes. In accordance with the realist approach to programme evaluation (Pawson and Tilley, 1997), monitoring the programme was essential to assess whether and how – through which mechanisms and with which outcomes – our mentoring scheme was capable of triggering change in well-defined contexts of application. The interpretation of results that emerged from this evaluative case study has been the starting point for designing the extension of the programme to the whole University of Naples Federico II, and its sustainability as a tool for promoting structural change in Italian academia. To assess the functioning of the pilot mentoring scheme, our study refers to the analytical mentoring model developed by Pawson (2004). According to this theoretical framework, the working of a mentoring programme can be represented in terms of possible shifts in status experienced by the mentees, thanks to the mentoring relationship. The different status conditions may be (but are not necessarily) identified with institutional roles. Shifts between them are conceived as triggered by ‘reference group’ mechanisms. These are intended to operate through mentors’ interventions, addressed to change mentees’ social identity commitments (Pawson, 2004; Rosenberg, 1979; Merton, 1968). The model is specifically sociological, focusing on mechanisms connected to the construction of social identity and group loyalty, rather than on individual psychology. In the case of mentoring for gender equality in academia, the social identity of participants can be defined by their academic and institutional position (full member, fixed-term researcher, postdoc, PhD candidate), and in terms of aspirations towards a scientific career. According to this framework scheme, a status change occurs: 1. Either, in the case of career advancement (achievement mentoring), such as a promotion from a fixed-term position toward a full member position, from a postdoc position toward a tenure-track position, and so on; or the achievement of a relevant academic goal by the mentee, such as becoming the principal investigator of a scientific project (horizontal shift in the grid of Figure 10.3). 2. Or in the case of change in the mentee’s reference group (identity mentoring); in this case, the mentee develops greater self-confidence, and more clear and defined aspirations in her academic career (vertical shift in the grid of Figure 10.3). When the two shift processes occur together, engagement mentoring is involved. It can be represented as a shift along the diagonal line of the grid in Figure 10.3.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 200

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender perspective in mentoring relationships ­201 Mentor’s reference group

Academia full member

Fixed-term researcher/ principal investigator

PhD students, postdoc

Mentee’s reference group

Advocacy

1

2

3

Aspiration

Autonomy

4

5

6

Resilience

Aversion

7

8

9

Resistance

Figure 10.3  Pawson grid adapted to pilot mentoring programme GENOVATE@UNINA According to Pawson, mentors also bring their social identity into the mentoring relationship; they can use benefits and advantages stemming from their status to support their mentees in different ways. In some cases, the mentor is deemed to act as an active role model for the mentee (advocacy); in other cases, the mentor considers herself as a bundle of resources (expertise, support, networks, and so on) made available to the mentee, while the decision about what to do with them is up to her (autonomy). The literature on mentoring also acknowledges a darker side of mentoring (aversion) that occasionally can occur when mentors practice distancing and manipulative behaviour (Scandura, 1998; Feldman, 1999; Eby et al., 2000). We address the questions: Can women-only academic mentoring programmes work to produce change towards gender equality? And for whom, and in which circumstances, do they work? In the considered case study, the conditions for the success of the instrumental and the transformative goals of the mentoring programme lie in the combination of different circumstances. In Table 10.1, it is possible to look at the number of shifts registered in the UNINA Pilot Mentoring Programme, according to Pawson’s scheme typology. Levels I, II and III in the first column refer, respectively, to the shifts 3 → 1, 2 → 1, and 3 → 2 (in case of achievement mentoring, second column of the table) and 9 → 3, 6 → 3, 9 → 6 (in case of identity mentoring, third column of the table) in the grid of Figure 10.3. Even if quantitative analysis with the low number of participants involved in this pilot programme cannot be assumed to be statistically significant, the figures reported in this table give some indications about the mechanisms at work. During the year of experimentation of the pilot mentoring programme GENOVATE@UNINA, four of the 20 mentees achieved important goals such as obtaining a fixed-term researcher contract or a principal investigator position in a scientific research project, experiencing a positive change in their contractual positions. Although the participation in the mentoring

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 201

13/12/2019 15:47

202

Gender, science and innovation

Table 10.1  N  umber of shifts registered in the Pilot Mentoring Programme GENOVATE@UNINA Shift level

Achievement mentoring

Identity mentoring

0 0 4 16

3 3 8 6

I II III No shift

Note:  Shift level definition: Level I 5 shift 3 → 1 in the Pawson scheme of Figure 10.3; Level II 5 shift 2 → 1; Level III 5 shift 3 → 2.

project cannot be considered as a decisive factor in achieving these results, it helped these mentees effectively to focus on the target. In fact, they all recognised the mentoring project as a source of self-esteem and further motivation. The most important results were associated with researchers having obtained their PhD several years before, showing a high level of identification with the scientific community and a clear focus on their path to inclusion within it. However, an increase in the level of identification with the scientific community and a clearer focus on related goals were achieved thanks to the mentoring relationship. According to our observations, the relationship with the mentors turned out to be a unique opportunity for the mentees and a positive condition for increasing confidence in their own abilities and resilience. Overall, 14 mentees out of 20 recorded a change on the identity dimension, which has strengthened their identification with the scientific community and their ability to aspire to belong to it, concretely. It is interesting to note that these mentees belong to mentor‒mentee couples who were also shown to have been developing, during the programme, growing awareness about gender issues in science. Conditions for achieving results on the identity dimension can be assessed in relation to the time horizon of the mentees and the attitude through which the mentor managed the relationship. On the one hand, younger women researchers (PhD students or early postdocs) display a very short-term temporal perspective, together with difficulties in projecting themselves and their research beyond the completion of the PhD or postdoc certification. Sociological literature has widely documented this phenomenon as a peculiar feature of younger cohorts in a context of change and experience fragmentation in the transition to adult life (Leccardi, 2013, 2014). In these cases, some mentors activated strongly challenging prompts, leveraging their experience to make visible, even to

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 202

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender perspective in mentoring relationships ­203

younger and less aware women researchers, the traps and hidden obstacles they could meet on their paths. The mentoring relationship provided young women researchers with essential tools giving them a clearer picture of the present situation and a higher capacity to face autonomously the dilemmas and choices about their future. In other cases, where younger mentees did not find strongly challenging prompts in the mentoring relationship, they had little meaningful benefit, at least within the time horizon that the monitoring and the first evaluative analysis of the programme were able to investigate. In rare cases, the mentor’s attitude turned out to be marked by selectivity (rather than neutrality or proselytism). Based on her experience, one of the mentors suggested a change in the programme’s target, to be addressed in future mainly to women researchers who had already demonstrated their academic and scientific ‘vocation’. That same attitude was, however, questioned by one of the mentees, who was no longer as young as others, and had been dealing with precariousness for years. From her point of view, highly selective messages are useful when targeted at younger aspirants, while their effects become extremely demotivating and pragmatically irrelevant at a later stage. Table 10.2 shows the availability of different kinds of resources put into the relationship by the mentors involved in the programme. According to Pawson (2004), positional and attitudinal resources are more determinant of status changes (horizontal shifts), while cognitive and affective resources are more influential in changing identity status (vertical shifts). While Table 10.2 does not provide information on the quality and quantity of resources involved, qualitative analysis of interviews shows that commitment and availability in supporting mentees varied considerably from one mentor to another. Other requirements on the side of the mentor for a fruitful relationship are a good listening attitude and marked awareness of women’s difficulties in science. These features are essential to establishing the empathy required for building trust and loyalty relationships, but they Table 10.2  R  esources activated by mentors in the Pilot Mentoring Programme GENOVATE@UNINA Activated resources Positional resources (advocacy) Attitudinal resources (coaching) Cognitive resources (direction-setting) Affective resources (befriending)

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 203

17  4  8 12

13/12/2019 15:47

204

Gender, science and innovation

are not a­ vailable by default, even in a mentoring programme developed to support women in research. Indeed, one of the most relevant findings, from data analysis, was the relative lack of awareness about the relevance of the gender dimension in science. This was quite surprising, considering that all participants were involved as volunteers in a programme apparently addressing women in science. Gender blindness shows up in different ways and involves different aspects of gender relevance in science. The majority of women involved in the programme identify women’s difficulties in science only with issues related to the work‒life balance; in some particular cases, differences between women and men in science are almost denied, except in recognising the energy and time spent by women on family and caring activities. The gendered structure of academia is hardly acknowledged by women who are working in it daily. Some of them are aware that decision-making positions are preferentially allocated to men, at the expense of women with the same rank and skills; other women have a definite feeling of the difficulties they had to overcome to gain scientific recognition and authority. However, in most of the cases, these feelings are understated compared with personal conditions, and are not interpreted as structural implications of the gendered structure of the institution. Gender blindness in science also appears in the lack of awareness about the way in which the gender dimension affects science content, as well as its epistemological definition, and its applications in technological innovation. Several women scientists conceive science and research as neutral, unencumbered and gender-free, rather than gendered. Science is not perceived as socially constructed and context-dependent, but rather as the result of an objective and neutral method that does not leave room for gender differences in the knowledge building process. In addition, our results highlighted two dimensions of gender blindness: the disciplinary dimension and the time dimension (Agodi and Picardi, 2016). The first dimension refers to disciplinary affiliation. Gender blindness is noticeably variable in relation to the ‘spontaneous’ epistemology (Althusser, 2000) of scientists. It is significantly more marked in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) than in those of the human and social sciences (HSS). Lack of opportunities for sharing experiences, by researchers working in different disciplines, contributes to reproducing ‘spontaneous’ epistemologies and, in some cases, mutual distancing and stereotyping processes (Rhoton, 2011). The second dimension refers to time and its contribution to making sense. The diachronic dimension of biographical and work experience development strongly affects gender blindness. From the retrospective analysis of the mentors’ biographies, as well as through comparison between mentors

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 204

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender perspective in mentoring relationships ­205

Gender blindness

STEM

Disciplinary dimension

HSS

Diachronic dimension

Grade C

Grade A

Source:  Agodi and Picardi (2016).

Figure 10.4  Double dimension in gender blindness in science and mentees positioning, gender awareness is most likely to arise in the most advanced stages of scientific careers. It slowly increases as time goes on, while it is almost absent during the PhD years. The time dimension of gender blindness shows gender awareness arousal, in science and academic life, to be a slow and delayed process (Figure 10.4). 10.3.4  Introducing the Gender Dimension in the Mentoring Programme Evaluation The results detected through the monitoring of the programme clearly pointed to the relevance of gender awareness as a crucial dimension in accounting for the mentoring programme results. This dimension, however, was not included in the programme theory of mentoring relationships, as sketched in Pawson’s (2004) realist synthesis of mentoring programmes evaluation, although the realist perspective underlying that theoretical model had proven to be extremely useful in detecting its relevance. Reference to the gender dimension may not be thought as obvious when assessing actions aimed at reducing gender inequality. On the contrary, the explicit introduction of the gender dimension in the evaluation of gender equality policies is a fundamental step, as reported by literature focusing on gendered evaluation (Batliwala and Pittman, 2010; Krizsan and Lombardo, 2013; Brisolara et al., 2014; Bustelo et al., 2015; Bustelo, 2017). In particular, this is fundamental to prevent policies and interventions aimed at improving women’s positions in academia and research from witnessing the ‘evaporation’ (Longwe, 1997) of the gender ­dimension

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 205

13/12/2019 15:47

206

Gender, science and innovation

in their implementation and in the evaluation of obtained results; a process that Coleman and Rippin (2000) call ‘losing gender’. Accordingly, we proceeded from monitoring to evaluating the pilot programme, further elaborating on the theoretical-conceptual framework to account for the spectrum of meanings through which the scientific community, as the preferred reference group, was perceived within the mentoring relationship (Figure 10.3). By introducing the gender dimension in the programme theory, the interpretation of the expected change is enriched with two further components. The first one concerns change in the degree of awareness of the relevance of that dimension in the scientific-academic field. The second one deals with the acquisition of transformative agency, on the different levels of production of gender inequalities: interpersonal, cultural and organisational-structural. According to this framework, change can be detected in two directions: 1. Gendered identity (vertical shift in the grid of Table 10.3). For research beginners, a scientific career may be one possibility among others; however, scientific achievement requires anticipated socialisation to the scientific community rules. For a beginner, the scientific community is something to aspire to belong to, when entering a scientific-academic career path. It may be conceived of in abstract terms, as a community of peers, oriented to universalistic and genderneutral rules. It may be a concrete community, perceived as gendered and worthwhile changing. Table 10.3  An evaluation scheme for transformative mentoring Transformative capacity Organisational/ structural level

Gender identity

Cultural level

Level of daily interaction and interpersonal relationships

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 206

Reference group from which one’s own identity derives Scientific community recognised as non-neutral, but gendered ‘Neutral’ scientific community Scientific community is not the reference group from which identity derives

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender perspective in mentoring relationships ­207

2. Transformative capacity (horizontal shift in the grid of Table 10.3). Changes of status along this dimension imply the development of new attitudes in academic action, involving concrete negotiation of gender practices within the academy. These actions can be played out on an interpersonal level (for example within research groups), on a cultural level or on the organisational level. These changes and position shifts contribute to create a framework for the interpretation of processes involved in, and generated by, the mentoring relationship. This framework integrates the gender dimension within Pawson’s (2004) scheme, making it consistent with the bifocal approach (De Vries, 2010; De Vries and van den Brink, 2016) and extremely useful from a heuristic point of view, when evaluating gender equality-oriented mentoring schemes’ transformative potential. It is particularly noteworthy that expected change does not only affect mentees (the only object of intervention in Pawson’s programme theory) but also involves all participants in the mentoring relationship: mentors and mentees. The focus shift in the programme evaluation is, in this perspective, entirely consistent with the same shift implied in the bifocal approach. It is crucially different from a mentee-centred approach: change triggered in the mentors, by the programme experience, is strategic for the transformative effectiveness of the intervention (De Vries and van den Brink, 2016). Table 10.4 reports the number of shifts acted by mentors and mentees in the Pilot Mentoring Programme, according to the proposed evaluation scheme, as represented in Table 10.3. The majority of the detected shifts concern the identity dimension, involving 18 mentees and 15 mentors and, for a significant part of them (8 mentees and 3 mentors), it resulted in recognition of the gendered features of the academic organisation. Table 10.4  N  umber of shifts registered in the Pilot Mentoring Programme GENOVATE@UNINA Shift level

Gendered identity mentoring

Transformative mentoring

6 (2 m; 4 M) 15 (6 m; 9 M) 12 (10 m; 2 M) 7 (2 m; 5 M)

5 (3 m; 2 M) 6 (1 m; 5 M) 10 (5 m; 5 M) 19 (11 m; 8 M)

I II III No shift

Note:  Shift level definition: (scheme of Table 10.3). For gendered identity mentoring: level I 5 shift 3 → 1; level II 5 shift 2 → 1; level III 5 shift 3 → 2; for transformative mentoring: level I = shift 9 → 3; level II = shift 6 → 3; level III = shift 9 → 6. N (n m; n M): N = total number of shifts; n m = number of mentees’ shifts; n M = number of mentors’ shifts.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 207

13/12/2019 15:47

208

Gender, science and innovation

Transformative shifts were very challenging and involved almost half of the mentoring programme participants (9 mentees and 12 mentors). It is interesting to correlate the contextual change experienced by the mentees with their mentors. In fact, both mentor and mentee got involved, in some ways, in changing perspective, and they are now able to widen their own observation field through the comparison with each other. The non-linear, neither one-dimensional nor unique, character of the change emerges in a very clear way through new analysis of the interviews and the focus groups. Even when scientific knowledge continues to be understood as the domain of an abstract, universalistic method of inquiry, the experience of mentoring produces transformational effects at the identity level, at the cultural level and at the daily interactional level. While focusing on the mentees’ career goals, both mentors and mentees become change actors in their academic context.

10.4 CONCLUSION In recent literature, mentoring programmes have come under the lens of gender studies theorists and practitioners as organisational interventions, previously categorised as ‘fixing the women’, potentially providing the foundation for transformative change if reinterpreted and implemented according to the bifocal approach (De Vries and van der Brink, 2016). The contribution of this chapter lies in proposing and testing a gendered evaluation framework to monitor and assess the effectiveness of the bifocal approach in remodelling mentoring schemes in specific contexts of implementation, in order to move theory and practice forward. The mentoring analytical model proposed by Pawson proves to be a useful and theory-driven general scheme to evaluate a mentoring programme, but it is actually gender blind. However, according to feminist scholars, the assessment from a gender perspective is a crucial step for gender mainstreaming policies and strategies (Batliwala and Pittman, 2010; Krizsan and Lombardo, 2013; Brisolara et al., 2014; Bustelo et al., 2015; Bustelo, 2017). Introducing the gender dimension in the evaluation scheme was a necessary step to make our evaluation process consistent with the dual purpose of our mentoring programme, as inspired by the bifocal approach. Under the focus of gendered evaluation, three different change processes emerged as the potential outcomes of transformative mentoring: ●●

Change in cultural processes, involving cultural schemas: narratives, symbols, images.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 208

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender perspective in mentoring relationships ­209 ●● ●●

Change in power relationships, involving resource distribution: time, laboratory access, authorship recognition, grants, and so on. Change in structural practices, involving cultural schemas and resources.

The introduction of the gender dimension in the programme evaluation highlighted the arousal of participants’ gender awareness as one of the greatest successes of the pilot programme. In the words of the mentees, this awareness opened up to them a new perspective, regardless of their position, and strengthened self-confidence in responding to professional challenges. As the bifocal approach suggests (De Vries and van den Brink, 2016), ‘the building of gender insight – the capacity to see relational and systemic gendering, and the capacity to act – is key to any movement towards the transformative on the part of the individual’. The introduction of the gender dimension in the evaluation design reveals how the raising of gender awareness, in mentorship relations, works as a key condition for the effectiveness of the programme, widening the mentees’ horizons and generating collective empowerment and self-confidence. The establishment of a network of women in the university, sharing gender awareness and willingness to force change in academic institutions, was a second accomplishment. This is, in turn, an inescapable condition for collectively generating ‘the capacity to disrupt structures, norms and relations of gender, linking individual (agency) and organizational change (structure)’ (ibid.). To summarise in a short list the outcome of the evaluation process described above, among the positive elements of the experimented mentoring model are the following: 1. Mentees were supported to project themselves through wider timescapes than those of the ‘extended present’. 2. Segregation mechanisms of sense-making by disciplines, generations and cohorts were discarded by experience-sharing within the programme. 3. A gender equality-sensitive women’s network in academia was created. 4. Negative side-effects, induced by the new progression system in academic careers and the related evaluation criteria (individualisation of career pathways, enhanced precariousness in early career steps, negative competition) were overtly confronted by and counterbalanced by solidarity-raising effects. As critical elements, we should consider the following:

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 209

13/12/2019 15:47

210

Gender, science and innovation

1. The programme’s duration was too short to make a significant impact on the career path (one year is not enough). 2. Tools offered to inexperienced mentors during their training were inadequate to allow them to effectively support the mentees. 3. The mentor’s role model may be a too-strict one in the mentoring relationship when gendered models in science as a variability source are at stake. 4. The richness and plurality of resources offered by the pool of mentors, taken together, was not entirely experienced as such by the mentees, who were only focused on the individual relationship with their individual mentors. The following unfavourable contextual conditions hampered the full realisation of the programme potential: 1. The structural negation of the relevance of the gender dimension in science is a corollary of the adherence to the universalistic model of science. 2. Academic organisations as greedy institutions subtract time for reflective practices. 3. The research evaluation system works by disincentivising anything that is not formally evaluated; participation in the mentoring programme is challenging and time-consuming and may be discouraging for those who are not already motivated. However, the introduction of the gender dimension in the programme evaluation scheme allowed one of the most significant results of the mentoring project implemented at UNINA to become apparent: a more focused and enacted awareness of the constitutive genderedness of the scientific and academic field. This is a clear success, when we consider the high level of gender blindness characterising the programme participants at the time of their first involvement. A self-selected group of women researchers, they had voluntarily chosen to participate in the project, overtly placed within a gender equality action plan in academia. Yet, they were the living evidence of how difficult it is to escape the double-bind effect of recognising the genderedness of academia, whilst complying with its presumed universalistic predicaments, to be enrolled and accepted as full members. That notwithstanding, the mentoring programme was able to affect their attitudes and agency, acting as a concrete and viable transformative practice.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 210

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender perspective in mentoring relationships ­211

REFERENCES Adam, H., Vincke, C. and Dubois-Shaik, F. (2016). Gender-sensitive mentoring programme in academia: A design process (No. 13). GARCIA Working Papers. http://garciaproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/GARCIA_working_ papers_13.pdf. Agodi, M.C. and Picardi, I. (2016). Il mentoring come progetto trasformativo della struttura di genere dell’accademia: il programma pilota di GENOVATE@ UNINA. La camera blu. Rivista di studi di genere, 15, 136‒70. Althusser, L. (2000). Ideology interpellates individuals as subjects. In P. du Gay, J. Evans and P. Redman (eds), Identity: A Reader (pp. 31‒8). London: SAGE. Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801‒31. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, NC, USA and London, UK: Duke University Press. Batliwala, S. and Pittman, A. (2010). Capturing change in women’s realities: A critical overview of current monitoring and evaluation frameworks and approaches. Toronto: Association for Women’s Rights in Development (AWID). http:// www.awid.org/publications/capturing-change-womens-realities (accessed 5 May 2016). Biancheri, R., Cervia, S. and Declich, G. (2015). Fostering structural changes through gender equality strategies. InGenere. Gender, Data, Policies. http:// www.ingenere.it/en/articles/fostering-structural-changes-through-gender-equal​ ity-strategies. Brisolara, S., Seigart, D. and Gupta, S. (2014). Feminist Evaluation and Research: Theory and Practice. New York: Guilford Publications. Bustelo, M. (2017). Evaluation from a gender+ perspective as a key element for (re)gendering the policymaking process. Journal of Women, Politics and Policy, 38(1), 84–101. Bustelo, M., Espinosa, J., Faúndez, A. and Weinstein, M. (2015). Guide to including a gender perspective in VOPEs: Innovating to improve institutional ­capacities. European Evaluation Society. https://evalpartners.org/sites/default/ files/files/Gender_Guide_def_en.pdf (accessed 28 April 2017). Chao, G.T. (2007). Mentoring and organizational socialization. In B.R. Ragins and K.E. Kram (eds), The Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research, and Practice (pp. 179–96). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications. Cockburn, C. (1989). Equal opportunities: the short and long agenda. Industrial Relations Journal, 20(3), 213–25. Cockburn, C. (1991). In the Way of Women: Men’s Resistance to Sex Equality in Organizations. New York: ILR Press. Coleman, G. and Rippin, A. (2000). Putting feminist theory to work: Collaboration as a means towards organizational change. Organization, 7(4), 573–87. Colwell, S. (1998). Mentoring, socialisation and the mentor/protégé relationship. Teaching in Higher Education, 3(3), 313–24. Devos, A. (2008). Where enterprise and equity meet: The rise of mentoring for women in Australian universities. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 29(2), 195–205.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 211

13/12/2019 15:47

212

Gender, science and innovation

De Vries, J.A. (2010). A realistic agenda? Women only programs as strategic interventions for building gender equitable workplaces. PhD dissertation, Graduate School of Business, University of Western Australia, Perth. http://allthesi​ sonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/A-realistic-agenda-Women-only-prog​ rams-as-strategic-interventions-for-building-gender-equitable-workplaces.pdf. De Vries, J.A. and Van den Brink, M. (2016). Transformative gender interventions: Linking theory and practice using the ‘bifocal approach’. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 35(7/8), 429–48. Eby, L.T., McManus, S.E., Simon, S.A. and Russell, J.E.A. (2000). The protégé’s perspective regarding negative mentoring experiences: The development of a taxonomy. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 57(1), 1–21. Ely, R.J. and Meyerson, D.E. (2000). Theories of gender in organizations: A new approach to organizational analysis and change. Research in Organizational Behavior, 22, 103–51. European Commission (2000). ETAN Report on Women and Science: Science Policies in the European Union: Promoting Excellence through Mainstreaming Gender Equality. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/ publication/4d456ad0-abb8-41a2-9d21-dbd5381f1f4c/language-en. European Commission (2002). National Policies on women and science in Europe: A report about women and science in 30 countries. Retrieved from http:// library.mpib-berlin.mpg.de/toc/ze_2003_46.pdf. European Commission (2011). Structural change in research institutions: Enhancing excellence, gender equality and efficiency in research and innovation. http:// ec.europa.eu/research/sciencesociety/index.cfmfuseaction public.topic&id=1406. European Commission (2013). Gendered innovations: How gender analysis contributes to research. http://ec.europa.eu/research/sciencesociety/document_lib​ rary/pdf_06/gendered_innovations.pdf (accessed 16 June 2014). European Commission (2019). She Figures 2018: Statistics and Indicators on Gender Equality in Science, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Feldman, D. (1999). Toxic mentors or toxic protégés? A critical re-examination of dysfunctional mentoring. Human Resource Management Review, 9(3), 247–78. Gay, B. and Stephenson, J. (1998). The mentoring dilemma: Guidance and/or direction? Mentoring and Tutoring, 6(1/2), 43–54. Garforth, L. and Kerr, A. (2009). Women and science: What’s the problem? Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State and Society, 16(3), 379‒403. Greenhaus, J.H. and Singh, R. (2007). Mentoring and the work‒family interface. In B.R. Ragins and K.E. Kram (eds), The Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research, and Practice (pp. 519–44). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications. Haraway, D. (1996). Modest witness: Feminist diffractions in science studies. In Peter Galison and David J. Stump (eds), The Disunity of Science: Boundaries, Contexts, and Power (pp. 428–42). Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press. Harding, S. (1986). The Science Question in Feminism. New York: Cornell University Press. Harding, S.G. (1998). Is Science Multicultural? Postcolonialisms, Feminisms, and Epistemologies. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Jarvis, C. and Macinnes, J. (2009). Maintaining or challenging the status quo? Mentoring and coaching in context. Engendering Leadership: Through Research and Practice Conference, University of Western Australia, Perth.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 212

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender perspective in mentoring relationships ­213

Krizsan, A. and Lombardo, E. (2013). The quality of gender equality policies: A discursive approach. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 20(1), 77–92. Lankau, M.J. and Scandura, T.A. (2007). Mentoring as a forum for personal learning in organizations. In B.R. Ragins and K.E. Kram (eds), The Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research, and Practice (pp. 95–122). London: SAGE. Leccardi, C. (2013). Temporal perspectives in de-standardised youth life course. In W. Schröer, B. Stauber, A. Walther, L. Böhnisch and K. Lenz (eds), Handbuch Übergänge (pp. 251–69). BeltzJuventa: Weinheim. Leccardi, C. (2014). La sfida delle nuove soggettività femminili. Le giovani donne di fronte alla crisi del futuro. In M. T. Mori, A. Pescarolo, A. Scattigno and S. Soldani (eds), Di generazione in generazione. Le italiane dall’Unità a oggi (pp. 389–404). Roma: Viella. Longwe, S.H. (1997). The evaporation of gender policies in the patriarchal cooking pot. Development in Practice, 7(2), 148–56. McKeen, C.A. and Bujaki, M.L. (2007). Gender and mentoring. In B.R. Ragins and K.E. Kram (eds), The Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research, and Practice (pp. 197–222). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications. Merton, R.K. (1968). Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: Simon & Schuster. Meyerson, D.E. and Fletcher, J.K. (2000). A modest manifesto for shattering the glass ceiling. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 126–36. O’Grada, A., Ní Laoire, C., Boylan, G., et al. (2012). Through the glass ceiling: Career progression programme and strategy for female academic and researchers. University College Cork. https://www.ucc.ie/en/media/research/iss21/Glass​ CeilingFinalOctober2012.pdf. Pawson, R. (2004). Mentoring Relationships: An Explanatory Review. London: ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice. Pawson, R. and Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Picardi, I. (2017). La dimensione di genere nelle carriere scientifiche. Naples: Fedoa Press Picardi, I. (2018). Through the glass labyrinth of science: Mapping gendering processes in academia. PhD dissertation, Mind, Gender Language, Università di Napoli Federico II. Picardi, I. (2019a). The glass door of academia: Unveiling new gendered bias in academic recruitment. Social Science, 8, 160; doi:10.3390/socsci8050160. Picardi, I. (2019b). La porta di cristallo: Un nuovo indice per misurare l’impatto di genere della riforma Gelmini sull’accesso alla professione accademica. Quaderni Italiani di Sociologia, 80, 2. Ragins, B.R. (1996). Jumping the hurdles: Barriers to mentoring for women in organizations. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 17(3), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437739610116984. Ragins, B.R. (1999). Gender and mentoring relationships: A review and research agenda for the next decade. In G.N. Powell (ed.), Handbook of Gender and Work (pp. 347–70). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. http://dx.doi. org/10.4135/9781452231365.n18. Ragins, B.R. and Kram, K.E. (eds) (2007). The Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research, and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412976619.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 213

13/12/2019 15:47

214

Gender, science and innovation

Rhoton, L. (2011). Distancing as a gendered barrier: Understanding women scientists’ gender practices. Gender and Society 25(6): 696–716. Rosenberg, M. (1979). Conceiving the Self. New York: Basic. Scandura, T.A. (1998). Dysfunctional mentoring relationships and outcomes. Journal of Management, 24(3), 449–67. Schiebinger, L. (ed.) (2008). Gendered Innovations in Science and Engineering. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Wajcman, J. (2000). Reflections on gender and technology studies: In what state is the art? Social Studies of Science, 30(3), 447–64. Wajcman, J. (2007). From women and technology to gendered technoscience. Information, Community and Society, 10(3), 287–98. Zachary, L.J. (2000). The Mentor’s Guide: Facilitating Effective Learning Relationships. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 214

13/12/2019 15:47

11. Gender and international collaborations in science and technology community building and policy agenda setting: an integrated analytic approach Connie L. McNeely and Katie Seely-Gant 11.1 INTRODUCTION Gender differences in science and technology (S&T) education, access, and productivity have become the topic of important policy debates around the world, especially in the face of calls for increasing the S&T workforce (cf. Lee and Pollitzer, 2016). Moreover, while there exists a rich and ­burgeoning literature on women in S&T fields, fundamental research remains to be done in delineating related policy processes and linking S&T  productivity and participation to policy formulation in broader contexts. Women have made important gains in S&T educational attainment and workforce representation, especially over the last three decades. However, disparities in access and bias in disciplinary environments continue to mark the S&T professional landscape, even in fields and countries in which increased numbers of women are achieving advanced S&T ­educational attainment (Blättel-Mink, 2009; AAUW, 2010; EC, 2016). As in the ‘developed’ world, such issues also are prominent in policy dialogues in countries going through socio-economic transitions (Pearson et al., 2015). Even in countries with enduring patriarchal regimes, the extension of education to women has been framed ‒ at least formally ‒ as a means for developing potential sources for S&T innovation and economic growth (Bielli et al., 2004; UNESCO, 2007, 2010; CNRS, 2004; NRC, 2011; Pearson et al., 2015), and is a prominent component of the United Nations’ previous Millennium Development Goals and current Sustainable Development Goals and of human rights more ­215

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 215

13/12/2019 15:47

216

Gender, science and innovation

­generally.1  Accordingly, the under-representation of women in S&T remains a critical matter for research and policy attention (Leggon et al., 2015; Leggon, 2018). This overall situation calls for a closer examination of factors affecting policy agenda setting and is the principal aim of the analysis presented here. The underlying idea is that related research brings attention to pertinent issues that provide direction for policy development and goals that, in this case, can be used to improve gender representation and to broaden participation in S&T fields (McNeely and Husbands Fealing, 2018). That is, research on gender disparities in S&T participation and inclusion is of particular interest here in relation to its role in informing policy development and affecting epistemic community building. More specifically, S&T gender research is considered in terms of collaborations, indicating community participation and networks relative to broader policy agenda setting and formulation processes. To that end, after a brief delineation of S&T education and workforce representation as background, underlying theoretical issues are presented as context for determining and understanding the pertinent relationships and processes that are explored. Drawing on a world polity perspective, the discussion references an understanding of gendered societal relations and globalization processes, which represent key social forces that interactively affect women’s S&T participation. Building upon these ideas, collaborative and policy processes are then detailed in terms of the meaning, production and role of S&T gender research. Collaboration is fundamental to how S&T knowledge is produced, diffused and applied within and across countries. It is in this regard that collaboration in S&T gender research is identified as a key aspect of global transformations and delineations of policy issues. Referring to supporting or placing issues on policy agendas, this approach also points to another impact of published research, in a way that is not typically engaged in collaboration or policy studies: the research itself is framed as a platform for policy agenda setting and diffusion. Indeed, ‘many researchers intend their findings to motivate processes of change and inform policy making. Although the relationships between research on gender in S&T and on policy making in these fields are more complex and slower than we would prefer, there have been important advances towards achieving this fundamental goal’ (Bonder, 2015, p. viii). In this guise, the research serves as a policy carrier or agent; the research itself can inform, inspire, and instigate policy agendas and positions.

1   http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals; http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelop​ ment.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 216

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and international collaborations in S&T community building ­217

To address this point, national and international research and collaborative relationships are explored in this study to glean insights on contexts and factors associated with influencing policy directions in a more ontological sense than is typically engaged in framing meaning and substance in policy processes. In particular, questions of policy agenda setting and S&T productivity and epistemic community building are addressed through an examination of collaborative network patterns, offering insight into the role of S&T gender research relative to socio-spatial factors and outcomes affecting collaborative relationships, participation, and inclusion.

11.2 BACKGROUND Generally under-represented in S&T fields, women’s S&T participation can vary by field, sector, and country. Women represent 29 per cent of researchers worldwide across fields, but this level can vary widely by region, as shown in Table 11.1. Latin America and the Caribbean have the highest share of women researchers at 45 per cent. In contrast, the share falls to 23 per cent in East Asia and the Pacific, and 19 per cent in South and West Asia. Moreover, there are exceptions at the country level, with one in five countries reflecting overall gender parity (UIS, 2017). Although still reflecting disparities and inequality, the representation of women in S&T has increased over time. However, this statement reflects a high level of aggregation across fields, such that discourse on women’s status in S&T can be dominated by the largest general field, the life sciences, within which women reflect near parity or higher levels of degree attainment. As such, important variations in educational and Table 11.1  Women S&T researchers by region, 2014 Area World North America and Western Europe Central and Eastern Europe Latin America & the Caribbean East Asia and the Pacific Central Asia South and West Asia Arab States Sub-Saharan Africa

Women researchers (%) 29 32 40 45 23 47 19 40 30

Source:  UIS (2017).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 217

13/12/2019 15:47

218

Gender, science and innovation

professional representation may be elided, obscuring ‘specific disciplinary contexts, functional tasks, and the socio-historical conditions that can vary markedly’ (Frehill et al., 2015, p. 3). For example, mathematics, statistics, chemical sciences, and computing are especially notable in terms of occupational sex segregation (Pearson et al., 2015; Frehill et al., 2016). Women tend to be better represented in health and life sciences, and under-represented in the physical sciences, constituting less than 25 per cent of researchers in computer science, energy, engineering, mathematics, astronomy, and physics (Elsevier, 2017; UIS, 2017). These patterns are explained in part by disparities in educational attainment, particularly at the tertiary level. In fact, women and men now attain baccalaureate degrees at generally equal levels. However, the ‘leaky pipeline’ metaphor is still quite apt at the upper levels. The gender gap widens dramatically at more advanced degree levels, with men predominating among doctorate holders and in S&T careers. Moreover, even in countries and fields with high shares of female researchers, men tend to receive better salaries and advancement opportunities (UIS, 2017; Huyer, 2015), speaking to equity issues affecting female participation and inclusion. In regard to research on women in S&T fields, the United States (US) and Europe have been dominant, as is indicated by publication output and productivity (Elsevier, 2017; UIS, 2017). However, S&T gender research is also growing in other countries, arguably reflecting globalization processes and broader recognition of gender issues and rights. As shown in Table 11.2, there has been a general expansion in amount and locational scope of S&T gender research (Elsevier, 2017). With growing cooperation and collaboration, facilitated and enhanced by increasing digitization, the global knowledge society is expanding at a rate heretofore unseen. Even with Europe and North America accounting for approximately 35 per cent each of the generation of knowledge in the world, collaboration and networks of researchers are increasing capacities for innovation and economic growth across the board.

11.3  THEORETICAL ISSUES Science and technology have long been conceptualized as founded in universal, rational, objective, and neutral knowledge generation and practice. However, a growing body of research has problematized this image, revealing clear and determinant connections with beliefs, values, and stereotypes framed in the socio-historical context in which S&T has been produced, disseminated, legitimized, and used (e.g., Drori et al., 2003). Two critical strands of research have been especially significant

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 218

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and international collaborations in S&T community building ­219

Table 11.2  S  cholarly publication output of S&T gender research in selected countries, 1996–2000 and 2011–2015 Location

Scholarly publication output 1996‒2000

2011‒2015

Number Global share Number Global share (%) (%) World Europe (EU28) United States United Kingdom Canada Australia France Brazil Japan Denmark Portugal Mexico Chile

8631 1847 4281 740 482 282 107 39 156 57 6 25 9

100 21 50 9 6 3 1 0 2 1 0 0 0

23 063 7973 7743 1907 1212 973 567 611 454 239 169 148 116

100 35 34 8 5 4 2 3 2 1 1 1 1

Change factor 2.7 4.3 1.8 2.6 2.5 3.5 5.3* 15.7* 2.9 4.2 28.2* 5.9* 12.9*

Note:  Change: * .5.0. Source:  Elsevier (2017, Figure 3.3/Table 3.1), modified.

in characterizing S&T representation and participation (cf. Pearson et al., 2015): gendered societal relations and globalization processes. These strands are engaged here as the principal framing concepts for the overall analysis, looking to collaboration and S&T gender research to inform policy agenda setting. On the one hand, gendered societal relations reflect horizontal and vertical dimensions of S&T workforce disparities and impacts and, despite apparent gains in the number of women in some S&T fields, gender bias and barriers are still the norm. Gendered perceptions have marked the S&T landscape across contexts and fields, defining what is conceived and valued as S&T knowledge, ‘demonstrating its androcentric or patriarchal biases concealed by the accepted criteria of rationality, validity, relevance, and excellence’ (Bonder, 2015, p. vi). Indeed, Gender is one of those issues that so permeates social interaction that its effects cannot be rightly captured by characterizing it simply as a separate factor in related analyses. Growing attention to research on networks and collaboration

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 219

13/12/2019 15:47

220

Gender, science and innovation

as key aspects of S&T productivity ‒ not only as outcome, but also as process ‒ reveals that it must be understood within the context of larger social, cultural, political, and economic conditions. (McNeely and Schintler, 2016, p. 75)

On the other hand, globalization encompasses processes in which S&T’s increasingly global and collaborative nature affects national labour markets and opportunities for individuals in related fields. In relation to how S&T is organized cross-nationally, these points are in keeping with a sociological institutionalist world polity perspective, emphasizing the relative place of an economy within the global system, historical conditions and the pace of change, and the capacity of individual countries to deploy resources to build an S&T enterprise, with implications for women’s participation and status (Frehill et al., 2015, p. 20; Drori et al., 2003). The world polity perspective provides a platform for understanding global relations, dynamics, and structures within a cultural framework. Some other arguments suggest that what has been experienced is a globalization of markets for commercialized products of S&T, and not processes of S&T research and innovation as such (Hickie and Hilpert, 2016). However, commodities are end products, and they do not happen outside of S&T processes and developments. S&T globalization is linked to development demands and to questions of both capabilities and rights, which can be applied particularly to women as an under-represented group. Recognizing that women’s S&T capabilities have been under-­recognized, under-developed, and under-utilized in most countries and that women can provide vital contributions to development, raising awareness of gender relations in the context of S&T-based socio-economic growth reflects two basic issues tied to the framing concepts (cf. Lee and Pollitzer, 2016, p. 5): ●●

●●

Societies and economies worldwide are gendered. Despite increased educational participation, women continue to face barriers to realizing workforce opportunities and aspirations. S&T fields and occupations are gendered, reflecting biases in knowledge production and practice, such that gender disparities can impact the quality of innovation processes and outcomes.

Dominant arguments emphasize S&T workforce capacities and, just as in the case of new technology adoption, the S&T participation of women has been regarded as a means by which countries can improve their international competitiveness. Accordingly, to achieve growth, countries will have to institute policies to overcome gender barriers to entry in related fields (Hilpert, 2016).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 220

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and international collaborations in S&T community building ­221

Note that, despite contending rhetoric, these approaches are not principally aimed at questions of rights and social justice in richer countries. Rather, they reference economic ends. Such aims might be more blurred in lesser-developed contexts in which relative values are defined interchangeably within models of socio-economic development. In this vein, social justice and equity approaches generally have been revised to reflect measureable economic and performance benefits of increasing women’s participation and inclusion (Hunt et al., 2015; Herring, 2009). Gender in this sense is both an innovation and a conceptual tool that offers insights on S&T performance and knowledge defined according to specified values and practices (cf. Longino, 1990). The importance of institutionalist thinking in this instance is reflected across and in policies aimed at, for example, ‘recruitment into pivotal positions and to important committees so that women can develop a network of contacts, access inside information about organizational politics, and gain visibility’ (Etzkowitz et al., 2010, p. 87). In this sense, gender mainstreaming offers a comprehensive policy approach to increasing the representation and inclusion of women in S&T fields, and more generally. Gender mainstreaming refers to the treatment of gender and gender perspectives as integral to the design, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of policies and programmes in all political, economic, and social spheres (UN, 1997). Note that gender mainstreaming has been promoted through various international organizations ‒ such as the United Nations, the European Union, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the International Labour Organization, and the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, to mention only a few ‒ as an issue both of rights and of development. In institutionalist terms, gender mainstreaming calls for an integrated systemic approach encompassing adaptable rationales, principles, and processes that can be applied on different levels in various contexts (cf. Lee and Pollitzer, 2016). Together, gendered societal relations and globalization processes, both understood relative to institutionalist world polity dynamics, provide a basic template for a nuanced integrated understanding and analysis of S&T gender research and effects. Bound in fundamental ways to education, epistemic and professional networks, and other such societally defined and determined features and circumstances, S&T participation and inclusion rely on socio-cultural processes and institutional dynamics and structural relations. Institutions confer identity and meaning on individual and collective social entities, their activities, and their relationships. Accordingly, the application of an institutionalist world polity frame imposes methodological and ontological consistency within and across different countries

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 221

13/12/2019 15:47

222

Gender, science and innovation

and epistemic domains that touch on policy agenda setting in relation to S&T participation and production (Drori et al., 2003). Gendered relations and the globalization of S&T research and collaboration provide the basis for networks that facilitate knowledge creation and innovation. Collaboration is an iterative process reflecting various activities, stages, and contextual features (Sargent and Waters, 2004; Sonnenwald, 2007). It is dependent on the ways in which research is organized, conducted, and located (cf. Fox and Mohapatra, 2007; Wagner, 2008), and on the topic and focus of the research. As such, S&T gender research itself operates to inform policy direction and diffusion in the world polity, and both collaboration and policy directions are fundamental to processes involved in identifying and understanding S&T gender representation and participation as critical issues requiring action.

11.4 THE COLLABORATIVE PRODUCTIVITY STIMULUS As mentioned above, collaboration is fundamental to S&T knowledge creation and to how it is diffused and applied within and across countries, and it has long been understood that factors internal to S&T practice are responsible for increased collaboration (Merton, 1973; Ben-David, 1990; Bukvova, 2010). The social organization of knowledge production is of particular note in this regard. Even with an overall growing S&T presence, women tend to have lower levels of research productivity, as indicated by publication rates (EC, 2016; Elsevier, 2017). Lower publication rates for women researchers typically are attributed to internal factors such as relatively limited access to funding, generally lower professional status and persistent biases, and less representation in terms of institutions and prestige and in senior positions, which is where the highest collaboration and publication rates are found (Huyer, 2015; Ceci and Williams, 2011). Moreover, S&T epistemic communities have been identified and operationalized through analyses of collaboration patterns and participation. As such, networks are a crucial factor in defining collaboration, with contextual relations encompassing socio-spatial links. For analytical purposes, typical characterizations of the way research is conducted is as either centralized, occurring in one location, or distributed, occurring in disparate locations. Both are matters of S&T capacity and collaborative productivity (Schintler et al., 2010; McNeely and Schintler, 2010, 2016). Given varying socio-historical dynamics in different countries and cultural contexts, expanding collaborative networks is an important consideration for assessing transformational opportunity and potential. While

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 222

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and international collaborations in S&T community building ­223

acknowledging contextualized variations, productivity levels are increasing among both women and men. However, although growth in international collaboration is occurring across the board, in relative terms women still tend to collaborate less than men. This point is particularly important since collaboration, in addition to indicating productivity as such, is the foundation and substantive mechanism for epistemic network building and participation. Still, S&T gender research itself ‘is growing in terms of size and complexity, with new topics emerging over time’ (Elsevier, 2017, p. 5). Recognizing this allows both for a more detailed understanding of the international division of labour, and for policy awareness and opportunities that can support a country in the S&T international community and in S&T engagement for socio-economic development (see Hilpert, 2016, p. 296).

11.5  POLICY ISSUES AND AGENDAS As mentioned, internationally, women comprise only a small percentage of the science and technology enterprise, signaling the crucial need for policies that encourage capacity building and bringing the development of knowledge and skills, vision and leadership, and views and aspirations to the science and technology agenda and to overall societal well-being. This situation raises questions not merely of structural adjustment but also ones of legitimation and empowerment. (Leggon et al., 2015, p. 310)

Research positing world level expressions of gender equity both as a value and as a practical means for development offers legitimizing directions for policy goals, adoption, and contextual adaptations regarding S&T gender participation. Related agenda setting is foundational for the policy process and, as an initial step, an issue must be recognized and receive attention in the first place if it is to be placed on the policy agenda. Research is critical to this process, that is, to the opening of policy windows and setting of policy agenda, formed in this case by framing the under-representation of women in S&T as a problem in need of solution, informing relevant policy approaches accordingly, and encouraging applicable political will and engagement. Taken together, a window of opportunity opens and policy action can be invoked to address the issue (Kingdon, 2011). This is the essence of policy agenda setting, including problem or issue identification, and also recognition and acceptance as such (especially in the face of gatekeepers filtering out which topics will or will not be given attention).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 223

13/12/2019 15:47

224

Gender, science and innovation

Research is especially important for policy formulation and for determining how the topic is translated for policy engagement. The development of policies and interventions aimed at increasing the S&T participation and inclusion of women relies on research prioritizing gender as a fundamental issue in the construction of S&T knowledge and practice. Accordingly, gender mainstreaming, as discussed above, is a critical means for addressing gender as a primary policy concern (Huyer, 2015). Across sectors ‒ in academia, government, and industry ‒ the creation of diversity-enabling environments to increase productivity, innovative capacity, and societal well-being is a prominent issue in policy dialogues around the world. Accordingly, these issues represent policy priorities for realizing socio-economic development. More to the point, such issues speak to the use of research in the policy process and to research focused especially on relevant areas for policy action (White et al., 2016; Michie and Cooper, 2015), including emphasis on the following topics, as discussed above: ●● ●●

●●

●● ●●

Mainstreaming gender equity in the design, development, implementation, and evaluation of S&T related policies and budgets. Strengthening accountability and mechanisms for gender equality and mainstreaming initiatives across and within government bodies constituting national S&T systems. Achieving gender balanced representation in decision-making positions in S&T systems by encouraging greater S&T participation of women at all levels across sectors. Taking adequate measures to improve gender equality in S&T knowledge creation and application. Strengthening cross-sector and international cooperation through knowledge sharing, lessons learned, and the adaptation of effective practices for gender equality and mainstreaming initiatives within national S&T systems.

The research subject represents a policy and social dynamic in which gender is increasingly significant. More specifically, the participation of women in S&T fields has emerged as a major policy issue, especially as regards questions on workforce development. Indeed, ‘gender issues are ubiquitous and complex’, and ‘their relevance to the world of research has been increasingly recognized via global, regional, and local initiatives aiming to foster better gender representation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics’ (Elsevier, 2017, pp. 15, 78). Accordingly, calls for research addressing S&T gender dynamics act to prompt and inform related policy decisions and investments. The policy process involves articulating the relevant issue, specifying its scope and

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 224

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and international collaborations in S&T community building ­225

relative ramifications (Kingdon, 2011), with research findings incorporated in policy dialogues. As such, those findings are central to opening doors for policy diffusion. Topical research suggests and influences the setting of the policy agenda and informing issue recognition. Furthermore, a critical component of policy formulation is the clear identification of the relevant population, that is, the segment of the population that the policy is intended to impact, and in what way (Leggon et al., 2015). Related research introduces gender as a critical consideration in the S&T arena, identifying and framing related disparities as key policy concerns around the world. The principal research issue here concerns the ways in which S&T gender issues are placed on the policy agenda in different national contexts. A variety of national and international policy delineators and carriers can be identified – for example, international governmental and non-governmental organizations and related stakeholders (McNeely, 1995; Boli and Thomas, 1999). At various points in time, a number of national and international agencies have developed resources and policy directives for increasing S&T recruitment, retention, and outreach to women and girls (Frehill et al., 2016). For example, the European Commission (EC) chartered the Helsinki Group in 1999 as part of an action plan for ‘mobilizing women to enrich European research’. Another example is the establishment of a series of Gender Summits, beginning in 2011, to convene delegates ‘to make gender equality in research and innovation the norm and to embed gender as a primary dimension of quality’.2 In this instance, rather than focusing principally on assumptions and outcomes noting female productivity as such, socio-spatial factors affecting policy attention and decision making in relationship to women’s S&T participation are of principal concern. Although concerns with S&T gender disparities undergird and inform the overall query, the emphasis here is on the research that addresses those disparities, and its role in identifying and promoting policy issues. Research on gendered societal dynamics and relationships impacts the structural and cultural interactions that delimit S&T work. Although some changes have occurred, studies have consistently provided evidence on barriers to full S&T participation and inclusion, demonstrating the persistence of gendered structures of marginalization (Frehill et al., 2015, p. 2; McNeely and Schintler, 2016). Such evidence reflects institutionalization processes by which socio-­relational disparities are enacted and embedded in broader educational and professional cultures. The dissemination and exchange of this research are critical as practical steps in addressing related issues in national policy and institutional  http://gender-summit.com/.

2

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 225

13/12/2019 15:47

226

Gender, science and innovation

s­ettings (cf. White et al., 2016; Michie and Cooper, 2015). Research findings provide insights for policy opportunities based on S&T developments and participation, informing related debates and inspiring policy and programmatic action. Indeed, they represent an important aspect of gender mainstreaming activities aimed at ‘prioritizing and integrating gender equity as a central concern on broader political and economic agendas’ (McNeely et al., 2015, p. 343). However, in some places, such as Enwise countries,3 a general lack of research on women in S&T fields has been identified as a hindrance to gender mainstreaming (EC, 2004). This suggests the importance of noting institutional affiliations and locations of researchers as (direct or indirect) agents for entering research into national policy dialogues, recognizing the conduct of research in particular locations as opportunities for on-site issue identification and awareness. Thus, exploring and providing a networked profile of research production along these lines suggest key spatial distributions and relationships over time as foundational for policy issue diffusion. As such, the focus here is on the role of S&T gender research as a policy determinant in different settings. While modified by a complex of interrelated contextual factors – for example, political system, cultural dynamics, and social structure – policy issue recognition and agenda setting represent significant challenges given broader institutionalization and adaptation enactments. Research is a central aspect of institutionalization and diffusion, and the more policies are grounded in evidence and research, the more likely they are to be sustainable (Leggon et al., 2015; Leggon and McNeely, 2012). Underscored here is recognition of the importance of research and evidence in the policy process from the outset. In this case, research helps to shape interests and sets conditions for the creation of policies in support of gender equity. The use of research in opening policy windows and setting policy agendas and applications is an innovation strategy that incorporates knowledge production and diffusion into the policy development process. Furthermore, referring back to cross-national research collaborations, this notion is fundamental to creating issue awareness in different contexts.

11.6  DATA AND METHODS The analytical goal of this study rests on a view of epistemic networks relative to broader socio-spatial dimensions and of topic-specified research

3   Enwise (Enlarge Women in Science to East) countries, that is, Central and Eastern European countries and the Baltic States (EC, 2004).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 226

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and international collaborations in S&T community building ­227

productivity and collaboration as a means for policy agenda setting and diffusion. Emphasis is placed on delineating and analyzing gender related research and linking key indicators of S&T productivity and workforce development to concrete outcomes and broader contexts. Publication is a major means by which research enters the realm of public discourse (UNESCO, 2005). In this sense, it is critical to the development of relevant policies in different countries along two principal dimensions: issue awareness and evidence foundations. Accordingly, following the previous discussion and in keeping with general research convention, publications are used as the principal indicator of S&T scholarly productivity, with collaborations primarily operationalized as co-authored publications. Applied to S&T gender research conditioned by location, attention is given to socio-spatial relationships reflected in collaborations and indicated by locations and interactions of S&T gender research co-authorships and publications. International collaborations typically are indicated by co-authorships operationalized in terms of countries of author institutional affiliations. Thus, the basic analytical features engaged in collaboration studies using co-authorships are author, institution, and country (Gauffriau et al., 2007). For this analysis, attending to scholarly output on S&T gender research, the emphasis is on the author and co-author country and institutional affiliation location, introducing gender through the research as a contextual factor at the national level. Looking particularly to evidence of gender-related research in terms of reach (national and international) and influence, central tasks included comparing geographic spans of networks defined by collaborative patterns, controlling for spatial distribution of institutional affiliations and S&T fields. S&T community detection was conducted via a nested ‘networks of networks’ approach for examining connections in selected disciplines, encompassing national and international indicators of collaborative interaction as the basis for a more complex depiction of S&T gender research and related implications. As noted, S&T fields vary in terms of levels of S&T under-representation and gender disparities, among which physics, computing, mathematics, statistics, and chemical sciences stand out. These fields were treated as exemplars for understanding broader trends based on cross-over organizing structures and interests (Pearson et al., 2015). Differences in gender referenced productivity are examined relative to the framing concepts of gendered societal dynamics and globalization, focusing on distributional variations within fields and across national contexts. S&T gender studies have witnessed a large growth over the past 30 years, with a considerable number of journals and journal articles and

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 227

13/12/2019 15:47

228

Gender, science and innovation

Table 11.3  Exemplar fields: Scopus articles by year Year

Articles

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total

1130 1293 1440 1666 2039 2302 9870

books being published on the topic.4 This study explores S&T gender research as a means for setting policy agendas and for establishing transnational knowledge communities. The spectrum of articles published from 2011 to 2016 (inclusive) on women in S&T was examined through a socio-spatial analysis focused on the geographical location of research partners at the national level. Data related to scientific publications and authorship were obtained through the Scopus database, maintained by Elsevier, which collates peer-reviewed scientific publications.5 Data collection was based on year, major scientific field, and key search terms based on the analytical goals, including ‘gender’, ‘women’, ‘education’, ‘workforce’, and related terms. Focusing on S&T gender research articles, iterative searches were conducted, with individual fields pulled from initial larger search results, ultimately returning 293 300 results across S&T fields and 9870 results for the exemplar fields noted above (Table 11.3). Indicating growth of the field, the analysis provided evidence for investigating the extension of related national and international networks and epistemic community building. Determination of socio-spatial networks was based on the function

Q5

di dj 1 ceij 2 dδ  a 2m ci cj 2m i, j

4   Interestingly, especially given the use of publications as a principal indicator of research productivity, more and more peer-reviewed journals are implementing editorial guidelines requiring sex- or gender-specific reporting, reinforcing broader gender mainstreaming policies for the inclusion of sex and gender-based analysis in research (see Schiebinger, in Elsevier, 2017). 5  https://www.scopus.com.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 228

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and international collaborations in S&T community building ­229

where eij is the edge between node i and j, di 5 a j eij, dj 5 a j eji, m 5 1/2 a ij eij, and cj is the community node to which i belongs, and cj is the community node to which j belongs, and a j eij is 1 if ci 5 cj and 0 otherwise (Blondel et al., 2008; Schintler et al., 2014). This function measures the density of edges within communities in relation to those between communities. It has a lower bound of −1 and an upper bound of 1. A value closer to 1 characterizes a more well-defined collaborative structure (Blondel et al., 2008). Collaborative relationships thus could be visualized as simplified networks in which nodes are locations and edges are authors in common between locations. Depiction of networks in this regard offers a visual heuristic for understanding spatially delineated collaborations and functional coherence (Schintler et al., 2014).

11.7  FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION The overall purpose was to identify research associated with location as a platform for policy agenda setting and formulation, with emphasis on S&T gender research delineations. Different countries were characterized by socio-cultural and institutional arrangements that must be considered when formulating relevant policies, programmes, and measures. Thus, varying levels of S&T scholarly output were expected. In general, the majority of publications originated in the US. Also, as a point of consideration for S&T research diffusion and reach, English generally has been treated as the lingua franca of S&T. Even articles coming from non-­ English speaking countries still are largely published in English. Moreover, non-English language articles are often accompanied by an English version. However, in recent years, the situation has changed to reflect a wider range of locations and cultural considerations, as seen in S&T publications in general (Hilpert, 2016) and in the more focused sample engaged here (Figure 11.1). While English continues to dominate the publication landscape, other linguistic representations are increasingly found in S&T publications. In any case, in virtually every country that has seen increases in S&T publications, increases in S&T gender research publications have grown even more. Framing research collaborations in terms of socio-spatial location, the countries in which author affiliations are located were of particular interest here. Rather than focus on author and co-author gender or sex identification, gender as the basic S&T research issue was the divining topic of the current analysis. While this does not indicate the way in which gender issues are presented or engaged, it can suggest social and global features reflecting growing concerns with gender issues in S&T. Again,

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 229

13/12/2019 15:47

230

Gender, science and innovation

100% 90%

8

2271

8

% of Total, by Year

80% 70%

1 1 1 1

8

15

1991

8

15

6

60% 50%

1630

7

40% 30%

1411

20%

1263

10% 0%

8 8

1107

English

12

2011

12

1

7

3

7

1 1

9

9

2013

1

5

5

4

2

W. E. European European 2012

1

8

3

2

1

Chinese

6

2014

Other Asian 2015

Persian

Spanish

2016

Figure 11.1  Languages of published articles in study sample, by year research operates as sources for policy ideas and agenda setting and for policy formulation, implementation, and evaluation (Leggon et al., 2015). Publications in this sense convey sites of issue recognition and legitimation. Today’s digital economy rests on burgeoning epistemic networks based on a spatial logic that transcends traditional social and national borders (UNESCO, 2005), and international research collaboration indicates broadened networks. These networks reflect participation from all corners of the globe. Still, the reality is that power relationships and dynamics still determine interaction patterns, and network participation is not equal participation. The US and Europe still dominate research publication, each reflecting more than a third of the world’s publication productivity of gender research, as previously mentioned (Elsevier, 2017). While publication productivity formerly was concentrated in the US, related research activity has risen particularly in the European Union (EU), due in large part to increased targeted funding and policy attention to gender mainstreaming and to goals of S&T gender diversity. However, capacities are changing. The reach of research content has expanded extensively, supported by digital communication and transportation networks. Moreover, technological innovations and their diffusion make such patterns less one-directional than in the past (UNESCO, 2005). Density of collaborations and research connections is indicative

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 230

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and international collaborations in S&T community building ­231

of networks and interactivity, showing the influence of epistemic communities. Of particular consideration here was the detection of networked productivity patterns, represented by ties between geo-located researchers. As expected, the research largely occurs within national boundaries in developed economies. In light of historical relations and research infrastructures, central nodes and patterns displayed greater density in the developed world. However, factors such as expanded technological capacities, educational exchange, and production relationships denote and demand attention to the increasingly global breadth of S&T research and opportunities for participation. More to the point, these networks reflect socio-spatial, cultural, and political links indicative of growth in concern for S&T gender issues. Furthermore, S&T gender relations can emerge as a new interest when connections to opportunities for development become known in different settings. To determine the extent of such interests, expanded networks can be considered as pathways to participation. Such expanded networks form policy-linked locations through the diffusion of related issues and approaches, and translate into potential opportunities for mobilizing and supporting the participation and inclusion of women in S&T. Socio-spatial network analyses were applied to the beginning and ending time points (2011 and 2016) to capture the study period. The findings serve as comparisons, illuminating changes and trends over the five-year period. As in the initial article count, 2016 had an increase of 1172 articles over 2011. Country collaboration networks for 2011 are shown in Figure 11.2. The circles, or nodes, represent countries; the lines, or edges, represent a research collaboration connecting countries. For 2011, there was an average of 4.3 articles per country. The larger black nodes represent countries that were above average in publication (five or more) of gender research articles in the exemplar fields. The smaller nodes indicate countries that fell below the average (four or less). Edges shown in black represent collaborations that produced above average numbers of publications (five or more). Edges shown in grey indicate below average collaborations (four or less). Where a node may be above average, but the edges are below average, the indication is that a country had numerous intra-country collaborations and/or single-authored publications, but few inter-country collaborations. Some interesting trends within fields were also found. Gender research in relation to chemistry in 2011 followed many of the overall trends, with the United States, United Kingdom, and China representing the principal hubs of collaborations. Computer science was dominated in 2011 by strong international collaboration among large countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom. Mathematics and statistics

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 231

13/12/2019 15:47

­232

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 232

13/12/2019 15:47

Figure 11.2  S&T gender research collaborations by country, 2011



Gender and international collaborations in S&T community building ­233

follow many of the general trends, with the United States and the United Kingdom (although not China) serving as the principal hubs of collaboration. Finally, physics followed many of the overall trends, with the United States, United Kingdom, and China serving as collaboration hubs. These countries appeared to dominate the 2011 publishing landscape for gender issues in physics, with few other countries represented. The 2011 findings were largely as expected. The United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, China, and South Korea were clear leaders in S&T gender research collaborations and, indeed, connected many disparate countries through their collaborations. It was also clear that countries with stronger economies, or better resourced research enterprises, appeared as collaboration hubs. Accordingly, researchers from less well-resourced countries might use such partnerships to help support their research or garner attention for their work. Indeed, publication citation patterns suggest that articles with authors from more than one country are more widely cited than those with authors from just one country (Kato and Asao, 2013). For 2016, there was an average of 5.8 articles per country. Figure 11.3 shows the country-level socio-spatial network analysis for 2016. The larger black nodes represent countries that were above average in publications (six or more). The smaller nodes were countries that fell below the average (five or less). Edges shown in black represent collaborations that produced above average publications (six or more). Edges shown in grey indicate below average collaborations (five or less). As expected, there was increased density within and across many regions that were already rising in 2011, such as Asia and parts of Eastern Europe. However, most notably, 2016 saw an increase in representation of African countries in the S&T landscape. In general, there was growing representation of lesser-resourced countries, particularly when collaborating with researchers in larger economies, with the implication of possibilities for greater policy attention to related research topics across the board. Some interesting trends also were found within the exemplar fields for 2016. Chemistry showed many of the general S&T gender research trends for 2016, with the United States, United Kingdom, and China serving as hubs of collaborations. France, Saudi Arabia, and Australia also emerged as strong hubs of collaborations. Computer science was a field largely dominated by United States and United Kingdom collaborations. Also, there was an increase in the volume of articles published, although this volume may have been comprised mainly of intra-country collaborations or single-authored publications. Similar to mathematics and statistics in 2011, the United States and the United Kingdom overshadowed China

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 233

13/12/2019 15:47

­234

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 234

13/12/2019 15:47

Figure 11.3  S&T gender research collaborations by country, 2016

United Arab Emirates



Gender and international collaborations in S&T community building ­235

as collaboration hubs in 2016. However, Italy and Canada also emerged as strong international collaborators. Finally, in physics, there were increased international collaborations in 2016, with China and India emerging as the clear leaders. In comparison to 2011, large increases in the volume of S&T gender research articles, the productivity of collaborations, and the density of intra-country activity were evidenced in 2016. Previous S&T gender research leaders on the international stage, such as China, the United States, and the United Kingdom, saw continued growth and continued to serve as hubs and connectors among disparate countries. Other betterresourced countries also attained ‘hub status’ in 2016, namely France, Saudi Arabia, Canada, and Australia, in the various S&T fields. In terms of development, 2016 also showed gains both in South East Asia and on the African continent. Malaysia and Singapore emerged as hubs of the Australasian region, developing productive authorship and publication relationships with Australia and New Zealand. In Africa, in addition to South Africa, Kenya showed increasing outputs and, through collaborations with larger economies, began to bring countries such as Ghana and Cameroon into the S&T gender research community in a more noticeable way. These trends appear to be expanding as researchers and policy makers seek to expand access and equity in the S&T landscape.

11.8 CONCLUSION Growth in S&T productivity is accompanied by expanded concerns for maintaining and building the concomitant workforce, which brings attention to women as generally untapped human capital resources. Although not a straightforward process, especially given normative expectations and contextual limitations, gender as a critical issue for S&T research and for S&T workforce development has grown. Moreover, related approaches and positions have been informed through the broad diffusion of affective principles, institutional processes, and cultural dynamics. These are not equally determinant forces, yet effects are seen even in the most patriarchal societies and countries (Pearson et al., 2015; UIS, 2017). Gender has been identified here as a central analytical construct for exploring related research productivity and questions addressing S&T collaboration and participation at national and international levels of interaction and in setting policy agendas (McNeely and Schintler, 2010). Network data structure showed whether the relationships were functionally coherent and interdependent and, even in an initial mapping of connections, provided a sense of the complexity involved in epistemic

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 235

13/12/2019 15:47

236

Gender, science and innovation

community building and the increasingly globalized S&T infrastructure. As reflected by publication output, S&T gender research is growing around the world, and overlapping links exhibit issue engagement and, arguably, potential for policy engagement, suggesting possibilities for the increasing prominence of related matters on policy agenda. While this analysis offers general relational depictions, such depictions are not meant to mask local variations and diversities, but, rather, to show broader trends by which more detailed understandings are contextualized. The conduct and publication of related research tends to be concentrated in particular locations, but awareness and possible policy effects can spread over time as aspects of globalization and interaction. Network participation and collaborations indicate the diffusion of ideas, findings, and skills within the wider community, arguably supporting innovation and development (DTI, 2006). While providing a summary viewpoint on collaborations as interactive networks, the results provide a point of inference for further issue recognition and identification. Also, engagement of research in this way is in keeping with notions of the world polity and knowledge economy and of research-based policy directives. In basic terms, the discussion indicates the identification of common interests and collaborative relationships to promote gender participation and inclusion in S&T, understanding and framing research as opportunities for influence and commitment to related goals motivated and affected by world polity interactions. Such relational processes can contribute to an ever more global body of knowledge that is increasingly shared by all contributors (Hilpert, 2016; McNeely and Husbands Fealing, 2018). Of course, various political, economic, and cultural factors can inhibit the potential and rate for incorporating  and translating this knowledge into action. Moreover, gendered relational structures are notoriously slow to change; they are deeply institutionalized and embedded in and across societal sectors. However, the centrality of S&T to economic productivity and the current rapid pace of S&T developments and needs can affect the capacity for change over time, albeit at different rates in different places, in S&T demographic profiles. Identifying tendencies for such change is an important analytical task. In general, the analysis has relied on the recognition and development of gender-specified research from a broadly inclusive perspective. The aim also has been to offer insights on gender research as a policy incentive and to provide initiating points for more detailed studies of gender representation within S&T fields and to offer a basis for developing a more targeted agenda for future research, policy, and activism associated with enhancing women’s inclusion in S&T around the world (cf. Pearson et al., 2015). For example, with further author and co-author disambiguated data,

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 236

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and international collaborations in S&T community building ­237

more detailed empirical investigation can provide a finer grained analysis of research foci and spatial relationships as scaffolding for policy issue identification and formulation. The social construction of S&T is reflected in complex gender-biased attitudes and practices, with direct and indirect effects, and gender equity in this sense is an innovation for enabling S&T performance and productivity. When gender is explicitly recognized and engaged as a critical influence on observed outcomes, it adds another layer of complexity to the policy process to the extent that research is demanded in order to gain insight and understanding of the institutional, cultural, political, and economic dynamics that shape the S&T workforce (McNeely and Schintler, 2010, 2016). Again, ‘gender is one of those issues that so permeates social interaction that its effects cannot be rightly captured by characterizing it simply as a separate factor to consider in related analyses’ (McNeely and Schintler, 2016, p. 75). The complex nature of embedded gender relationships in substantive areas of research requires the explicit recognition of critical interactions and influence. Even a simple consideration of changing sociospatial network patterns, as shown here, contributes to a better understanding of gender research as a policy determinant and as a collaborative factor affecting the participation and inclusion of women in the broader science and technology endeavour.

REFERENCES American Association for the Advancement of Women (AAUW). 2010. Why So Few? Women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Washington, DC: AAUW. Ben-David, J. 1990. Scientific Growth. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Bielli, A., A. Buti, M.V. Camino, et al. 2004. ‘Proyecto Iberoamericano de Ciencia, Technología y Género‒GENTEC‒UNESCO: Informe comparative regional e informes nacionales de Argentina, Brasil, Costa Rica, España, México, Paraguay, Uruguay, y Venezuela’. http://api.ning.com/fi les/3wIypPzztSduT4Q6g5O8DZkd NgudKlow6TrCnNeQq-F-B5AwrJ42Jdwu3rT8RlkhkY5vbmuBO-EZK0Pu0qV​ Z6cDwbV180bSf/Reporte_FinalGENTEC.pdf. Blättel-Mink, B. 2009. ‘MINT: The German National Initiative for More Women in SET’, Equal Opportunities International 28(1): 104–9. Blondel, V.D., J.L. Guillaume, R. Lambiotte and E. Lefebvre. 2008. ‘Fast Unfolding of Communities in Large Networks’, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2008(10): P10008. arXiv:0803.0476 [physics.soc-ph]; DOI: 10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/P10008. Boli, J. and G.M. Thomas. 1999. Constructing World Culture: International Nongovernmental Organizations since 1875. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 237

13/12/2019 15:47

238

Gender, science and innovation

Bonder, G. 2015. ‘Foreword for Advancing Women in Science’, pp. v‒viii in Advancing Women in Science: An International Perspective, edited by W. Pearson Jr, L. Frehill and C.L. McNeely. London: Springer. Bukvova, H. 2010. ‘Studying Research Collaboration: A Literature Review’, Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems 10(3). http://sprouts.aisnet. org/10-3. Ceci, S.J. and W.M. Williams. 2011. ‘Understanding Current Causes of Women’s Underrepresentation in Science’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 108(8): 3157–62. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS). 2004. ‘Les Femmes dans l’Histoire du CNRS’. http://www.cnrs.fr/mpdf/IMG/pdf/cnrs_femmes_histoire. pdf. Department for Trade and Industry (DTI), UK. 2006. Knowledge Transfer from the Research Base. London: DTI. Drori, G.S., J.W. Meyer, F.O. Ramirez and E. Schofer. 2003. Science in the Modern World Polity: Institutionalization and Globalization. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Elsevier. 2017. ‘Gender in the Global Research Landscape’, Elsevier Research Intelligence Report. elsevier.com/research-intelligence/resource-library/genderreport. Etzkowitz, H., N. Gupta and C. Kemelgor. 2010. ‘The Gender Revolution in Science and Technology’, Journal of International Affairs 64(1): 83‒100. European Commission (EC). 2004. Waste of Talents: Turning Private Struggles into a Public Issue—Women and Science in the Enwise Countries, Report of the Enwise Expert Group on Women Scientists in the Central and Eastern European countries and in the Baltic States. Brussels: EC. European Commission (EC). 2016. She Figures 2015. Brussels: EC. doi:10.277​ 7/744106. Fox, M.F. and S. Mohapatra. 2007. ‘Social-Organizational Characteristics of Work and Publication Productivity Among Academic Scientists in DoctoralGranting Departments’, Journal of Higher Education 78(5): 543‒71. Frehill, L.M., C.L. McNeely and W. Pearson, Jr. 2015. ‘An International Perspective on Advancing Women in Science’, pp. 1‒6 in Advancing Women in Science: An International Perspective, edited by W. Pearson Jr, L. Frehill and C.L. McNeely. London: Springer. Frehill, L.M., K. Seely-Gant and C.L. McNeely. 2016. ‘Gender Segregation of Academic Science and Engineering: Policies, Programs, and Trends since 2000 in International Perspective’, presented at the Annual Meeting of the Eastern Sociological Association, Boston, MA. Gauffriau, M., P.O. Larsen, I. Maye, et al. 2007. ‘Publication, Cooperation, and  Productivity Measures in Scientific Research’, Scientometrics 73(2): 175‒214. Herring, C. 2009. ‘Does Diversity Pay?: Race, Gender, and the Business Case for Diversity’, American Sociological Review 74(2): 208‒24. Hickie, D. and U. Hilpert. 2016. ‘Transatlantic Comparison of Continental Innovation Models: A Differentiation of Regionalized Processes of Innovation in Europe and the US’, pp. 37‒49 in Routledge Handbook of Politics and Technology, edited by U. Hilpert. London: Routledge. Hilpert, U. 2016. ‘Metropolitan Locations in International High-Tech Networks: Collaboration and Exchange of Creative Labour as a Basis for Advanced Socio-

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 238

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and international collaborations in S&T community building ­239

Economic Development’, pp. 281‒98 in Routledge Handbook of Politics and Technology, edited by U. Hilpert. London: Routledge. Hunt, V., D. Layton and S. Prince. 2015. ‘Diversity Matters’, McKinsey & Company. http://www.diversitas.co.nz/Portals/25/Docs/Diversity%20Matters. pdf. Huyer, S. 2015. ‘Is the Gender Gap Narrowing in Science and Engineering?’, pp. 85‒103 in UNESCO Science Report: Towards 2030, edited by S. Schneegans. Paris: UNESCO. Kato, M. and A. Asao. 2013. ‘The Relationship between Research Performance  and International Collaboration in Chemistry’, Scientometrics 97: 535–53. Kingdon, J.W. 2011. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. New York: Longman/Pearson. Lee, H. and E. Pollitzer. 2016. Gender in Science and Innovation as Component of Inclusive Socioeconomic Growth. London: Portia. Leggon, C. 2018. ‘Reflections on Broadening Participation in STEM: What Do We Know? What Do We Need to Know? Where Do We Go From Here?’ American Behavioral Scientist 62 (5): 719–26. Leggon, C. and C.L. McNeely. 2012. ‘Promising Policies’, pp. 109‒116 in Blueprint for the Future: Framing the Issues of Women in Science in a Global Context, edited by W. Pearson, L. Frehill and K. Didion. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Leggon, C., C.L. McNeely and J. Yoon. 2015. ‘Advancing Women in Science: Policies for Progress’, pp.  307‒27 in Advancing Women in Science: An International Perspective, edited by W. Pearson Jr, L. Frehill and C.L. McNeely. London: Springer. Longino, H.E. 1990. Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. McNeely, C.L. 1995. Constructing the Nation-State: International Organization and Prescriptive Action. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. McNeely, C.L. and K. Husbands Fealing. 2018. ‘Moving the Needle, Raising Consciousness: The Science and Practice of Broadening Participation’, American Behavioral Scientist 62 (5): 551‒62. McNeely, C.L. and L.A. Schintler. 2010. ‘Gender Issues in Scientific Collaboration and Workforce Development: Implications for a Federal Policy Research Agenda’, presented at the Workshop on the Science of Science Measurement, U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy, Washington, DC. http://www.nsf. gov/sbe/sosp/workforce/mcneely.pdf. McNeely, C.L. and L.A. Schintler. 2016. ‘Recognizing Opportunities for S&T Workforce Development and Productivity: The Gendered Resource’, pp. 65‒78 in Routledge Handbook of Politics and Technology, edited by U. Hilpert. London: Routledge. McNeely, C.L., L.M. Frehill and W. Pearson, Jr. 2015. ‘Postscript on Advancing Women in Science’, pp. 341‒4 in Advancing Women in Science: An International Perspective, edited by W. Pearson Jr, L. Frehill and C.L. McNeely. London: Springer. Merton, R.K. 1973. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Michie, J. and C.L. Cooper (eds). 2015. Why the Social Sciences Matter. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 239

13/12/2019 15:47

240

Gender, science and innovation

National Research Council (NRC), US. 2011. Expanding Underrepresented Minority Participation: America’s Science and Technology Talent at the Crossroads. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Pearson, W., Jr, L.M. Frehill and C.L. McNeely (eds). 2015. Advancing Women in Science: An International Perspective. New York: Springer. Sargent, L. and L.E. Waters. 2004. ‘Centers and Academic Research Collaborations: An Inductive Process Framework for Understanding Successful Collaborations’, Journal of Vocational Behavior 64(2): 308‒19. Schintler, L., G. Galiazzo and C.L. McNeely. 2010. ‘Geography and Scientific Collaboration: A Gendered Perspective’, Conference Paper P1903, presented at the Annual North American Meeting of the Regional Science Association International, Denver. Schintler, L.A., R. Kulkarni, K. Haynes and R. Stough. 2014. ‘Sensing SocioSpatio Interaction and Accessibility Using Location-Sharing Services Data’, pp. 92‒112 in Accessibility and Spatial Interaction, edited by A. CondeçoMelhorado, A. Reggiani and J. Gutierrez. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing. Sonnenwald, D.H. 2007. ‘Scientific Collaboration’, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 41: 643‒81. UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS). 2017. ‘Women in Science’, March, Fact Sheet No. 43, FS/2017/SCI/43 http://uis.unesco.org/en/topic/women-science. United Nations (UN). 1997. ‘Report of the Economic and Social Council for 1997’, A/52/3, ECOSOC 1997/2. http://www.un.org/womenwatch/osagi/pdf/ ECOSOCAC1997.2.pdf. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 2005. UNESCO World Report: Towards Knowledge Societies. Paris: UNESCO. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 2007. Science, Technology, and Gender: An International Report. Paris: UNESCO. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 2010. UNESCO Science Report 2010: The Current Status of Science Around the World. Paris: UNESCO. Wagner, C.S. 2008. The New Invisible College: Science for Development. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. White, P., R. Spalter-Roth, A. Best and K. Joyce. 2016. ‘A Relational Model for Understanding the Use of Research in the Policy Process’, Workshop Report, 20‒21 November, National Science Foundation (US).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 240

13/12/2019 15:47

PART III

Entrepreneurship, Innovation, Commercialization

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 241

13/12/2019 15:47

12. Gender differences in the commercialisation of research: a study in UK universities* 1

Helen Lawton Smith, Viviana Meschitti, Jeanne Le Roux, Mark Panton, Ning Baines, Alexandra Poulovassilis and Colette Henry 12.1 INTRODUCTION The process of commercialising academic research is economically desir­ able for universities, individual researchers and the public (de MeloMartin, 2013). Of the various ways that this takes place, for example academic entrepreneurship and patenting, the relative propensity for women academics so to do is significantly less than for men (Arenius and Minniti, 2005; Micozzi et al., 2014). In this chapter two aspects are examined in relation to the experiences of women in the commercialisation of academic research: the individual perspective and the organisational environment. Specifically, we ask: what are women academics’ experiences of the research commercialisation process? We address this question with respect to intentions, motivations and entrepreneurial readiness, and we explore how these influence behaviour. We also consider the implications of these explanations for universities. A caveat is that while our evidence is based on the United Kingdom (UK), it should be noted that there are national differences in environment for academic entrepreneurship (Kloftsen and Jones-Evans, 2000). This is likely to have an impact on the choices that women make with regard to the kind of commercial activity they undertake, and whether it constitutes entrepreneurship, and how they plan their exit strategies (Justo et al., 2015). *  This chapter draws on research carried out for the TRIGGER project, A. No. 611034 funded under the Seventh Framework Programme, Specific programme ‘Capacity’, Work programme ‘Science in Society’, FP7-SCIENCE-IN-SOCIE​ TY-2013-1. ­242

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 242

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender differences in the commercialisation of research ­243

Our evidence for this chapter is drawn from a study of commercialisation practices at Birkbeck, one of the constituent colleges of the University of London, during 2015–2016. The Birkbeck case is important as it illustrates some of the issues relating to the commercialisation experiences of women (and men) in a specific organisational context. The remainder of this chapter is structured as follows: the next section reviews extant literature and lays the theoretical foundation for the empirical study. The subsequent section explains the study context and methodological approach. This is followed by a discussion of the findings. Finally, conclusions are drawn and avenues worthy of future study are identified.

12.2 COMMERCIALISATION OF RESEARCH AND GENDER: THEORY AND PRACTICE In this chapter, our theoretical framework for analysis comprises two strands: the female researcher (intentions, motivations and commercialisation readiness) and the organisation (culture and commercialisation support). From our review of the literature, we derive four stylised facts about women academic entrepreneurs: 1. women constitute a very small proportion of academic entrepreneurs and they patent less than men; 2. they operate in different sectors to men; 3. their motivations for starting and running a business are different from those of their male colleagues; and 4. they are less successful than men in attracting venture capital and angel funding post start-up. 12.2.1  Women and Commercialisation We begin by exploring the first two facts, that is, the general patterns, regardless of country. Although the number of women who are active in the commercialisation of research is increasing, men are more likely than women to be involved at all stages from start-up through to growth (Arenius and Minniti, 2005; Micozzi et al., 2014; Elsevier, 2017). Women’s choice of business area tends to be in bio-sciences rather than physical sciences. This reflects gender differences in discipline; women researchers are more likely to be found in health and life sciences, and least likely in engineering and computer science (Elsevier, 2017), and overall are less well represented in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) disciplines (Coleman and Robb, 2012). Moreover, numbers and

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 243

13/12/2019 15:47

244

Gender, science and innovation

­ ercentages by themselves do not indicate whether there is a culture of p gender inequality within traditionally male dominated disciplines. Leggon (2011) for example found in the United States (US) that there was an ‘illusion of inclusion’, by which it appears that women are both represented among engineers and are more integrated into the engineering profession than is the case. Moreover, a further aspect is that entry credentials (academic degrees, professional certificates, membership of professional associations) are not in fact synonymous with inclusion into the community of professional engineers. With respect to the third stylised fact, in a study of entrepreneurial intentions of female academics Miranda et al. (2017) found that, irrespective of discipline, women have less of an entrepreneurial intention than men. Drawing on a study of 1178 academics across all discipline areas in Spanish universities, Miranda et al. (2017) explored whether the determining factors of the entrepreneurial intention of academics are the same for men and women, and tested whether their degree of importance was related to gender. They found that the lesser entrepreneurial intention of women detected in previous studies is not due to an absence of any factor considered as a determinant of entrepreneurial intention. Rather, they found that it is related to the existence of implicit barriers for women that influence their entrepreneurial intention. One of these barriers relates to seniority. This can be implicated in whether female scholars do or should engage in commercialisation. For example, Rosa and Dawson (2006) found that because of the low number of women in senior research positions in many leading UK science departments, few women had the chance to lead a spin-out because it is a senior level role where the tradeoffs between academic career prospects (publishing, research grants, and so on) are less pressing than for junior colleagues. These differences are explored by Rosser (2012, 2017). Other personal factors include the conflict between work, home life and peer networks (Rosa and Dawson, 2006). A factor in entrepreneurial motivation therefore might be the time it takes outside the work environment to start and run a company. This is also likely to be related to entrepreneurial readiness: if women have access to support, this may in turn affect their motivation to undertake commercialisation activity. In relation to the fourth stylised fact, previous studies have found that not only is discipline gendered – and, as a consequence, the propensity for research commercialisation – but also women face considerably more challenges in their entrepreneurial endeavours than their male counterparts. An explanation for this can be found in human capital theory (Becker, 1964) and social capital theory (Mosey and Wright, 2007). Specific human capital refers to skills or knowledge that is useful to a particular setting or

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 244

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender differences in the commercialisation of research ­245

industry, and increases a worker’s productivity in all tasks (though possibly differentially in different tasks, organizations and situations): in this case, commercialisation of academic research. A recent view is that the concept of human capital should be broadened to competences as well as knowledge and skills (Wright et al., 2007; Gillies, 2017). In this sense the human capital of female academics relates to both their scientific and professional knowledge, as well as characteristics relating to entrepreneurial intentions, motivations and readiness through such things as acquiring internal and external knowledge on how to commercialise their research. Mosey and Wright (2007) identify a growing recognition of the heterogeneity of entrepreneurial experience (Westhead and Wright, 1998; Ucbasaran et al., 2008), but this analysis has not been applied to gender and academic entrepreneurship until recently (see, for example, the neglect identified by Shane, 2004; Wright et al., 2007). Mosey and Wright (2007) also cite Bozeman and Mangematin (2004), arguing that social mechanisms underpin the production of knowledge and are critical for its subsequent distribution and use. They propose that social capital is important for the creation of ventures based upon university research. In the context of the commercialisation of academic research, it is not the level of education that matters: rather, it is the skills and knowledge required for entrepreneurship and commercialisation that matter. Muller (2006) argues that it has been widely recognized that human capital is essential to build up a firm and keep it running. Moreover, some authors have pointed out that human capital can even explain the financial structure of new firms and its role in their new firms’ success. With regard to networks, Mosey and Wright (2007) point out that the social network of academics is typically constrained to a narrow scientific research network. Academics may have close or strong ties with team members in their department, leading to the creation of bonding social capital. However, many academics may only have loose or weak ties with actors located outside their department (citing Granovetter, 1973). An additional dimension to be considered is how networks and social capital are utilised. The quality of a founding team’s social networks, which is an external resource, is an important element in the fundraising process of a university spin-off (Shane,  2004;  Vohora et al., 2004). This is necessarily interdependent with entrepreneurial intention, motivation and readiness. Networks have often been found to be lacking for women (Ahl, 2006). Indeed, sometimes women are excluded from networks, facing barriers such as male-dominated cultures and hierarchies (Ranga and Etzkowitz, 2010). Ding et al. (2006) found that female academics were less likely to know people who could, firstly, help them to recognise the

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 245

13/12/2019 15:47

246

Gender, science and innovation

commercial potential of their research, and secondly, help them to commercialise it effectively. Furthermore, women are found to have a lower capacity for associating with colleagues who are patenting, commercialising or have contacts with industry (Murray and Graham, 2007). More recently, Brush et al. (2014) found that in the US, many fundable women entrepreneurs had the requisite skills and experience to lead high-growth ventures. In spite of this, women have been found to be consistently excluded from the networks which gain access to finance, and have appeared to lack the contacts needed to establish themselves in those networks (see Polkowska, 2013). There is also a possible hierarchy and geography to networking activities. While little research exists on the role of geography for women academics’ entrepreneurial activity, for women entrepreneurs in general it is suggested that some networks may be linked to different status positions that are inherent in gender relations, reflecting inequality of opportunity. This may include less access to business development resources such as venture capital (Mayer, 2008). Part of the explanation for geographical differences in the levels of women’s entrepreneurship (motivation, performance and goals) may lie in the relationship between individuals’ propensity to be entrepreneurial and the impact of their regional context. Some of these explanations have several different but related dimensions. For example, networks are embedded in place-based social, economic, cultural and political structures (Hanson and Blake, 2009), just as universities to a greater or lesser degree are embedded in their local and regional context (Lawton Smith and Bagchi-Sen, 2012). These networks can also influence entrepreneurial intention (Bercovitz and Feldman, 2008; Rasmussen et al., 2014; Miranda et al., 2017) and, to a greater or lesser extent, will have an impact on commercialisation readiness. Examples from the US show how existing gender inequality in commercialisation readiness is addressed. Howe et al. (2014) found that developing solutions to low levels of women academic entrepreneurs at Ohio State University in the form of a curriculum for an entrepreneurship workshop series was problematic. This was due to cultural differences in what women would need to know to become motivated to engage in commercialisation. This is when activity is framed in terms of societal impact. Therefore, readiness would mean that women would need to envision themselves as entrepreneurs and then adopt relevant activities and learning tailored to their own work, for example analysis of research potential of the marketplace, learning the landscape, and recognising that forming a start-up was not the only way forward. Howe et al. (2014) reported that the United States National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded REACH

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 246

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender differences in the commercialisation of research ­247

programme1 has supported nearly 100 women (faculty with some commercialisation experience and post-docs) at some 15 institutions. They concluded that cultivating a community of women entrepreneurs was essential, as women have different experiences to men. Therefore, sharing experiences and expanding networks were beneficial in helping women academics become motivated and ready to engage in commercialisation activities. The scope of support for women entrepreneurs has also been developed at the national level. In 2011, Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) in the United States formed a Women Inventors Task Force in response to press reports, studies and observations that their members encounter disproportionately fewer women inventors and entrepreneurs. The more permanent AUTM Women Inventors Committee was scaled up in 2013. Its active members are drawn from tech transfer offices, law firms, consulting groups and other organizations that share the common goal of increasing women’s participation in all aspects of innovation (see Chapter 18 in this volume). 12.2.2  The Organisational Context An explanation for the low level of female academic entrepreneurs is that universities as an organisational type present particular inhibitors to female academic entrepreneurship. For example, Siegel et al. (2003) found that the most critical organisational factors per se are faculty reward systems, Technology Transfer Office (TTO)2 staffing and compensation practices, and cultural barriers between universities and firms. However, formal structures do not appear to be the most important factors. Rather it is the characteristics of the individual and the social environment that matter, and these may be gender-related. For example, Clarysse et al. (2011) found that individual-level attributes and experience are the most important predictors of academic entrepreneurship. They also found that the social environment surrounding the academic plays an influential role, but its role is much less pronounced than individual-level factors. The activities of the TTO played only a marginal, indirect role in driving academics to start new ventures. Instead, norms of behaviour, expectations of behaviour and organisational practice were more significant.   The REACH for Commercialization – Inspiring Female Entrepreneurship at Ohio State and Beyond is a United States innovation research programme (https:// advance.osu.edu/initiatives/project-reach/). 2   Many UK universities have a TTO, which exists to identify research which has commercial potential, and to implement strategies for exploiting it. 1

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 247

13/12/2019 15:47

248

Gender, science and innovation

Organisational contexts, therefore, are arguably important as they shape possibilities and preclude others. University cultures and expectations in relation to the kinds of commercial activity undertaken are affected by the size, status and history of the university, as well as whether gender has informed organisational practice. Colyvas et al. (2012) found that gender differences in commercialising research in three US medical schools are highly conditioned by the employment context and resources. In their study, gender differences are attributed to the use of outcome measures that capture both behaviour and performance. The organisation context (industry and academia) seems to have an impact on women’s propensity in STEM areas to form companies or commercialise their research. Patenting as a form of commercialisation is more popular than starting a company but is similarly affected by organisational context. Morgan et al. (2001) compared the patenting and inventing activity of US scientists and engineers in both industry and academia. They found that those who patent are five times more likely to be life scientists than engineers, with the balance being more in favour of academia. Overall, in academia women comprised 25 per cent of doctorate holders but only 11 per cent of patenting activity. Owen-Smith and Powell (2001) argue that an understanding of gender inequality in commercial activity requires a conceptualisation of the multiple ways in which men and women may be involved, and an exploration of whether a commercial pipeline of involvement is present for women in science. Indeed, studies have identified that women often lack organisational support for patenting (Etzkowitz et al., 2000; Fox, 2001; Long, 2001). Whittington and Smith-Doerr (2008) found that, controlling for education- and career-history variables, women were generally less likely to patent than men. They suggest that female life scientists must overcome two kinds of gender disparity: in commercial activity – both involvement and decisions to patent – and in productivity. They note that, in the US at least, scientists have to make decisions about the level of involvement they will have in commercial work. Those who are involved are institutionally and personally rewarded, for example by way of increases in research funding, access to better equipment, personal wealth, and so on. A further reward in the UK is one’s degree of participation in the Research Excellence Framework, through which impact of one’s research beyond academia (such as commercialisation of research in STEM subjects) is assessed.3 It is not just the structure of work in organisations that matters: how   Accessed 8 April 2015 at http://www.ref.ac.uk/.

3

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 248

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender differences in the commercialisation of research ­249

organisations incentivise the commercialisation of research is also important. Nilsson (2015) argued that organisations could attract more women to engineering if the content were made more socially meaningful, by reframing the goals of engineering research and the curriculum to be more relevant to societal needs. In addition, academics in the US are not incentivised to commercialise their research by the reward structure. The suggestion, therefore, is that explicit value must be placed on entrepreneurial activity for the purposes of promotion and tenure, annual salary reviews and career progression. The organisational context – that is, the hierarchical nature of both the university and the particular academic discipline – can make a difference to whether or not women are motivated to undertake commercial activities. Research by Corley and Gaughan (2005) and by Link et al. (2007) has suggested that gender differences may be affected by organisational context. The authors found that women are more likely to patent in more flexible network-based organisational structures than in hierarchical organisations, in both academia and industry. They analysed detailed data from a sample of academic and industrial life scientists working in the United States. They found that in biotechnology firms – industrial settings characterised by flatter, more flexible, network-based organisational structures – women scientists were more likely to become patent-holding inventors than was the case in more hierarchically arranged organisational settings in industry or academia. A policy implication of all this is that universities would benefit from devoting resources to enable women scientists to commercialise (Whittington and Doerr-Smith, 2005). A rather different perspective, however, is that of de Melo-Martin (2013), who argues that encouraging women to patent more may harm their careers. Rather, it would be better to be clear about the goals of such activity and to assess the overall impact rather than counting the number of patents. She also challenges the notion that patents per se are of value to society, as they increase secrecy and may delay access to new knowledge; she also highlights other limitations about assumptions relating to the value of patents. Reflecting on previous studies, it would be expected that our study would find the following. First, with regard to personal characteristics, there will be fewer women researchers actively involved in commercialising their research, and they will be in different disciplines to men. This is a reflection of lower levels of entrepreneurial intention, motivation and commercialisation readiness. Seniority is a strong influence on the extent of academic women’s involvement in commercialisation. All of these can be explained by human capital arguments and networking and social capital. Second, the organisational context seems to have an impact on

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 249

13/12/2019 15:47

250

Gender, science and innovation

one’s propensity to commercialise research, but this appears to be related to universities’ cultures, hierarchies and incentives rather than to the TTO.

12.3  STUDY CONTEXT AND METHODOLOGY 12.3.1  The UK Context The UK has some 1301 universities, ranging from the elite Russell Group whose 24 members are large, world-class, research-intensive institutions; post-1992 universities comprising mainly former polytechnics and colleges of higher education; and private universities which form the Million1 Group. The 1994 Group was another group of smaller research-led universities until it disbanded in 2013. The University of London has 18 member institutions including several members of the Russell Group and several of the former 1994 Group (of which Birkbeck was one). The gender profile of UK academics is skewed towards women being primarily represented at junior rather than senior levels. Only 24 per cent of women academics are university professors, whereas women account for 40 per cent of all academic professionals in higher education institutions.4 In the UK, data on university commercialisation are collected in the annual Higher Education Business and Community Interaction Survey (HEBCI).5 However, this survey does not record data according to gender. In North America, the AUTM6 collects similar data and has a Metrics subcommittee which tracks women inventors.7 Such monitoring highlights the significance attributed to commercialisation endeavours by women. 12.3.2  Introduction to Birkbeck and Study Methodology Our study at Birkbeck was part of the EU FP7 TRIGGER project (2013– 17).8 Birkbeck has almost 1100 staff and 19 000 students, of which around 13 000 are undergraduates and 6000 postgraduates (taught and research). Birkbeck is known as ‘London’s Evening University’, as the majority of   Accessed 27 February 2017 at http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/Resear​ chBriefing/Summary/SN05170. 5   Accessed 1 August 2017 at http://www.hefce.ac.uk/ke/hebci/. 6   Accessed 1 June 2015 at https://www.autm.net/Home.htm. 7   Accessed 1 August 2017 at http://www.autm.net/autm-info/leadership/commi​ ttees/women-inventors-committee/metrics-subcommittee/. 8   Accessed 1 August 2017 at http://www.bbk.ac.uk/trigger. 4

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 250

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender differences in the commercialisation of research ­251

undergraduate students are in full-time employment and attend classes in the evening. Birkbeck has five Schools: Arts; Business, Economics and Informatics (BEI); Law; Science; Social Sciences, History and Philosophy (SSHP). In Biological Sciences, within the School of Science, the college works closely with the neighbouring University College London (UCL), which also provides Technology Transfer activities through UCL Ventures. In the School of BEI, a Research Development Manager was appointed in 2015 whose role includes supporting technology transfer activities in computer science, as a direct result of findings and recommendations from the TRIGGER project. Data from the 2015/2016 HEBCI report showed that the college has had very little academic spin-off activity since the mid-2000s. The college registered one spin-off with higher education provider intellectual property (HEP IP) ownership in both 2014/2015 and 2015/2016, one graduate start-up in 2015/2016, and three graduate start-ups the year before. On external commercialisation activity it registered no value of business and community services with small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and only £11 000 of value with commercial non-SMEs in 2014/2015; no value in 2015/2016; and £43 000 with non-commercial organisations in 2015/2016. Records on disclosures and patents are sparse. In 2014/2015, just one patent was filed, 0 licences, 9 MTAs (Material Transfer Agreements) and 9 CDAs (standard confidentiality agreements). There was one disclosure in 2014/2015, and one patent application in 2015/2016. Overall, the patent application portfolio in 2015/2016 amounted to ten applications. The main area where Birkbeck activity is recorded on the HEBCI survey is in the number of public lectures and performances (drama, music, and so on). Against this background, the TRIGGER project undertook an audit of commercialisation within Birkbeck. This was followed up with interviews with a small number (four) of volunteers. Three were academics in the School of Science (one woman, a biologist) and one was a member of the college’s professional staff whose job included fostering entrepreneurship amongst the student body. Other interviews were conducted with the Assistant Dean for Computer Science and Information Systems (CSIS), followed by a meeting with a group of academics and researchers from CSIS, a senior woman professor in the School of Science noted for her interaction with industry, a senior woman entrepreneur formerly at Birkbeck who was the founder of a bioinformatics company, and staff from UCL Ventures. The Research Managers in the School of BEI and the School of Science were also consulted on the outlook for research ­commercialisation in their schools.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 251

13/12/2019 15:47

252

Gender, science and innovation

Types of data collected Four different types of gender-disaggregated data were collected from Birkbeck’s Research Grants and Contracts Office (RGCO), from Birkbeck’s School of Science, and from UCL Ventures. The RGCO provided data on research projects funded by industry and commercial partners in 2009–2014, by gender and amount; the School of Science provided data on the amounts of Higher Education Innovation Fund (HEIF) funding allocations as of December 2014, by gender and amount. UCL Ventures provided data on patents filed by Birkbeck academics in 2011/2012, 2012/2013, 2013/2014; licences in the same years; and confidentiality agreements and material transfers over the same period.

12.4  FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION As confirmed by the HEBCI survey data, the findings show that Birkbeck has a very low overall level of activity in commercialisation of research. Accordingly, relatively little can be said with significance about gender differences. In the period 2011–2014, commercialisation activity was conducted equally by men and women: seven males and six females were involved (Box 12.1). However, in the case of bids to the HEIF, all the awards given were won by males. In addition to the above, between 2010 and 2015, Birkbeck had 30 grants funded by industry and commerce. Of these, the gender of the principal investigator was male on 19 grants, and female on 11 grants. There were 14 different males and seven different females involved. In six cases (five men and one woman) more than one award was received. Male-led BOX 12.1  COMMERCIALISATION ACTIVITY AT BIRKBECK ● ● ● ●

●

Three patents were filed. One was by a combination of male and female academics and the other two by a female. Three licences were taken out. One involved a male, one a female and the third a male-female combination. Three individuals are involved in all licences and patents: two males and one female. There were 20 formal agreements with other parties, mostly two-way confidentiality or material transfer agreements: 9 involved one male, 5 involved one female, 3 involved three males, 3 involved one male and one female. In the School of Science, all HEIF fund allocations up to December 2014 were awarded to males (three successful bids out of five bids overall: four male and one female).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 252

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender differences in the commercialisation of research ­253

grants totalled £2 038 000 and female-led ones £604 000. Female-led grants tended to be primarily social science-based. Data from UCL Ventures showed that commercialisation at Birkbeck is heavily weighted towards biological sciences. The two leading players are both female professors. One has written a piece of software widely used in the commercial world and academia. She also undertakes consultancy for the pharmaceutical industry. 12.4.1  Interview Responses Our study sought explanations for these patterns by gathering more qualitative data through the four interviews as described above. Five main findings emerged, as detailed below. First, all the interviewees saw benefits from their involvement in the commercialisation of research. Contacts and networking came out strongly as positive benefits that were mentioned by all three academics. Commercialisation activities had helped to provide a network of contacts outside of the university, which had then proved useful for arranging future collaborations, or for providing contacts, internships and industry experience for students. The narratives provided by successful commercialisation opportunities could also be used for student recruitment. In addition, the academic staff commented that being involved in commercialisation had encouraged them to think about their work in a real-world context as opposed to a more abstract academic one, as well as pushing them to work more collaboratively, and to interact with a range of individuals and audiences outside of their usual professional circle. One academic mentioned promotion being linked to commercialisation work. The female academic had benefited to the largest extent and had incorporated commercialisation most into her academic practice. The female academic concerned is also very active in networking. For her, incorporating commercialisation into teaching had developed from her personal work into funding opportunities linked to the institutions in which she worked, including Birkbeck. The administrator who was interviewed clearly enjoyed working with academics who seek to commercialise their ideas: ‘Some of the people who conduct research are just genuinely amazing, sometimes quirky, but amazing’. Second, the relationship between gender and commercialisation was one that all of the interviewees found particularly difficult to define. They suggested that in their experience gender had not necessarily had a direct impact on commercialisation activities, and indeed several of them had worked on commercialisation projects with mixed gender or femaleonly teams. The pool of people with the potential to commercialise their

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 253

13/12/2019 15:47

254

Gender, science and innovation

research in some departments is very small. Hence it would not make sense to organise support along gender lines. Gender was only highlighted as an issue in relation to being on the board of the spin-out company, as all of the other members of the board were men. Moreover, patents are generally not a successful route to commercialisation, whereas other routes such as Industrial Cooperative Awards in Science and Technology (CASE) studentships and research collaborations are often more effective ways of working with industry. Third, gender seemed, however, to become a factor when coupled with other hierarchical structures. All of the interviewees suggested that an individual’s stage in their career had an impact on their ability to commercialise. Junior colleagues were less likely to commercialise their work, and more likely to experience a negative impact on their career from so doing. There appeared to be some fundamental issues in the way in which commercialisation and academic careers are balanced for one of the interviewees, a junior academic in the School of Science, who described himself as having a ‘scathing demeanour’ about this issue and that, ‘in the end it was a fundamental blow to my academic career from which I have never recovered’. This in itself may indicate a gender issue, as there are fewer women in senior academic or managerial roles (Rosa and Dawson, 2006). The issue for young scientists is that it is advisable to build a scientific reputation first, unless individuals have a real interest in commercialisation as a career path, since commercial activity will affect time spent on research. An issue of confidence is one that relates to both seniority and gender, as it was commented that uncertainty in one’s abilities is more often observed in female than male colleagues. A senior female psychologist commented: ‘I never felt I wouldn’t get to the top, I just thought I’d have to work hard and believe in yourself and you’ll get there’. However, she did say that, ‘I see it in women and I get angry and I’m mentoring now quite a few women in the college, not only in my department but outside, because it annoys me to see them putting themselves down, where men don’t’. Fourth, the availability of contacts and networking are related to one’s ability to commercialise research. Networking is essential, as ­researchers need to be willing to attend meetings and conferences in order to make useful contacts. This is consistent with Mosey and Wright (2007), Bercovitz and Feldman (2008) and Rasmussen et al. (2014). However, it was also suggested that Birkbeck should do more to publicise the results of scientific research in order to attract more industry attention. In relation to organisational structures, Birkbeck could do more to improve informal networking opportunities which currently vary between different depart-

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 254

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender differences in the commercialisation of research ­255

ments. For example, workshops on communicating with business could be held at Birkbeck for Computer Science colleagues; alumni could be a first port of call, as is already the case in the School of Science. As suggested in previous studies, Birkbeck’s Computer Science Department and School of Science are very different in terms of their potential to commercialise their research. Whereas Computer Science had no impact case studies in the 2014 Research Excellence Framework relating to commercialisation of research, the School of Science had several, mainly jointly with UCL. This may reflect a lack of experience in Computer Science in knowing which research could have potential for commercialisation, and hence the need for specialist advice and reward structures. It may also reflect the ethos of the faculty in which the department lies. However, the School of BEI Research Manager reported that CSIS is the department within BEI where commercialisation is most likely to occur. This is because software engineering, data analysis and computer science are key to generating new avenues for exploitation and development upon which so many other fields depend. The Research Manager reported that, even in Computer Science, there are two key barriers to commercialisation being accomplished within short-term deadlines. The first is the difficulty in gaining access to ‘real’ data, which means any technical breakthrough is seen to be sufficiently robust, flexible, scaleable and supportable. The second is that when development has reached a certain point, where it may have commercial interest, a partner company often does not wish to fund the process externally, particularly if there is commercial sensitivity. As a result, it is difficult to move into commercialisation as opposed to a proof of principle. Fifth, all four interviewees raised issues about trying to commercialise work through Birkbeck. Although there was support within Birkbeck for commercialisation work, a common theme seemed to be a lack of resources. One of the academic staff commented that they were not clear on exactly how to make external companies notice their work, whilst the professional services member of staff was uncertain about exactly what research was taking place in their department until it was almost completed. An intervention at an earlier stage of the process could help to improve the situation, by matching up academic and administrative staff with external companies when research is being developed, so as to set up collaborations before the work becomes too specialised. It was also observed that a general emphasis on improving the college’s research communication and visibility, particularly in the media, would further facilitate this process by allowing external companies to be more aware of what kind of work is taking place at the college.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 255

13/12/2019 15:47

256

Gender, science and innovation

12.5 CONCLUSIONS This chapter set out to explore women academics’ experiences of the research commercialisation process. Our research context focused on Birkbeck, one of the constituent colleges of the University of London. The issue of research commercialisation, although a hot policy agenda, takes many forms and, as this chapter shows, is context dependent. Some universities, particularly research-intensive universities in the US and the UK, have a body of research which lends itself to being patented/and or forming the basis for a new company. The evidence from the Birkbeck study emphasises the heterogeneity of the entrepreneurial experience (Mosey and Wright, 2007). Even in research-intensive universities such as Birkbeck, albeit a relatively small college, there are other models and perspectives on what might be best practice. This chapter has sought to provide insights on how motivations and practices of commercialisation are linked to seniority and organisational context. At Birkbeck there appeared to be no greater challenges to women than men in terms of the commercialisation of research. This may well be the case elsewhere. Contrary to other studies (see, e.g., Miranda et al., 2017; Howe et al., 2014) motivation did not appear as a gender issue in the interviews, and this was consistent with the Birkbeck data on commercialisation activities. There was a difference when grants funded by industry and commerce were considered. More men than women received such grants, and the total value of grants awarded to men was more than three times higher than those awarded to women. As an explanation, human capital theory is useful because it goes beyond academic qualifications, scientific and professional knowledge to include competences (Wright et al., 2007; Gillies, 2017). In this context, this relates to characteristics of entrepreneurial intentions, motivations and readiness. This chapter has also highlighted that engagement with the entrepreneurial process adds to human capital developing networks and developing the student learning experience. However, it should be noted that networks can be viewed from two different perspectives. The first relates to the importance of getting to ‘first base’ by developing networks that lead to commercialisation opportunities and access to resources; which at Birkbeck appears to be an institutional and disciplinary issue rather than a gender issue (Vohora et al., 2004). The second is how networks for those involved in commercialisation positively influence the ‘day job’ in terms of teaching and the student experience. Indeed, it was suggested that Master’s students in the School of Science were far more likely to be entrepreneurial than the academics. No other generalisation from the Birkbeck

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 256

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender differences in the commercialisation of research ­257

data is possible. The two most heavily networked people were the female biologist and the male founder of the biomedical spin-off. Two themes were most relevant. The first is a gender-related issue and concerns that of seniority. Commercialisation activity is less damaging to an academic career for senior academics. However, at Birkbeck, in the UK and in many other countries, there are fewer senior women in STEM disciplines than senior men (Rosa and Dawson, 2006). The corollary is that there are fewer women undertaking research commercialisation in STEM. The second issue is not necessarily related to gender and concerns the organisational context. Commercialisation has not been a priority for Birkbeck. All of Siegel et al.’s (2003) three critical organisational factors seem to be missing at Birkbeck. There is no clear reward system for academics, and being a successful entrepreneur does not compensate for a lack of research income or research publications. The TTO system works well in some respects and not in others. The college employs UCL Ventures to work on commercialisation but these interactions are generally reactive rather than proactive. As yet there is no specialist advice for commercialisation of research in computer science, although the School of BEI Research Manager does now have the role of supporting CSIS academics when they wish to explore possible commercialisation opportunities. The college recently devolved its business engagement team to the individual schools, and in so doing, arguably possibly lost some momentum and expertise in technology transfer. It is perhaps significant that the only school to have such activity is that working with UCL. While our study sought to gain insights into research commercialisation from a gender perspective at Birkbeck, the focus on a single university setting is a key limitation. Future studies could seek to expand their focus to multiple institutional contexts, perhaps providing a sufficient number of regional and/or country contexts to facilitate geographical comparisons. Augmenting interview samples would also provide richer and more meaningful insights into academics’ different commercialisation experiences and perceived barriers. Furthermore, there is scope for more work on the characteristics of individuals in their respective organisational contexts. Advances in human capital theory, networking and social capital appear to offer useful theoretical frameworks for future analyses.

REFERENCES Ahl, H. (2006). Why research on women entrepreneurs needs new directions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30 (5), 595–621.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 257

13/12/2019 15:47

258

Gender, science and innovation

Arenius, P. and Minniti, M. (2005). Perceptual variables and nascent entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 24 (3), 233–47. Becker, G.S. (1964). Front Matter, Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis, with Special Reference to Education, New York: National Bureau of Economic Research. Bercovitz, J. and  Feldman, M. (2008). Academic entrepreneurs: organizational change at the individual level. Organization Science, 19 (1), 69–89. Bozeman, B. and Mangematin, V. (2004).  Editor’s introduction: building and deploying scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 33 (4), 565–68. Brush, C.G., Greene, P.G., Balachandra, L. and Davis, E.A. (2014). Diana report women entrepreneurs 2014: bridging the gender gap in venture capital. Accessed 4 September 2017 at http://www.babson.edu/Academics/centers/blank-center/ global-research/diana/Documents/diana-project-executive-summary-2014.pdf. Clarysse, B., Tartari V. and Salter, A. (2011).  The impact of entrepreneurial capacity, experience and organizational support on academic entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 40 (8), 1084–93. Coleman, S. and Robb, A. (2012). Capital structure theory and new technology firms: is there a match? Management Research Review, 35 (2), 106–20. Colyvas, J.A., Snellman, K., Bercovitz, J. and Feldman, M. (2012). Disentangling effort and performance: a renewed look at gender differences in commercialising medical school research. Journal of Technology Transfer, 1–12. Corley, E. and Gaughan, M. (2005). Scientists’ participation in university research centres: what are the gender differences? Journal of Technology Transfer, 30 (4), 371–81. De Melo-Martín, I. (2013). Patenting and the gender gap: should women be encouraged to patent more? Science and Engineering Ethics, 19 (2), 491–504. Ding, W.W., Murray, F. and Stuart, T. (2006). Gender differences in patenting in the academic life sciences. Science, 313, 665–7. Elsevier (2017), Gender in the global research landscape. Accessed 4 September 2017 at https://www.elsevier.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/265661/ElsevierGe​ nderReport_final_for-web.pdf. Etkowitz, H., Kemelgor, C. and Uzzi, B. (2000). Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science and Technology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fox, M.F. (2001). Women, science and academia: graduate education AND Careers. Gender and Society, 15 (5), 654–66. Gillies, D. (2017). Human capital theory. In M. Peters (ed.), Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and Theory, Singapore: Springer, pp. 1–5. Granovetter, M.S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78 (6), 1360–80. Hanson, S. and Blake, M. (2009). Gender and entrepreneurial networks. Regional Studies, 43 (1), 135–49. Howe, S.A., Juhas, M.C. and Herbers, J.M. (2014). Academic women: overlooked entrepreneurs. Peer Review, 16 (2). Accessed 29 January 2015 at https://www.aa​ cu.org/peerreview/2014/spring/howe. Justo, R., DeTienne, D.R. and Sieger, P. (2015). Failure or voluntary exit? Reassessing the female underperformance hypothesis. Journal of Business Venturing, 30 (6), 775–92. Klofsten, M. and Jones-Evans, D. (2000). Comparing academic entrepreneurship in Europe – the case of Sweden and Ireland. Small Business Economics, 14, 299–309.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 258

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender differences in the commercialisation of research ­259

Lawton Smith, H. and Bagchi-Sen, S. (2012). The research university, entrepreneurship and regional development: research propositions and current evidence. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 24 (5/6), 383–404. Leggon,  C.B. (2011). African-American faculty in science and engineering: the illusion of inclusion. In Henry T. Frierson and William F. Tate (eds), Beyond Stock Stories and Folktales: African Americans’ Paths to STEM Fields Diversity in Higher Education, Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing, pp. 273–86. Link, A.N., Siegel, D.S. and Bozeman, B. (2007). An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informal technology transfer. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16 (4), 641–55. Long, S. (2001). From Scarcity to Visibility: Gender Differences in the Careers of Doctoral Scientists and Engineers, Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Mayer, H. (2008). Segmentation and segregation patterns of women-owned hightech firms in four metropolitan regions in the United States. Regional Studies, 42 (10), 1–27. Micozzi, A., Micozzi, F. and Pattitoni, P. (2014). Fostering female entrepreneurship in academic spin-offs. In D. Audretsch, E. Lehmann, M. Meoli and S.  Vismara (eds), University Evolution, Entrepreneurial Activity and Regional Competitiveness, London: Springer, pp. 49–70. Miranda, F.J.,  Chamorro-Mera,  A., Rubio, S. and Pérez-Mayo, J. (2017). Academic entrepreneurial intention: the role of gender. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 9 (1), 66–86. Morgan, R.P., Kruytbosch, C. and Kannankutty, N. (2001). Patenting and invention activity of US scientists and engineers in the academic sector: comparisons with industry. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26, 173–83. Mosey, S. and Wright, M. (2007). From human capital to social capital: a longitudinal study of technology-based academic entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31, 909–35. Muller, B. (2006). Human capital and successful academic spin-off. Discussion Paper No. 06-081. Accessed 4 September 2017 at ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/ dp/dp06081.pdf. Murray, F. and Graham, L. (2007). Buying science and selling science: gender differences in the market for commercial science. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16, 657–89. Nilsson, L. (2015). How to attract female engineers. Accessed 4 September 2017 at https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/27/opinion/how-to-attract-female-engine​ers. ht​ml?mcubz=0. Owen-Smith, J. and Powell, W.W. (2001). To patent or not: faculty decisions and institutional success at technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 26 (1), 99–114. Polkowska, D. (2013). Women scientists in the leaking pipeline: barriers to the commercialisation  of scientific knowledge by women. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 8 (2), 156–65. Ranga, M. and Etzkowitz, H. (2010). Athena in the world of techne: the gender dimension of technology, innovation and entrepreneurship. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 5 (1), 1–12. Rasmussen, E., Mosey, S. and Wright, M. (2014). The influence of university departments on the evolution of entrepreneurial competencies in spin-off ventures. Research Policy, 43 (1), 92–106. Rosa, P. and Dawson, A. (2006). Gender and the commercialisation of ­university

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 259

13/12/2019 15:47

260

Gender, science and innovation

science: academic founders of spinout companies. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 18, 341–66. Rosser, S.V. (2012). Breaking Into the Lab: Engineering Progress for Women in Science, New York: New York University Press. Rosser, S.V. (2017). Academic Women in STEM Faculty: Views beyond a Decade after POWRE, New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Shane, S. (2004). Academic Entrepreneurship:  University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing. Siegel, D.S., Waldman, D.A. and Link, A.N. (2003). Assessing the impact of organisational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study. Research Policy, 32, 27–48. Ucbasaran, D., Westhead, P. and Wright, M. (2008). Opportunity identification and pursuit: does an entrepreneur’s human capital matter? Small Business Economics, 30 (2), 153–73. Vohora, A., Wright, M. and Lockett, A. (2004). Critical junctures in the development of university high-tech spinout companies. Research Policy, 33 (1), 147–75. Westhead, P. and Wright, M. (1998). Novice, portfolio and serial founders: are they different? Journal of Business Venturing, 13, 173–204. Whittington, K.B. and Smith-Doerr, L. (2005). Gender and commercial science: women’s patenting in the life sciences. Journal of Technology Transfer, 30, 355–70. Whittington, K.B. and Smith-Doerr, L. (2008). Women inventors in context disparities in patenting across academia and industry. Gender and Society, 22 (2), 194–218. Wright, M., Hmieleski, K.M., Siegel, D.S. and Ensley, M.D. (2007). The role of human capital in technological entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship, Theory and Practice, 31 (6), 791–806.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 260

13/12/2019 15:47

13. Unfolding the factors affecting female scientists’ intentions in spinoff creation: a Central European case study* 1

Sándor Huszár, Szabolcs Prónay and Norbert Buzás 13.1 INTRODUCTION For many decades, academics were considered to be lecturers and scientists who teach and conduct scientific research without commercializing their scientific results. Thus, there was little need to investigate start-up creation in academia as there were few such start-ups. However, in recent decades, the role of universities has been changed significantly since society has raised the expectation that universities should contribute to social development through their scientific activity (Etzkowitz et al., 2000; Rasmussen et al., 2006). The concept of entrepreneurial universities has gained increasing attention in the international literature (Etzkowitz, 2002; O’Shea et al., 2005; Rothaermel et al., 2007) due to their role in regional development (Etzkowitz, 1998), in technology development (Mansfield and Lee, 1996; Shane, 2004a) and in spin-off creation (Roberts, 1991). Although academic spin-offs have been rare entities, they can contribute to economic development and to additional income generation for universities (Shane, 2004b). We believe that individual researchers play a significant role in the commercialization process (Hoye and Pries, 2009; Shane, 2004a), but – as previous studies have observed – the commercialization of university knowledge may divert scientists from fundamental research activity (Geuna and Nesta, 2006) and can restrict information flow among *  This project was partially supported by the European Union and the European Social Fund through project grant No. TÁMOP-4.1.1.C-12/1/KONV-2012-0004. ­261

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 261

13/12/2019 15:47

262

Gender, science and innovation

scientists (Welsh et al., 2008), a tendency which runs counter to the norms of open science. Furthermore, scientists’ workload (teaching and research) and personal circumstances can hamper entrepreneurial intention (Goethner et al., 2012). Thus, the role of scientists and their attitudes towards commercialization are particularly important. Although most scientists have positive attitudes towards knowledge and technology transfer in general, traditionally they do not favour entrepreneurial activity as a form of knowledge transfer (Lee, 1996). However, researchers who are motivated mainly by the commercial potential for entrepreneurial activity are more likely to take part in spin-off creation (D’Este and Perkmann, 2011). Moreover, attitudes and motivations as regards spin-off creation also differ between traditional and entrepreneurial scientists (Huszár et al., 2016). In addition, other authors argue for the possible positive effects of commercialization (Etzkowitz, 2003; Grimaldi et al., 2011; Godin and Gingras, 2000; Gulbrandsen and Smeby, 2005), such as increased publication performance, defining new research agendas with industrial partners and increased cooperation between research groups. Following previous studies, we place our research focus on individuals and aim to understand individual attitudes and motivation with respect to spin-off creation. Although we can observe an increasing number of scientific papers investigating academics’ motivation and attitudes towards engaging with industry, there are few that address explaining gender differences. It is necessary to investigate the expectations of both genders because some evidence exists of significant disparities between male and female scientists in academia. For instance, some authors have found that male scientists are more likely to engage with industry and take part in commercialization than female scientists (Azagra-Caro, 2007; Boardman and Ponomarinov, 2009; Buttel and Goldberger, 2002), but formal technology transfer (for example, spin-off creation) still plays less of a role when compared to informal technology transfer channels, such as consulting and joint publication (Link et al., 2007; Klofsten and Jones-Evans, 2000). However, there are also contradictory results, which suggest that no links exist between gender and university‒industry ties (Gulbrandsen and Smeby, 2005; Van Rijnsoever et al., 2008). Based on results from previous investigations, the international literature cannot clearly specify the extent to which male and female scientists differ with respect to the commercialization of scientific results and the factors that play the most significant roles. Thus, we leave these questions open in our empirical investigation and attempt to determine similarities and differences between male and female scientists’ intention and attitudes towards spin-off creation in a Central European country. We believe that our investigation highlights significant differences in spin-off creation and identifies the influencing factors behind the

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 262

13/12/2019 15:47



Unfolding the factors affecting female scientists’ intentions ­263

disparities. Our research focuses on the following scientific questions: (1) do female and male scientists differ in their intention to create a spin-off? If yes, (2) what are the differences that influence their behavioral antecedents? In the next section, we provide a brief overview of the most influential antecedents for the intention to create a spin-off, and the influencing factors with regard to gender differences. Since there is a lack of research in higher education institutions, we refer to results on female entrepreneurship in general. These studies provide insights into the main disparities between male and female entrepreneurs and form the basis for our hypotheses and empirical investigation. Although these studies concluded that gender differences in entrepreneurial endeavours are highly influenced by sectoral characteristics (Anna et al., 1999; Loscocco and Robinson, 1991) and educational background (Cowling and Taylor, 2001; Wilson et al., 2007), other studies have not found a significant effect for education (Blanchflower, 2004; Langowitz and Minniti, 2007) or other demographic circumstances. Male and female scientists form a more homogeneous group in our investigation of higher education institutions because they are all highly qualified holders of higher degrees, usually of PhDs working in the same sector even if in different scientific disciplines. Based on the literature, we highlight those topics that could be relevant antecedents to female intention to create a spin-off. Although most studies focus on female entrepreneurship in general, their results provide some insights into the antecedents to spin-off creation. Section 13.2 demonstrates theories and motivations relating to entrepreneurial intention. Section 13.3 offers a brief review of influencing factors in entrepreneurship. Sections 13.4 and 13.5 give our research results. Finally, in sections 13.6 and 13.7 we present a discussion and draw conclusions, and provide some practical advice for policy makers on possible interventions needed to increase female scientists’ intention towards spin-off creation.

13.2 WILLINGNESS AND MOTIVATIONS WITH RESPECT TO SPIN-OFF CREATION In recent decades, social psychologists have thoroughly investigated the influencing factors of human behavior and concluded that in most cases a particular behavior is triggered by an intention (Ajzen, 1988) or perceived efficacy (Bandura, 1977) as regards that behaviour. During this scientific advancement, some theories have proven to be significant predictors of human behaviour, thus improving the scientific toolbar in psychology

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 263

13/12/2019 15:47

264

Gender, science and innovation

with further adoptions by other scientific disciplines, such as economics and business studies. One of the well-known theories in social psychology is Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour (TPB). This theory aims to provide a theoretical model to predict certain behaviour (Ajzen, 1988). The theory was developed in social psychology and was used to study entrepreneurship (Kautonen et al., 2013; Krueger and Carsrud, 1993; Lortie and Castogiovanni, 2015). It was also adopted to investigate the entrepreneurial intention of individuals in academia, especially among academics (Goethner et al., 2012) and also students (Küttim et al., 2014; Yurtkorua et al., 2014). The central concept of the TPB is the individual’s intention to perform a certain behaviour. ‘Intention’ refers to the extent to which the individual is willing to engage in a particular behaviour. The TPB model assumes that the stronger the intention to engage in a behaviour, the more likely that it turns into that behaviour (Ajzen, 1991). The TPB supposes that the stronger an individual’s favourable attitude and the pressure of specific reference groups towards a particular behaviour and the greater the perceived behavioral control, the stronger the individual’s intention to engage in that behaviour. The author points out that intention can only trigger behaviour in cases when engaging in the behaviour is under volitional control. The role of control also appears in Bandura’s well-established theory of self-efficacy (TSE). Bandura (1977) argues that an individual only engages in a particular behaviour if the individual perceives themselves as being sufficiently effective to succeed. Self-efficacy will be discussed later. Along with these assumptions, we suppose that intention towards spin-off creation can be an appropriate predictor of woman-headed startups. This is why we place our research focus on intention and attempt to measure gender differences in the case of intention to create a spin-off. In our investigation, intention is used as a dependent variable that is influenced by various factors, which are discussed in the next section. Although some surveys have found contradictory results on the impact of gender differences on engagement with industry, we base our hypothesis on Goethner et al. (2012), who found that male scientists in academia are more likely to express an intention to create a new business than female scientists. Thus, our first assumption is: Hypothesis 1:  Female scientists express a lower intention towards spinoff creation than male scientists. Why do women start new business ventures? As a previous study has found, women are more likely to change if necessary (Sexton and

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 264

13/12/2019 15:47



Unfolding the factors affecting female scientists’ intentions ­265

Bowman-Upton, 1990). Women’s entry into the small business arena is greatly influenced by the fact that the relevant sectors are often unattractive for men for some reason, such as unfavourable economic prospects. Thus, these small businesses are rather more concentrated in sectors usually dominated by women than in those dominated by men (Loscocco and Robinson, 1991). Specifically, women tend to start businesses in retail and service-oriented sectors, while their participation in hightechnology, construction and manufacturing is much smaller (Anna et al., 1999). With regard to other factors, recent studies have found various motivations that can influence academics’ entrepreneurial activity. Personal income is one of the well-discussed motivational factors. Evidence exists that expected financial gain can motivate researchers (Renault, 2006; Goethner et al., 2012), but other results (Goethner et al., 2012) suggest only an indirect link between financial gains and entrepreneurial intention. This supposes that expected personal earnings only exert a direct effect on attitudes towards entrepreneurial activity that have a direct impact on entrepreneurial intention (Goethner et al., 2012), while many scientists are motivated by enhancing their academic standing rather than by financial profit (Fini et al., 2009). Hungarian studies have also investigated motivational factors among scientists, emphasizing the importance of financial incentives due to low salaries in academia (Novotny, 2014), particularly among young researchers (Makra and Erdős, 2012). These studies have failed to prove the significance of career-related motivations in general. In addition, an expected boost in reputation usually does not motivate scientists in their entrepreneurial activity (Goethner et al., 2012). This can be explained by the fact that entrepreneurial activity does not always yield an additional reputational gain for researchers among their peers in the scientific community. Another motivational factor is the desire to bring discoveries to market, which has been proven important in researchers’ motivation (Nilsson et al., 2010), while some young scientists create spinoffs to escape bottlenecks in the academic system and work in their field of expertise (Rizzo, 2015). In our study, we suppose that female scientists are rather more motivated by social values than male scientists; therefore, our next assumption is: Hypothesis 2:  Female scientists’ intention to create a spin-off company is rather more influenced by social development-related motivations than by financial-oriented ones.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 265

13/12/2019 15:47

266

Gender, science and innovation

13.3 INFLUENCING FACTORS IN SPIN-OFF CREATION While in the previous section we introduced the concept of intention and motivations that can trigger entrepreneurial pursuit, in this section we demonstrate other influencing factors that can have an impact on intention to create spin-offs. In this study, we focus on previous experience outside academia, on control-related variables (as psychological determinants of entrepreneurship) and on entrepreneurial capabilities. As recent studies have pointed out, experience can greatly influence entrepreneurship. As Goethner et al. (2012) concluded, previous entrepreneurial experience can influence new business ventures; furthermore, a Canadian study highlighted that only a small proportion of researchers in academia take part in producing inventions, but they generate a significant share of all inventions (Hoye and Pries, 2009). This result suggests that it is usually a small group of scientists who actively contribute to the development of an entrepreneurial university, where the role of experience takes on significant value. Furthermore, other studies have found that female entrepreneurs possess less managerial and new business experience (Carter, 1997; Kalleberg and Leicht, 1991). From our perspective, experience can be approached from two standpoints. Firstly, experience outside academia (even if it is research experience) can facilitate entrepreneurship; and secondly, managerial experience (for example, as a director or head of a company) can also foster the establishment of a new company. Thus, our next assumption is: Hypothesis 3:  Female scientists have less managerial and research experience outside academia than do male scientists. Above, we briefly presented Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior and emphasized the role of perceived behavioural control. The concept of control relating to a certain behaviour plays a significant role in the TPB and in the TSE also. Moreover, some scholars deem perceived behavioural control (TPB) and self-efficacy (TSE) as the same constructs. While these constructs share some similarities, there are significant differences between them. While perceived behavioural control reflects the individual’s perception of how much autonomy they have to engage in a particular behaviour (Ajzen, 1988), self-efficacy reflects the extent to which an individual can succeed in completing tasks and reaching goals (Bandura, 1977). Both authors agreed that perceived behavioural control and self-efficacy are significant triggers (or requirements) of human behaviour. As previous studies have also investigated the role of perceived behavioural control

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 266

13/12/2019 15:47



Unfolding the factors affecting female scientists’ intentions ­267

(Ajzen, 1991; Goethner et al., 2012; Kautonen et al., 2013; Krueger and Carsrud, 1993; Küttim et al., 2014; Lortie and Castogiovanni, 2015; Yurtkorua et al., 2014) and the role of self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977; Boyd and Vozikis, 1994; Chen et al., 1998; Wilson et al., 2007), we also attempt to determine the strength of their influence, on the assumption that these constructs also have an impact on the intention to create spin-offs. Although men usually perceive equal self-efficacy in traditional and non-traditional occupations, women feel less self-efficacy in non-traditional occupations and more self-efficacy in traditional ones (Betz and Hackett, 1981). This may suggest that, while a woman scientist feels effective as a researcher, she can still be uncertain about being a founder of a spin-off company. In addition, women are less willing to take risks (Sexton and Bowman-Upton, 1990), thus possibly representing a barrier to a new business venture. Furthermore, Cliff (1998) found that women entrepreneurs are more likely not to grow a company they control beyond a certain size, so as to maintain a balance between work and personal life. Adopting these results for our investigation, in the field of academic research, managing and participating in spin-off companies can result in a significant workload that can threaten this balance. Goethner et al. (2012) also found that one of the main barriers to academic entrepreneurship is the additional workload, given personal circumstances. If we accept these results and suppose that female scientists consider personal consequences rather than economic opportunities, then our next assumption is: Hypothesis 4:  Control over spin-off creation influences female scientists’ intention to create a spin-off more strongly than male scientists’ intention to do so. Even within the same sector, women business owners usually achieve less success than businesses which are led by men business owners (Loscocco and Robinson, 1991). Young women may avoid entrepreneurship because they feel that they do not possess the necessary skills and abilities to become successful entrepreneurs (Wilson et al., 2007). Chen et al. (1998) also draw attention to the lack of necessary skills, but emphasize the perception of lack of necessary skills more. If the individual evaluates their skills as being lower than they think is necessary, then that person will shun entrepreneurial activities. Langowitz and Minniti (2007) also argue for this concept, and found in their survey of 17 countries that women tend to perceive themselves and the entrepreneurial environment in a less favourable light than do men. They suggest that perceptual variables may be significant universal factors influencing entrepreneurial behaviour. Anna et al. (1999) used the term ‘venture efficacy’ for the individual’s

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 267

13/12/2019 15:47

268

Gender, science and innovation

efficacy in attracting financial resources for business formation. The concept behind this phrase is that individuals show differing effectiveness in the ability to gain access to financial resources if needed. Thus, opportunities to attract funding for the expenditures of spin-off creation are crucial. If female and male scientists differ in this ability, then female scientists may experience difficulty in, and significant barriers to, starting a new business venture. Our presumption relating to entrepreneurial capabilities is therefore: Hypothesis 5:  Female scientists evaluate their capabilities lower than male scientists, thus hindering their intention to create a spin-off company to commercialize scientific results. We designed our research agenda based on this literature review and these hypotheses. In the following sections, we demonstrate our research findings and draw conclusions with respect to the hypotheses.

13.4  RESEARCH METHOD In 2015, we carried out a survey among scientists at 20 Hungarian higher education institutions to investigate their attitudes towards commercialization of research results through spin-off companies. These institutions cover all higher education institutions where the natural sciences, life sciences, engineering and agriculture are represented. Our aim was to identify motivations with a significant relationship to scientists’ intention to create a spin-off company. In our research focus, intention plays a significant role. Intention to create a spin-off (for example, ‘I plan to create a spin-off company within one year to commercialize my scientific results’) and other variables were measured on a traditional five-point Likert scale. The survey was carried out with an online web-based system, which allowed us to collect responses at low cost and in a structured manner (Malhotra and Birks, 2006), while maintaining the validity of the responses (Gosling et al., 2004). The questionnaire was tested at a technology transfer office with technology transfer managers holding degrees in the natural and life sciences. After the internal test, we sent the questionnaire to one university, checked the preliminary results and then distributed the questionnaire to other institutions. We collected the e-mail addresses of researchers from the departments’ websites to send the questionnaire directly to those individuals. Our previous experience suggests that this method yields better response rates. In collecting e-mail addresses, we considered two principal rules. First, the

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 268

13/12/2019 15:47



Unfolding the factors affecting female scientists’ intentions ­269

department of the researchers had to be relevant to the scientific fields mentioned above. Second, the position held by the researcher had to be relevant to the research. Finally, we sent the questionnaire directly to the academics in 2015 and received 660 responses out of 7967 scientists. The survey was carried out through the EVASYS online web-based survey system, and responses were analysed with IBM SPSS 20.0 statistical software. Although 660 academics participated in our investigation, 42 scientists did not indicate their gender; 148 female scientists (23.9 per cent) and 470 of their male peers (76.1 per cent) participated in our sample; this shows an imbalance in the gender distribution and could be a consequence of gender disparities in the natural sciences, engineering, medicine and agriculture.

13.5  RESEARCH RESULTS In this section, we demonstrate our research results in terms of gender with the aim of better understanding gender differences relating to attitudes and intention to create a spin-off. 13.5.1  Intention to Create a Spin-Off In our study, intention to create a spin-off company to commercialize scientific results plays a central role. Based on previous studies, we assume that female scientists express a lower intention towards spin-off creation than male scientists. To investigate our presumption, we measured intention to create a spin-off with the five-point Likert scale suggested by Ajzen (1991), and we adapted it for our research purposes: ‘I plan to create a spin-off company (within one year) to commercialize my recent scientific results’. With regard to the whole sample, scientists expressed quite a low intention to create a spin-off company (M 5 1.70; SD 5 1.14), suggesting that most scientists are not interested in spin-off creation and that only a small proportion of them tend to commercialize their research results. If we investigate the results in detail, we can also observe that while male scientists expressed quite a low intention (M 5 1.76; SD 5 1.19), female scientists’ intention to create spin-off companies to commercialize scientific results was even lower (M 5 1.47; SD 5 0.87) (see Table 13.1). We tested the means of intention between the male and female scientists (with the independent samples t-test). The results of the comparison provided evidence that the intention of male and female scientists differs significantly (Levene’s test for equality of variances: Sig. 5 0.000; t-test for

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 269

13/12/2019 15:47

270

Gender, science and innovation

Table 13.1  Female and male scientists’ intention to create a spin-off

Intention

Gender

N

Mean

Std deviation

Female Male n.a. Sample

85 310 16 411

1.4706 1.7645 1.8125 1.7056

0.86724 1.19303 1.16726 1.13629

equality of means: Sig. 5 0.012). We can conclude that female scientists expressed lower probability to create a spin-off company than male scientists. From these results, we accept Hypothesis 1. 13.5.2  Motivations Towards Spin-Off Creation We also investigated the motivations for creating a spin-off company to commercialize scientific results. The variables investigated were adopted from the international literature and our recent qualitative study conducted in Hungary. Our aim was to determine whether male and female scientists differ in patterns of motivation. According to the literature, female entrepreneurs tend to behave based more on social benefit and expectations than do male entrepreneurs. To determine the patterns of the motivations investigated, a principal component analysis was conducted first. The results suggest that three different groups of motivations can be distinguished: social development-oriented motivations, reputation-oriented motivations and financial-oriented motivations. While financial-oriented motivations refer mostly to personal earnings by commercializing scientific results in a spin-off company, and to a certain extent to acquiring financial resources for further research and increasing cooperation with industrial partners, reputation-oriented motivations demonstrate interest in increasing one’s reputation within academia and society and to prove the benefit of one’s scientific activity to family members and friends. Social development-oriented motivations comprise commercializing scientific results for the benefit of society, providing career opportunities for young scientists, obtaining financial resources for further research and stimulating cooperation with industrial partners. In the next step, we compared motivations indicated by male and female scientists to identify differences in their motivational patterns. According to the results (see Table 13.2), social development-oriented motivations and financial-oriented motivations play a more important role in s­ cientists’

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 270

13/12/2019 15:47

­271

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 271

13/12/2019 15:47

135 (42%)

  43 (42%)

281 (85%)

132 (41%)

  42 (41%)

  87 (84%)

  98 (30%)

246 (76%)

  25 (24%)

  80 (78%)

275 (82%)

  93 (90%)

To stimulate collaboration with   industrial actors

To secure jobs for young researchers   at my spin-off company To demonstrate the practical   relevance of my research activity for family/friends To increase my scientific reputation   through entrepreneurship To increase my social reputation   through entrepreneurship To increase my personal income   from entrepreneurial activity

278 (84%)

100 (97%)

To obtain financial resources for   further research

262 (79%)

  89 (87%)

Male

To make my invention socially  beneficial

Female

Frequencies,* N (%)

Notes: * Including scientists who indicated at least a 4 or 5 on the Likert scale. ** Results from the independent samples t-test on means of male and female scientists’ motivations.

Financial-oriented motivations

Reputation-oriented motivations

Social developmentoriented motivations

Table 13.2  Motivations of female and male scientists

4.28

3.14

3.13

2.65

4.17

4.39

4.60

4.40

Female

4.21

3.07

3.04

2.77

3.96

4.16

4.17

4.10

Male

Means

No difference  (Sig. 5 0.561) No difference  (Sig. 5 0.632) No difference  (Sig. 5 0.476)

Significant  difference (Sig. 5 0.007) Significant  difference (Sig. 5 0.000) Significant  difference (Sig. 5 0.018) No difference  (Sig. 5 0.070) No difference  (Sig. 5 0.402)

Test results**

272

Gender, science and innovation

commercialization pursuits than reputation-oriented motivations. While the first two groups of motivations were important for more than threequarters of the scientists, the latter motivated less than half of them. To gain better insights into gender differences, we conducted an independent samples t-test for the comparison of means. As the test highlighted, only social development-oriented motivations were found to be significantly different (except in ensuring career opportunities for young scientists). Reputation-oriented motivations and financial-oriented motivations were not. Taking into consideration the means, we can conclude that female scientists expressed higher motivation towards social ­development-oriented motivations in spin-off creation than male scientists, therefore supporting our presumption. Thus, we accept Hypothesis 2. Although the results were confirmed by the statistical test, we must tread carefully in drawing our conclusions since the differences were quite low. 13.5.3  Experience Outside Academia Recent studies have shown that previous experience can also contribute to entrepreneurial intention. Thus, possessing previous experience – even if this is research experience or managerial experience outside academia – can be an influencing factor in entrepreneurship. According to the results, a higher proportion of male scientists (28.6 per cent) possess research experience with companies than do female scientists (15.7 per cent) and more male scientists (24.4 per cent) possess managerial experience with companies than do female scientists (8.6 per cent). These results suggest that male scientists have more experience outside academia than female scientists. While there are about twice as many male scientists possessing research experience than female scientists, there are three times  as many male scientists as female scientists with managerial experience. We also compared experienced researchers and investigated their experience. We wanted to know whether any difference exists between male and female scientists in their experience measured in years. According to the results, experienced male scientists possess 6.93 years of research experience (N 5 128; SD 5 5.40) and 7.87 years of managerial experience (N 5 109; SD 5 5.35). In contrast, experienced female scientists gained 6.27 years of research experience (N 5 22; SD 5 5.94) and 6.92 years of managerial experience (N 5 12; SD 5 6.14), a result which is a little lower than male scientists’ experience. To test these disparities, we conducted an independent sample t-test for the comparison of means. The results did not confirm previous findings

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 272

13/12/2019 15:47



Unfolding the factors affecting female scientists’ intentions ­273

(research experiences with companies – Levene’s test for equality of variances: Sig. 5 0.323; t-test for equality of means: Sig. 5 0.515; managerial experience with companies – Levene’s test for equality of variances: Sig. 5 0.518; t-test for equality of means: Sig. 5 0.563) and suggest that there is no significant difference. We can conclude that a smaller proportion of female scientists possess research and managerial experience outside academia; thus, we accept Hypothesis 3, but the groups of female and male scientists with more experience do not differ on average. 13.5.4  Control-Related Variables As previous studies have highlighted, female entrepreneurship is greatly influenced by perceived control over starting a business. This means that female entrepreneurs need more perceived control over entrepreneurial activity than men, who tend to take more risks. To better understand the relationship between control-related variables and intention to create a spin-off company, we investigated the correlation between them. The correlation table (Table 13.3) shows that some of the control-related variables were proven significant for intention to create a spin-off. While entrepreneurial male scientists believe that companies under their control can compete with industrial rivals, entrepreneurial Table 13.3  Correlations between control-related variables and intention Intention If I commercialized my  research results in my own company, I could easily do so at the university Whether I commercialize my  research results in a spin-off company or not is entirely up to me There are barriers beyond my  control, which make it difficult to commercialize research results in a spin-off company A company under my  leadership could compete with industrial competitors

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 273

Female

Male

Pearson correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N

0.089 0.581 41

0.134* 0.042 232

Pearson correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N

0.335* 0.015 52

0.175** 0.005 254

Pearson correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N

0.074 0.612 50

0.039 0.555 232

Pearson correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N

0.356* 0.014 47

0.311** 0.000 207

13/12/2019 15:47

274

Gender, science and innovation

female scientists’ belief in this regard is a little lower (the relationship is weaker). Furthermore, the perceived freedom to establish a spin-off company to commercialize scientific results plays a more important role in male scientists’ decisions than in female scientists’ behaviour. Based on the results, we can conclude that control-related variables influence male scientists’ intentions to a higher extent than female scientists’ intentions. This result contradicts our presumption (and the results of recent studies); thus, we reject Hypothesis 4. 13.5.5  Influence of Entrepreneurial Capabilities We investigated the role of other variables identified during our previous qualitative study and in the international literature. These variables are entrepreneurial experience,1 entrepreneurial competencies, ties to ­industry, existence of business expertise and existence of financial resources. In the case of the last two variables, we asked respondents to indicate the extent to which they would need assistance in business expertise and financial resources from the university or another support organization. The results show that both female and male scientists’ intention to create a spin-off is moderately influenced by previous entrepreneurial experience (RF 5 0.466; SigF 5 0.000; RM 5 0.314; SigM 5 0.000), entrepreneurial competencies (RF 5 0.525; SigF 5 0.000; RM 5 0.329; SigM 5 0.000) and ties to industry (RF 5 0.326; SigF 5 0.002; RM 5 0.161; SigM 5 0.005); however, ties to industry seem to be more influential for female scientists than for male scientists (see Table 13.4). While assistance from the university in business expertise was not proven important for female scientists (RF 5 0.128; SigF 5 0.288) or male scientists (RM 5 0.049; SigM 5 0.419), the potential financial support provided by the university was (RF 5 0.580; SigF 5 0.000; RM 5 0.189; SigM 5 0.002). The results also suggest that female scientists rely more on assistance from the university than do male scientists. With regard to assistance from other support organizations in business expertise and financial resources, male scientists (RM 5 0.192; SigM 5 0.001) attributed greater importance to this than female scientists (RF 5 0.236; SigF 5 0.048). We thus reject this hypothesis.

  This variable is different from the variable investigated for entrepreneurial experience. While the former was measured in years, the latter was self-reported on a five-point Likert scale. 1

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 274

13/12/2019 15:47



Unfolding the factors affecting female scientists’ intentions ­275

Table 13.4  Correlation between influencing variables and intention Intention I have significant experience in  entrepreneurial activity I possess appropriate  entrepreneurial competencies I have appropriate ties to  industry I would not need professional  support from the university to manage a spin-off company successfully I could afford the expenditures  of establishing a spin-off company without support from the university I would need professional  and financial support from an external company to manage a spin-off company successfully

Female

Male

Pearson correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N

0.466** 0.000 85 0.525** 0.000 82 0.326** 0.002 84 0.128 0.288 71

0.314** 0.000 310 0.329** 0.000 295 0.161** 0.005 307 0.049 0.419 271

Pearson correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N

0.580** 0.000 68

0.189** 0.002 270

Pearson correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N

0.236* 0.048 71

0.192** 0.001 275

Note:  ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed); * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

13.6 DISCUSSION In our study, we investigated influencing factors in intention to create a spin-off among female and male scientists in Hungarian higher education institutions. Our results are in line with the international literature in that women express less of an intention to create a spin-off company. Furthermore, our study also sheds light on the fact that female scientists possess less managerial and research experience outside academia, a feature which may pose challenges to the entrepreneurship endeavours of female scientists. These results support the notion that lack of experience can significantly hinder potential female entrepreneurs in taking a first step towards entrepreneurship. While we can observe a small difference in the case of research experience outside academia, in the case of the difference

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 275

13/12/2019 15:47

276

Gender, science and innovation

between female and male scientists in managerial experience, women were significantly less experienced. In addition, those scientists, both women and men, who do possess non-academic experience do not differ in terms of average experience (the means are almost equal). This result suggests that significant differences exist between experienced and inexperienced scientists rather than between experienced female and male scientists. The study found that motivations could be grouped into three different categories: social development-oriented motivations, reputation-oriented motivations and financial-oriented motivations. The results are in line with previous investigations that suggested the importance of financial income motivations (Renault, 2006; Goethner et al., 2012). In our case, the role of personal earnings was rated higher in general, thus also contributing to previous studies conducted in Hungary (Makra and Erdős, 2012; Novotny, 2014). These studies suggest that financial incentives are important because of the low salaries in Hungarian higher education institutions. Although we found no difference between female and male scientists with regard to their motivations towards financial incentives and reputation, a small difference can be observed in social development-oriented motivations. As the results highlighted, female scientists are more motivated than are male scientists in securing jobs for young researchers, fostering cooperation with industrial partners, gaining access to financial resources for conducting further research and contributing to society through the commercialization of the invention, even if the differences were small. We called these motivations social development-oriented motivations and believe that female entrepreneurs consider other aspects as well besides financial incentives. The international literature suggests that women expect greater control over starting a new business venture. In this regard, if women do not perceive that they will exercise sufficient control over the business, then they do not become entrepreneurs. Our results contradict previous findings, which found a stronger relationship between control and entrepreneurial intention among male scientists than for female scientists. We assume that these unexpected results are due to the greater homogeneity that characterizes female scientists who do not consider starting a business, as the low rate of their entrepreneurial intention showed. Although we found results that contradicted the literature in the case of control, we also observed that as regards entrepreneurial capabilities, female scientists do not differ significantly in the influence of existing capabilities. As previous studies have suggested (Chen et al., 1998; Langowitz and Minniti, 2007; Wilson et al., 2007), women evaluate their capabilities and skills lower than men, thus hindering women’s entrepreneurial endeavours. In our case, we could not find a significant difference in their capabilities; however, a minor difference can be observed.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 276

13/12/2019 15:47



Unfolding the factors affecting female scientists’ intentions ­277

13.7 CONCLUSIONS These findings have important implications for policy makers and provide significant insights into gender disparities in the intention to create a spinoff company to commercialize scientific research in academia. Although there is a small proportion of scientists who expressed an intention to create a spin-off, the willingness of female scientists to engage in entrepreneurial activity is much lower. This result is in line with other studies that found male scientists are more likely to engage with industry and take part in commercialization than are female scientists (Azagra-Caro, 2007; Boardman and Ponomarinov, 2009; Buttel and Goldberger, 2002); however there are opposite results which have not found any evidence of such linkages (Gulbrandsen and Smeby, 2005; Van Rijnsoever et al., 2008). In addition, female scientists expressed more social motivations than male scientists. From this perspective, facilitating female scientists’ motivation towards entrepreneurship would be socially beneficial. As previous studies have highlighted, women tend to start a business in those sectors which are unattractive for men because of low profitability (Loscocco and Robinson, 1991). In such situations women-led companies may provide solutions for social issues that are not interesting for men and would not have been solved. With regard to reputation-oriented motivations and financial-oriented motivations, women scientists did not show any significant difference from male scientists, even if the importance of financial incentives has been proven high in other countries (Goethner et al., 2012; Renault, 2006) and in Hungary, too (Novotny, 2014; Makra and Erdős, 2012). Our study concluded that fewer female scientists have any research or managerial experience outside academia than male scientists, but those female scientists who have already gained such experience do not differ from their male counterparts. This result contributes to some extent to the results of other studies which also found that female scientists possess less managerial and new business experience (Carter, 1997; Kalleberg and Leicht, 1991). However, in the Hungarian case, those female scientists who already have experience in new business do not differ significantly from male scientists. These results suggest that policy interventions should focus on how to encourage female scientists towards obtaining the relevant business experience, and not on those female scientists who are already engaged in spin-offs. Although we suggest that female scientists are influenced more by perceived control over spin-off creation and other entrepreneurship-related variables (such as competencies and ties to industry) than male scientists, these presumptions have not been proven, and both groups share more or less the same characteristics.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 277

13/12/2019 15:47

278

Gender, science and innovation

The results also suggest that the main barriers to entrepreneurial intention may be entrepreneurial competencies, ties to industry and business expertise, which need to be improved through entrepreneurship-oriented programmes, while the financial resources necessary for establishing a spin-off company should be allocated for spin-off creation via a central governmental funding mechanism.

REFERENCES Ajzen, I. (1988), Attitudes, Personality, and Behavior (Second Edition), Maidenhead: Open University Press. Ajzen, I. (1991), ‘The theory of planned behavior’, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50 (2), 179–211. Anna, A.L., Chandler, G.N., Jansen, E. and Mero, N.P. (1999), ‘Women business owners in traditional and non-traditional industries’, Journal of Business Venturing, 15 (3), 279–303. Azagra-Caro, J.M. (2007), ‘What type of faculty member interacts with what type of firm? Some reasons for the delocalisation of university–industry interaction’, Technovation, 27 (11), 704–15. Bandura, A. (1977), ‘Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change’, Psychological Review, 84 (2), 191–215. Betz, N.E. and Hackett, G. (1981), ‘The relationship of career-related self-efficacy expectations to perceived career options in college women and men’, Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28 (5), 399–410. Blanchflower, D.G. (2004), ‘Self-employment: more may not be better’, NBER Working Paper No. 10286, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA. http://www.nber.org/papers/w10286 (accessed 12 April 2017). Boardman, P.C. and Ponomariov, B.L. (2009), ‘University researchers working with private companies’, Technovation, 29 (2), 142–53. Boyd, N.G. and Vozikis, G.S. (1994), ‘The influence of self-efficacy on the development of entrepreneurial intentions and actions’, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18 (1), 63–77. Buttel, F.H. and Goldberger, J.R. (2002), ‘Gender and agricultural science: evidence from two surveys of land-grant scientists’, Rural Sociology, 67 (1), 24–45. Carter, N. (1997), ‘Discontinuance among new firms in retail: the influence of initial resources, strategy and gender’, Journal of Business Venturing, 12 (2), 125–45. Chen, C.C., Greene, P.G. and Crick, A. (1998), ‘Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers?’, Journal of Business Venturing, 13 (4), 295–316. Cliff, J.E. (1998), ‘Does one size fit all? Exploring the relationship between attitudes towards growth, gender, and business size’, Journal of Business Venturing, 13 (6), 523–42. Cowling, M. and Taylor, M. (2001), ‘Entrepreneurial women and men: two different species?’, Small Business Economics, 16 (3), 167–76. D’Este, P. and Perkmann, M. (2011), ‘Why do academics engage with i­ ndustry? The

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 278

13/12/2019 15:47



Unfolding the factors affecting female scientists’ intentions ­279

entrepreneurial university and individual motivations’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 36 (3), 316–39. Etzkowitz, H. (1998), ‘The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university–industry linkages’, Research Policy, 27 (8), 823–33. Etzkowitz, H. (2002), MIT and the Rise of Entrepreneurial Science, London, UK and New York, USA: Routledge. Etzkowitz, H. (2003), ‘Research groups as “quasi-firms”: the invention of the entrepreneurial university’, Research Policy, 32 (1), 109–21. Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A., Gebhardt, C. and Terra, B.R.C. (2000), ‘The future of the university and the university of the future: evolution of ivory tower to entrepreneurial paradigm’, Research Policy, 29 (2), 313–30. Fini, R., Grimaldi, R. and Sobrero, M. (2009), ‘Factors fostering academics to start up new ventures: an assessment of Italian founders’ incentives’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 34 (4), 380–402. Geuna, A. and Nesta, L.J.J. (2006), ‘University patenting and its effects on academic research: the emerging European evidence’, Research Policy, 35 (6), 790–807. Godin, B. and Gingras, Y. (2000), ‘The place of universities in the system of knowledge production’, Research Policy, 29 (2), 273–78. Goethner, M., Obschonka, M., Silbereisen, R.K. and Cantner, U. (2012), ‘Scientists’ transition to academic entrepreneurship: economic and psychological determinants’, Journal of Economic Psychology, 33 (3), 628–41. Gosling, S.D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S. and John, O.P. (2004), ‘Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about internet questionnaires’, American Psychologist, 59 (2), 93–104. Grimaldi, R., Kenney, M., Siegel, D.S. and Wright, M. (2011), ‘30 years after Bayh‒Dole: reassessing academic entrepreneurship’, Research Policy, 40 (8), 1045–57. Gulbrandsen, M. and Smeby, J.-C. (2005), ‘Industry funding and university professors’ research performance’, Research Policy, 34 (6), 932–50. Hoye, K. and Pries, F. (2009), ‘Repeat commercializers, the habitual entrepreneurs of university–industry technology transfer’, Technovation, 29 (10), 682–89. Huszár S., Prónay, Sz. and Buzás, N. (2016), ‘Examining the differences between the motivations of traditional and entrepreneurial scientists’, Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 5 (1), 1–22. Kalleberg, A. and Leicht, K. (1991), ‘Gender and organizational performance: determinants of small business survivial and success’, Academy of Management Journal, 34 (1), 136–61. Kautonen, T., Van Gelderenb, M. and Tornikoskic, E.T. (2013), ‘Predicting entrepreneurial behaviour: a test of the theory of planned behaviour’, Applied Economics, 45 (6), 697–707. Klofsten, M. and Jones-Evans, D. (2000), ‘Comparing academic entrepreneurship in Europe: the case of Sweden and Ireland’, Small Business Economics, 14 (4), 299–309. Krueger, N.F. and Carsrud, A.L. (1993), ‘Entrepreneurial intentions: applying the theory of planned behaviour’, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 5 (4), 315–30. Küttim, M., Kallaste, M., Venesaar, U. and Kiis, A. (2014), ‘Entrepreneurship education at university level and students’ entrepreneurial intentions’, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 110 (24), 658–68.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 279

13/12/2019 15:47

280

Gender, science and innovation

Langowitz, N. and Minniti, M. (2007), ‘The entrepreneurial propensity of women’, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31 (3), 341–64. Lee, Y.S. (1996), ‘“Technology transfer” and the research university: a search for the boundaries of university‒industry collaboration’, Research Policy, 25 (6), 843–63. Link, A.N., Siegel, D.S. and Bozeman, B. (2007), ‘An empirical analysis of the propensity of academics to engage in informal university technology transfer’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 16, 641–55. Lortie, J. and Castogiovanni, G. (2015), ‘The theory of planned behavior in entrepreneurship research: what we know and future directions’, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11 (4), 935–57. Loscocco, K.A. and Robinson, J. (1991), ‘Barriers to women’s small-business success in the United States’, Gender and Society, 5 (4), 511–32. Makra, Z. and Erdős, K. (2012), ‘Fiatal egyetemi kutatók – potenciális akadémiai vállalkozók? A fiatal kutatók vállalkozói attitűdjének, hajlandóságának és aktivitásának vizsgálata a hazai elitegyetemeken’ (Young university researchers – potential academic entrepreneurs? Investigating of entrepreneurial attitudes, willingness and activitiy of young researchers at Hungarian elite universities), in Makra, Z. (ed.), Spin-off cégek, vállalkozók és technológia transzfer a legjelentősebb hazai egyetemeken, Szeged, HU: Universitas Szeged Kiadó, pp. 175–206. Malhotra, N.K. and Birks, D.F. (2006), Marketing Research: An Applied Approach, Harlow: Pearson Education. Mansfield, E. and Lee, J.-Y. (1996), ‘The modern university: contributor to industrial innovation and recipient of industrial R&D support’, Research Policy, 25 (7), 1047–58. Nilsson, A.S., Rickne, A. and Bengtsson, L. (2010), ‘Transfer of academic research: uncovering the grey zone’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 35 (6), 617–36. Novotny, Á. (2014), ‘Siker és motiváció a magyar vállalkozó-kutatók körében’ (Success and motivation among Hungarian entrepreneurial scientists), Competitio, 13 (1), 75–87. O’Shea, R.P., Allena, T.J., Chevalierb, A. and Rochec, F. (2005), ‘Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of US universities’, Research Policy, 34 (7), 994–1009. Rasmussen, E., Moen, Ø. and Gulbrandsen, M. (2006), ‘Initiatives to promote commercialization of university knowledge’, Technovation, 26 (4), 518–33. Renault, C.S. (2006), ‘Academic capitalism and university incentives for faculty entrepreneurship’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 31 (2), 227–39. Rizzo, U. (2015), ‘Why do scientists create academic spin-offs? The influence of the context’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 40 (2), 198–226. Roberts, E.B. (1991), Entrepreneurs in High Technology: Lessons from MIT and Beyond, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rothaermel, F.T., Agung, S.D. and Jiang, L. (2007), ‘University entrepreneurship: a taxonomy of the literature’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 16 (4), 691–791. Sexton, D. and Bowman-Upton, N. (1990), ‘Female and male entrepreneurs: psychological characteristics and their role in gender-related discrimination’, Journal of Business Venturing, 5 (1), 29–36. Shane, S. (2004a), ‘Encouraging university entrepreneurship? The effect of the Bayh‒Dole Act on university patenting in the United States’, Journal of Business Venturing, 19 (1), 127–51.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 280

13/12/2019 15:47



Unfolding the factors affecting female scientists’ intentions ­281

Shane, S. (2004b), Academic Entrepreneurship: University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing. Van Rijnsoever, F.J., Hessels, L.K. and Vandeberg, R.L.J. (2008), ‘A resourcebased view on the interactions of university researchers’, Research Policy, 37 (8), 1255–66. Welsh, R., Glenna, L., Lacy, W. and Biscotti, D. (2008), ‘Close enough but not too far: assessing the effects of university–industry research relationships and the rise of academic capitalism’, Research Policy, 37 (10), 1854–64. Wilson, F., Kickul, J. and Marlino, D. (2007), ‘Gender, entrepreneurial self-­ efficacy, and entrepreneurial career intentions: implications for entrepreneurship education’, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31 (3), 387–406. Yurtkorua, E.S., Kuşcub, Z.K. and Doğanayc, A. (2014), ‘Exploring the antecedents of entrepreneurial intention on Turkish university students’, Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 150 (15), 841–50.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 281

13/12/2019 15:47

14. Gender diversity in R&D teams and its impact on firm openness Lisa Messina, Gary Chapman and Nola Hewitt-Dundas 14.1 INTRODUCTION Organizations can innovate in a number of different ways. They might generate the required knowledge independently through internal resources and research and development (R&D) efforts; or they might choose to acquire the required knowledge externally, for example by purchasing licences or outsourcing activities. A third option would be to develop new technological knowledge by establishing external R&D cooperation agreements (Guisado-González et al., 2016): this is known as open innovation (OI). Supporting the adoption of OI practices is the idea that, by becoming more effective users of external knowledge, organizations’ internal R&D efforts become more productive in terms of innovation development and the identification of new routes to market for existing technologies (Alexy et al., 2012; Salter et al., 2014). Accordingly, over recent years, many organizations have encouraged their employees to become ‘open innovators’, increasing their interaction with external parties to identify new ideas for the improvement and/or the creation of products, processes and services (Chesbrough, 2003; Salter et al., 2014). However, adopting such practices requires significant organizational change (Alexy et al., 2013), which has led many companies to encounter numerous internal barriers (Mortara and Minshall, 2011). Consequently, for many organizations the promise of OI has proven difficult to realize. Such challenges call for further investigation into the internal factors that influence a firm’s ability to engage in external collaboration. A number of authors claim that the characteristics of the individuals involved in the innovation process influence organizations’ innovation performance (Ruiz-Jiménez et al., 2016). As such, a small number of studies investigate the contribution of gender diversity to innovation practices in the organization (e.g., Miller and Triana, 2009; Østergaard et al., 2011). ­282

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 282

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and diversity in R&D teams ­283

However, to our knowledge, no study explores the influence of gender diversity on the firm’s propensity to engage in external collaboration agreements. This chapter addresses this gap in the literature by examining whether gender diversity in the R&D team affects firms’ propensity to engage in external knowledge sourcing for innovation. Existing studies exploring the effects of gender diversity present highly heterogeneous results, an issue that has been attributed to the diversity of organizational, sectoral and geographical contexts explored (e.g., Bowers et al., 2000; Stewart, 2006). For this reason, and due to the critical role that R&D teams play in the identification of scientific developments, the study will focus on the specific context of R&D teams in Spanish SMEs. Spain is appropriate for this study as, firstly, there is an extensive literature which considers ‘territory’ as an important element in the explanation of firms’ innovation outcomes (Porter, 1998); and secondly, there is a dearth of studies exploring gender diversity in Southern European countries (DíazGarcia et al., 2013).

14.2  LITERATURE REVIEW 14.2.1  Gender Diversity in the Workplace Diversity represents the degree of heterogeneity among the attributes of the members of a unit or organization (Ruiz-Jiménez et al., 2016; Simons et al., 1999). In other words, it consists of the differences in the composition of a group of individuals (Kearney et al., 2009; Ruiz-Jiménez et al., 2016). Research on diversity is scarce and largely focuses on the impact of diversity on firm performance (Díaz-Garcia et al., 2013). Furthermore, it usually conceptualizes diversity as multicultural diversity and/or demographic diversity (e.g., Chowdury, 2005). With regard to studies focusing on gender diversity specifically, research findings are often found to be inconsistent (Garcia Martinez et al., 2017), with some claiming that it boosts performance, and other authors claiming that it hinders it. Indeed, some authors have described diversity as a ‘two-edged sword’ (Milliken and Martins, 1996) or ‘mixed blessing’ (Williams and O’Reilly, 1998), because it fosters the need for interaction and coordination within teams and across the firm, thereby increasing the potential for conflict and distrust (Díaz-Garcia et al., 2013). In terms of its negative effects on performance, some scholars claim that greater diversity in important demographic features, such as gender, generates divisive categorizations within groups, which ultimately lead to negative consequences (Garcia Martinez et al., 2017). Indeed, they find

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 283

13/12/2019 15:47

284

Gender, science and innovation

that gender-heterogeneous groups exhibit increased conflict, low cohesion and increased employee turnover (Garcia Martinez et al., 2017; Milliken and Martins, 1996), ultimately affecting decision-making quality and members’ commitment to the group (Garcia Martinez et al., 2017). In support of the positive effects of gender diversity on performance, scholars have argued that teams with diverse backgrounds possess a wider spectrum of task-relevant knowledge, experience and perspectives that are non-redundant and distinct (van Knippenberg et al., 2004), which can be combined in new ways, leading to positive cognitive effects (Page, 2007). Going beyond firm performance, some studies have explored the effects of gender diversity on innovation, finding that increased gender diversity leads to greater creativity (Østergaard et al., 2011; Díaz-García et al., 2013) and productivity (Wood, 1987), with no evidence for increased conflict. Garcia Martinez et al. (2017) explain such positive effects of diversity through the ‘value-in-diversity’ hypothesis (Cox et al., 1991), which posits that diversity within a group results in increased information availability, perspective, knowledge and skills, thus rendering it ‘more likely for teams to generate new ideas for solving problems’ (Díaz-Garcia et al., 2013, p. 149). In the light of the socialization capabilities required to engage in OI practices, although no study focuses on OI explicitly, some authors claim that gender diversity can improve a team’s social relations and create a work environment which is open to discussion and debate (Díaz-Garcia et al., 2013; Nielsen and Huse, 2010). Ruiz-Jiménez et al. (2016) support these views by arguing that, according to social cognitive theory, men and women differ in their socialization experiences, such as professional experience or links with social networks, and that these experiences generate different strategic options for the organization (Manolova et al., 2007). Østergaard et al. (2011) also posit that, among other things, gender diversity has positive effects on openness due to the fact that innovation is an interactive process which involves communication and interaction among employees in and across firms, and draws on their different qualities. Due to the conflicting findings on gender diversity, scholars maintain that they should be investigated in light of their context (Joshi and Roh, 2009; Kochan et al., 2003, p. 147). For example, instead of focusing on the organization as a unit of analysis, Bear and Woolley (2011) identify another organizational level that ‘plays a crucial role in scientific work – teams’, identified by Wuchty et al. (2007) as the most important level for the production of scientific innovations. However, even when focusing on the context of the team, a number of factors, such as the type of team, need to be taken into account. The question of whether gender diversity matters for team processes and per-

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 284

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and diversity in R&D teams ­285

formance has been investigated by a number of empirical and conceptual studies (e.g., Bowers et al., 2000; Joshi and Roh, 2009). While findings suggest that gender diversity can have positive effects on group processes, its effects on team performance largely depend on a variety of moderators (Bear and Woolley, 2011), such as the type of team (Stewart, 2006), task difficulty (Bowers et al., 2000), the presence of social divisions within the team (Pearsall et al., 2008) and other types of demographic diversity present in the team (Pelled et al., 1999). For these reasons, and due to the fact that ‘organisations [increasingly] rely on R&D teams to identify scientific developments that bridge gaps and reduce time to market’ (Garcia Martinez et al., 2017, p. 311), the study focuses on a specific type of team, R&D teams, in a specific geographic context, Spain. 14.2.2  Gender Diversity within R&D Teams Women continue to be under-represented in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) on a number of different levels, ranging from university enrolment to industry positions (National Science Foundation, 2009). As pointed out by Bear and Woolley (2011), some progress has been made over the past few decades in reducing the gender gap in STEM; however, the gap still persists, particularly in top-level positions in both industry and academia. A variety of explanations for this gender gap have been proposed, including bias and discrimination against women, a lack of female role models, differential access to social networks and disproportionate family responsibilities (Blackwell et al., 2009; Sonnert et al., 2007). Addressing and overcoming this issue is of critical importance. Indeed, it does not only mean that scientific teams may be missing out on female talent, it also means that the women who are members of scientific teams may not be participating to their fullest if they represent a significant minority (Bear and Woolley, 2011). Research studies investigating the consequences of the STEM gender gap are limited and inconsistent (Garcia Martinez et al., 2017). Woolley et al. (2010) found that ‘collective intelligence’, rather than the intelligence of each group member, affects R&D team performance. Accordingly, the authors argue that it is the team’s social sensitivity, the equality in which members can contribute to discussions and tasks, and the presence of females in the group that has an impact on team outcomes (Woolley et al., 2010; Díaz-Garcia et al., 2013). Indeed, collaborative work among team members has been found to have synergistic effects in the context of R&D teams (Kim et al., 2015). As such, gender diverse teams should be able to

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 285

13/12/2019 15:47

286

Gender, science and innovation

combine women’s typically more interactive, people-oriented and cooperative work-styles with men’s more analytical decision-making approaches and competitive orientation (Fenwick and Neal, 2001; Woolley et al., 2010). Díaz-Garcia et al.’s (2013) study also investigates gender diversity in R&D teams, finding that gender diversity generates certain team dynamics that result in novel solutions leading to innovation. The authors argue that a gender diverse team is more innovative and adaptive than a homogeneous team due to the availability of diverse knowledge and perspectives, and the varying socialization abilities of the individuals within the team (Díaz-Garcia et al., 2013; Ruiz-Jiménez et al., 2016). In fact, several authors suggest that divergent types of knowledge are critical to the achievement of innovative results that enable the firm to satisfy the rapid changes in market demand (Alexiev et al., 2010; Ruiz-Jiménez et al., 2016).

14.3  HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT Although some studies have explored the relationship between R&D team gender diversity and performance and/or innovation, no study has investigated the relationship between gender diversity in the R&D team and the firm’s propensity to engage in external knowledge sourcing for innovation. Nonetheless, some arguments supporting the notion that gender diversity in the R&D team might positively affect external knowledge sourcing can be identified. Two aspects appear to be prominent in this regard: first, the R&D team’s superior abilities in knowledge production; second, the R&D team’s networking and external engagement abilities. In terms of the R&D team’s knowledge production abilities, some studies suggest that the presence of women in teams improves soft management skills and decision-making processes, and enhances creativity and innovation (Bagshaw, 2004; Díaz-Garcia et al., 2013). Female involvement generates team diversity in terms of human and social capital, which might contribute to superior performance (Singh et al., 2008). Accordingly, Garcia Martinez et al. (2017) argue that, compared to homogeneous groups, cognitively diverse teams possess greater absorptive capabilities, enabling them to integrate new knowledge and apply it to generate new ideas (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990); greater problem-solving skills (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995); and a higher network variety, enabling them to tap into diverse knowledge pools (Garcia Martinez et al., 2017; Katz and Tushman, 1979). With respect to the networking abilities of the R&D team, Joshi and Jackson (2008) find that gender diversity within teams may improve their

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 286

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and diversity in R&D teams ­287

external relationships, thereby facilitating the acquisition of new knowledge through external cooperative relationships with other groups. The presence of a diverse group of people increases the team’s social capital and relational capabilities (Fenwick and Neal, 2001). Supporting this view is Woolley et al.’s (2010) study, whose evidence suggests that a group’s internal and external collaboration is greatly improved by the presence of women in the group. Taken together, these findings suggest that the presence of women in R&D teams can have positive consequences for the firm’s propensity to engage in OI practices, as innovation is a fundamentally ‘interactive process’ (Østergaard et al., 2011, p. 501). These findings lead to the first hypothesis: Hypothesis 1:  Female participation in the R&D team is positively associated with the firm’s propensity to engage in external collaboration ­activities. While Hypothesis 1 examines gender diversity in a dichotomous manner, perhaps of greater interest is the extent of female participation in R&D teams and the effect of this on OI practices. Woolley et al. (2010) found that the proportion of women in a team is strongly related to its measured collective intelligence. The authors find that women have higher levels of social sensitivity, and that groups of women display greater equality in conversational turn-taking, thus nurturing cooperative team dynamics, and supporting the development of knowledge and skills on behalf of group members. These findings are consistent with other studies exploring the effects of gender on interpersonal communication in groups (Carli, 2001). For instance, Eagly and Johnson (1990) find that women are significantly more interpersonally oriented than men, in that men adopt a more autocratic style of communication, while women tend to be more democratic by nurturing individual participation. Furthermore, when comparing all-female and all-male teams, findings show that all-female groups tend to be more egalitarian, featuring equal communication among group members and shared leadership (Berdahl and Anderson, 2005). The notion of increased interaction and communication within, and across, teams is extremely important in light of the value in diversity question, as it helps to explain the positive effects of gender diversity on team processes and cooperation. In fact, as Bear and Woolley (2011) argue, gender heterogeneity increases the likelihood of team participation and collaboration. It is important to note that the gender diversity argument must not be confused with gender dominance. It is expected that gender-balanced,

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 287

13/12/2019 15:47

288

Gender, science and innovation

rather than female-dominated teams, generate the best results for external engagement. Supporting this view are the findings of Fenwick and Neal (2001), which show that groups with equal numbers of men and women perform better than homogeneous groups due to more collaborative group processes and cooperative norms. Other studies support these findings by implying that gender-balanced groups lead to the best outcomes for team processes (Carli, 2001; Craig and Sherif, 1986), for equal participation (Myaskovsky et al., 2005) and for satisfaction with their group cooperation experiences (Jehn et al., 1999). Studies have suggested that gender dominance in teams can lead to increased transaction costs, due to the fact that interaction and communication between different types of people might become challenging (Østergaard et al., 2011). Accordingly, Laursen et al. (2005) argue that firm performance is not only related to the levels of human resources, but also to the composition of these resources, and that both too little and too much diversity can have a negative impact, ultimately resulting in an inverted U-shaped relationship between diversity and performance (Østergaard et al., 2011). Based on the above discussion, the authors propose that: H2:  The greater gender diversity in the R&D team is associated with a higher propensity for the firm to engage in external collaboration activities. Gupta et al. (2005) find that women are affected by a triple burden: an unfavourable work environment, disproportionate domestic responsibilities, and lower levels of social capital. These obstacles, which according to Tartari and Salter (2015) contribute to gender stratification, are found to be particularly true in gender-dominated work environments, such as in many STEM occupations. Indeed, Joshi and Roh’s (2009) results suggest that gender diversity has strong, negative effects on team performance in male-dominated occupations; while it has a significantly positive effect on team performance in gender-balanced occupations. Allmendinger and Hackman’s (1995) findings on the integration of women in male-­ dominated orchestras also support this view. Based on these findings, the study also explores how the effects of gender diversity is moderated by the social context within which women operate. Drawing on the concept of ‘tokenism’ (Kanter, 1977; Tartari and Salter, 2015), the study suggests that the presence of high proportions of women in the wider organization helps to attenuate the differences and stereotypes against women in male-dominated professions. Indeed, given that there are ‘far fewer alpha-females than alpha-males available as role models’ in STEM (Faulkner, 2006, p. 12), women are more likely to face

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 288

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and diversity in R&D teams ­289

gender-related barriers, and to have to work harder than men to prove themselves (Tartari and Salter, 2015). As the proportion of females in the firm increases, the negative stereotypes against women should fade, ultimately resulting in the expertise and contributions of females being more accurately recognized and accepted (Bear and Woolley, 2011). This suggests the third hypothesis: Hypothesis 3:  Female participation in the R&D team will have a stronger association with external collaboration activities in female-dominated firms, compared to male-dominated firms.

14.4  THE SPANISH CONTEXT This study focuses on the geographic context of Spain. As argued by Asheim and Gertler (2005), innovation is a complex process that cannot be explored independently of the social and institutional context within which it takes place. Furthermore, while gender equality has emerged as an important issue in Northern European countries (Point and Singh, 2003), some studies have highlighted the dearth of studies on gender diversity in Southern European countries, such as Spain (Díaz-Garcia et al., 2013). Over the past two decades, Spanish government agencies have actively promoted technological collaborations to promote the diffusion and transfer of knowledge among economic agents (Autio et al., 2008; Chávez, 2011). Accordingly, increasing amounts of public funding are being devoted to the establishment of technological partnerships, thus placing cooperative activities at the core of innovation policies (Chávez, 2011). Consequently, maximising the quantity and effectiveness of such cooperative engagements has become a priority policy objective in Spain. Despite findings suggesting that gender diversity in firms improves the quality of outcomes, female involvement in technological sectors remains relatively low in Spain. According to the Asociación de Empresas de Electronica, Tecnologias de la Informacion y Telecomunicaciones (2007), in terms of employment, females represent 35.8 per cent of the workforce, while men represent 64.2 per cent. While Bordons et al. (2009) found an increase in the contribution of females to patent applications during the period from 1990 to 2005, female inventors still only accounted for 15 per cent of all inventors (Díaz-Garcia et al., 2013). Such under-representation of women in the technological sector emphasizes the importance of ­investigating this context in greater detail.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 289

13/12/2019 15:47

290

Gender, science and innovation

14.5  DATA AND METHODOLOGY The Spanish Panel of Technological Innovation (PITEC) provides the data for this study. The data are collected by the Spanish National Statistical Institute (INE) in conjunction with the Spanish Science and Technology Foundation (FEYCT) and the Foundation for Technological Innovation (COTEC). PITEC follows other European Union (EU) Community Innovation Surveys by applying the methodological rules and questionnaire design of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) Oslo Manual (OECD, 1992). An annual survey which comprehensively captures the innovation activities and characteristics (including gender composition) of Spanish manufacturing and service firms is the basis for PITEC (see Lucena, 2016). The inclusion of gender characteristics, alongside firms’ (open) innovation activities, makes PITEC appropriate for this study. As firms are legally required to respond to INE surveys, PITEC has a response rate of approximately 90 per cent. This study utilizes the data from 2008 to 2013, which provides 77 040 observations. Of these, 30.80 per cent had female employees within the R&D team, and 37.94 per cent engaged in external collaboration activities. To test the hypotheses, three specifications of the independent variable, female participation in R&D teams, are developed. The first is as a binary variable equal to 1 if a firm has any female employees within their R&D team. This enables us to test the effect of the existence of females in the R&D team on the firm’s OI. The second independent variable assesses the proportion of females within the R&D team (Lyngsie and Foss, 2017). This ranges in value from 0 (no females in the R&D team) to 100 (R&D team is all female). This specification provides insight into the effect of the extent of female participation in the R&D team on firm’s OI. The final specification relates to four binary variables, each capturing a different extent of female participation in the R&D team: namely, 1–20 per cent, 20–40 per cent, 40–60 per cent and 60–100 per cent. This follows best practice when testing for the presence of decreasing returns of including binary variables spread across the different levels of engagement to identify the optimal level of engagement (Haans et al., 2016). All specifications of the independent variable are lagged by three periods (T-3) to avoid simultaneity problems. For the dependent variable, the study uses a binary variable in each model, equal to 1 if the firm has engaged in external collaboration for innovation within the previous three years (T–T-2). The study also includes several control variables within their estimations to account for other firm’s characteristics that have been found to have a significant effect on OI behaviour. First, the study controls for firm size, firm age and enterprise group membership (dichotomous variable equal to

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 290

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and diversity in R&D teams ­291

1 if the firm belongs to a business group) to account for scale and age effects. Second, it controls for firm innovation intensity, defined as the proportion of sales from new products in the prior three years (Garcia Martinez et al., 2017). Innovative firms may be more attractive as prospective collaborative partners, and thus face fewer barriers to engaging in external collaboration. Next, it controls for a firm’s human capital, measured as the proportion of researchers with a third-level degree or higher, given the key role skilled staff play in facilitating and driving firms’ OI (Alexy et al., 2016; Escribano et al., 2009). The study also controls for whether firms are continuously engaged in R&D activities, given the important role of absorptive capacity in firms’ OI (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990). Finally, the study includes a series of industry and time dummies to account for variations across sector and time. All control variables, except those which are truly exogenous (for example, firm age), are measured at T-3. As the dependent variable is binary, probit regression models are used to test the arguments. The study uses the data as a pooled cross-section, and hence it clusters the standards errors within the probit models, to account for the fact that some firms are observed more than once. Equally, as multiple time periods are considered, time dummies are included to control for heterogeneity through time. As the economic significance of the coefficients produced by probit models are difficult to interpret directly, the study reports marginal effects in all models (Hoetker, 2007).

14.6 FINDINGS Table 14.1 provides the descriptive statistics for the variables. Correlation values amongst the variables are generally low to moderate, indicating a low probability of collinearity issues. Analysis of the variance of inflation corroborates this, with the mean values ranging between 1.76 and 3.38 across the models, suggesting multicollinearity is not a serious issue. Figure 14.1 shows female participation in R&D teams in Spain throughout the 2008 to 2013 period considered in this study. Three measures of female participation are graphed: first, the proportion of R&D teams with any females; second, the proportion of females within R&D teams; and finally, the proportion of R&D teams with majority female membership. As can be seen by the negative slope of each measure, female participation is declining, albeit marginally, throughout the period. The proportion of R&D teams with any female membership declines most, across all three measures, from 32.84 per cent in 2008 to 29.69 per cent in 2013. The respective change for the proportion of females in the R&D team is 13.02 per cent to 11.41 per cent, and 7.57 per cent to 6.95 per cent for majority

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 291

13/12/2019 15:47

292

Gender, science and innovation

Table 14.1  Descriptive statistics and correlation coefficients Variables

Mean Std Dev.

Firm Age 3.26 Firm Size 319.78 R&D 7.915 Team   Size 1.53 Human   Capital (log) 0.393 Continuous   R&D 1.61 Innovation   Intensity (log) 0.402 Enterprise   Group

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0.002 8.316 0.175

1.000 0.0985 0.0416

1.000 0.1868

1.000

0.006

20.0175

0.0099

0.2780

1.000

0.001

0.0139

0.0096

0.2916

0.7583 1.000

20.0254 20.0203

0.1563

0.3951 0.4170 1.000

0.1314

0.0918 0.0813 0.0061 1.000

0.01

0.002

0.1138

0.1639

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

% of R&D teams with any females % of female majority R&D teams % of females in R&D team

Figure 14.1  Female participation in R&D teams, 2008–2013 female R&D membership. Collectively, this suggests declining female participation in R&D teams. Given the hypotheses, this overall low level of female participation, and more specifically the declining share of females in the R&D workforce, warrants further investigation to understand the potential effect of this on the propensity to engage in OI. The main results are shown in Table 14.2, which contains five models.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 292

13/12/2019 15:47

­293

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 293

13/12/2019 15:47

Any Females in R&D  Team (0/1) Proportion of Females in   R&D Team Proportion of Females in   R&D Team Sqr Females in R&D Team  (1–20%) Females in R&D Team  (21–40%) Females in R&D Team  (41–60%) Females in R&D Team  (61–100%) Enterprise Group Innovation Intensity Continuous R&D Human Capital Firm Size: 50–99 Firm Size: 100–149 Firm Size: 150–199

Variables

0.070*** (0.010) 0.007*** (0.002) 0.011 (0.012) 0.021*** (0.003) 0.008 (0.014) 0.035* (0.018) 0.022 (0.021)

0.042*** (0.012)

1

0.199*** (0.031) 0.021*** (0.007) 0.035 (0.036) 0.065*** (0.010) 0.025 (0.040) 0.099* (0.053) 0.063 (0.060)

0.069*** (0.010) 0.007*** (0.003) 0.010 (0.012) 0.022*** (0.003) 0.008 (0.014) 0.034* (0.018) 0.022 (0.021)

0.032* (0.018)

0.038** (0.016)

0.061*** (0.014)

0.204*** (0.035) 0.014* (0.008) 0.073* (0.039) 0.052*** (0.011) 0.053 (0.045) 0.119** (0.059) 0.052 (0.069)

20.000*** (0.000)

20.000*** (0.000)

4 Male

0.007*** (0.001)

0.039** (0.017)

3

0.006*** (0.001)

2

Table 14.2  Effect of females in the R&D team on firm collaboration

0.058** (0.023) 0.014** (0.005) 20.060** (0.029) 0.035*** (0.007) 20.022 (0.031) 0.033 (0.041) 0.060 (0.042)

20.000** (0.000)

0.003*** (0.001)

5 Female

­294

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 294

13/12/2019 15:47

1

Yes 17725 20.10850 0.0941

0.129* (0.068) 0.071 (0.051) 0.185*** (0.053) 0.366*** (0.035) 0.618*** (0.058) 0.845*** (0.072)

2

3

Yes 17725 210849 0.0941

0.044* (0.024) 0.024 (0.018) 0.065*** (0.019) 0.134*** (0.013) 0.227*** (0.023) 0.313*** (0.027)

Notes:  *** p ≤ 0.01, **p ≤ 0.05, * p ≤ 0.10. Marginal effects at the mean are reported.

Firm Size: 200–249 0.045* (0.024) Firm Size: 250–499 0.024 (0.018) Firm Size: 5001 Employees 0.066*** (0.019) R&D Team Size: 5–19 0.136*** (0.013) R&D Team Size: 20–39 0.230*** (0.022) R&D Team Size: 40 or 0.317*** (0.026)  more Industry and time dummies Yes No. of observations 17725 Log likelihood 20.10854 R2 0.0937

Variables

Table 14.2  (continued)

Yes 14255 28699 0.0983

0.158** (0.075) 0.113* (0.059) 0.236*** (0.062) 0.373*** (0.038) 0.606*** (0.065) 0.838*** (0.080)

4 Male

Yes 3470 22118 0.0901

0.020 (0.054) 20.008 (0.037) 0.041 (0.036) 0.094*** (0.030) 0.203*** (0.048) 0.252*** (0.061)

5 Female



Gender and diversity in R&D teams ­295

Model 1 contains the variable Any Females in the R&D Team which is a dichotomous variable equal to 1 if any of the members of the R&D team are female alongside the control variables. As can be seen in model 1, the existence of any female members in the R&D team has a positive and statistically significant effect on firms’ propensity to engage in external collaboration. In terms of magnitude, moving from no female R&D members to having female members in the R&D team goes with an increase in the probability of external collaboration by 4.2 percentage points. In line with earlier arguments, this indicates the existence of gender diversity in the R&D team is positively associated with firms’ likelihood of engaging in external collaboration for innovation. Model 2 examines whether the extent of gender diversity in the R&D team is important by introducing the variables Proportion of Females in R&D Team, and the square of this variable (Proportion of Females in R&D Team Sqr). As can been seen in model 2, the proportion of females in the R&D team has a positive and statistically significant relation with firm propensity to engage in external collaboration. This suggests that the extent of female participation in the R&D team is important, with growing female participation in the R&D team, increasing the probability of a firm engaging in external collaboration. The square term of the proportion of females in the R&D team is negative and statistically significant, however. This suggests that while growing female participation in the R&D team goes with firm probability of engaging in external collaboration, at some point decreasing returns set in. To further explore the influence of the extent of gender diversity on firm collaboration, model 3 introduces four dichotomous variables representing different levels of female participation in the R&D team namely, Females in the R&D Team (1–20 per cent), Females in the R&D Team (21–40 per cent), Females in the R&D Team (41–60 per cent) and Females in the R&D Team (61–100 per cent). As can been seen in model 3, all four levels of female participation have positive and statistically significant correlation with firm propensity to engage in external collaboration. Looking at the size of the effect shows that the influence of female participation on external collaboration increases when moving from between 1 per cent and 20 per cent females in the R&D team (3.9 per cent probability increase over no females) to between 21 per cent and 40 per cent females in the R&D team (6.1 per cent probability increase over no females), before declining for between 41 per cent and 60 per cent females in the R&D team (3.8 per cent probability increase over no females), and declining further for between 61 per cent and 100 per cent females in the R&D team (3.2 per cent probability over no females). This suggest an inverted U-shaped relationship, with an optimal level of female participation for external

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 295

13/12/2019 15:47

296

Gender, science and innovation

collaboration of between 21 per cent and 40 per cent, aligning with the argument of the importance of gender diversity for external collaboration. In models 4 and 5, the study examines whether the effect of female participation in the R&D team on external collaboration differs for femaledominated and male-dominated firms. Model 4 shows the results for male-dominated firms and model 5 for female-dominated firms. As can be seen, the correlation with the proportion of females in the R&D team is positive and statistically significant in both settings, and the square term (Proportion of Females in R&D Team Sqr) negative and statistically significant in both settings. The magnitude of the effect also suggests little difference between the two settings. Contrary to prior arguments, this suggests that the benefit of female participation in the R&D team for firm external collaboration is not influenced by the presence of females within the firm. Contrary to the authors’ expectations, this result aligns with Tartari and Salter (2015), who in a study of differences between levels of female and male academic engagement in industry collaboration found that the proportion of females in the faculty did not matter. Moving to the controls, the study finds that innovation intensity has a positive and statistically significant correlation with propensity to engage in external collaboration, suggesting that previous engagement in innovation increases a firm’s probability of collaborating externally. Next, a firm’s level of human capital is found to go positively with its probability of engaging in external collaboration, aligning with prior research that highlighted the key role of skilled staff in facilitating and driving firms’ OI efforts (Alexy et al., 2016; Escribano et al., 2009). Finally, findings show that growing R&D team size is positively associated with the probability of external collaboration, suggesting that firms with larger R&D teams are more likely to engage in external collaboration. This finding aligns with the extant work showing the key role of absorptive capacity (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990) and organizational resource availability (e.g., Van de Vrande et al., 2009) in facilitating and driving firms’ OI efforts.

14.7 DISCUSSION This study aimed to contribute to our understanding of the influence of gender diversity in the R&D team on firms’ propensity to engage in external collaboration agreements. By doing so, the study contributes to existing literature in two significant ways. Firstly, it shows that gender diversity in the R&D team does indeed matter in supporting the firm’s efforts in adopting OI practices. Secondly, it investigates this relationship in a spe-

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 296

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and diversity in R&D teams ­297

cific context, addressing the limitations of existing studies not accounting for context and, consequently, generating highly heterogeneous results. The findings of the study support Hypothesis 1 on a positive relationship between the presence of females in the R&D team and the firm’s propensity to engage in external cooperative agreements. This result extends findings of previous studies supporting the value of gender diversity in teams. For example, Ruiz-Jiménez et al. (2016) find that gender diversity in top management teams fosters innovation performance. Østergaard et al. (2011) find that gender diversity in teams is one of the variables that has the strongest relation with a firm’s likelihood to innovate. A number of arguments explaining this relationship can be identified in the literature. Some authors observe that the presence of women within teams improves soft management skills and decision-making processes, as well as enhancing creativity and innovation (Bagshaw, 2004; Garcia Martinez et al., 2017). Indeed, women have been found to possess highly diverse human and social capital backgrounds, which Singh et al. (2008) suggest might contribute to enhanced outcomes. Gender diversity has also been viewed as improving a team’s external relationships, enabling teams to gain new knowledge and novel ideas by collaborating with external parties (Garcia Martinez et al., 2017; Joshi and Jackson, 2008), ultimately fostering the exchange of ideas and knowledge (Sandberg, 2003). Women have been found to solicit imput from other people by making individuals feel included and creating more open communication flows (Rosener, 1995; Ruiz-Jiménez et al., 2016), thus leading to an increased propensity to engage in external cooperative agreements. Hypothesis 2, which posits that increasing levels of gender diversity in the R&D team are associated with a higher firm propensity to engage in external cooperative agreements, is also supported. The findings suggest that a moderate degree of diversity, that is, ‘a degree of diversity where the minority group has a critical mass to contribute to the innovation process’ (Østergaard et al., 2011, p. 507), appears to generate a higher propensity to engage in external cooperation. At very low and very high levels of gender diversity, however, the firm’s propensity to engage in external cooperation does not differ significantly. This result is in line with the findings of Østergaard et al. (2011), who find that a moderate degree of employee diversity results in a higher likelihood for firms to introduce an innovation; and with the findings of Laursen et al. (2005), who argue both that too little and too much diversity can have a negative association with firm outcomes, thus supporting the finding of an inverted U-shaped relationship between gender diversity and firm propensity to engage in OI practices. The literature offers a number of arguments explaining this ­phenomenon.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 297

13/12/2019 15:47

298

Gender, science and innovation

Theories on decision making in groups suggest that quality and consensus of decisions in teams increase in more diverse groups, as complex problems often require some degree of cognitive conflict (Østergaard et al., 2011; Priem et al., 1995). While diversity has been shown to generate negative results if it creates socio-emotional conflict between team members (Priem et al., 1995), some problems have been found to disappear when the minority group increases (Milliken and Martins, 1996; Østergaard et al., 2011). In agreement with these findings, Woolley et al. (2010) find that groups with more women exhibit greater equality in conversational turn-taking, enabling team members to cooperate with one another, and to make best use of the knowledge and skills of the members. This can be attributed to the higher levels of social sensitivity exhibited by women, based on ‘their greater ability to read nonverbal cues and make accurate inferences about what others are feeling or thinking’ (Bear and Woolley, 2011: 148). Gender diversity also seems to foster broader organizational routines and search activities (Nelson and Winter, 1982; Dosi, 1982), and to increase the team’s absorptive capacity, which enables the firm to identify and exploit useful external information (Østergaard et al., 2011; Zahra and George, 2002). Gender diversity, however, can also lead to increased transaction costs, since ‘interaction and communication between different knowledge bases and groups might be difficult’ (Østergaard et al., 2011, p. 502). In fact, social identity theory predicts that diversity in groups frequently generates conflict and competitive behaviour within teams (Østergaard et al., 2011). This has been found to be particularly true in cases where there is strong gender dominance – usually male – which results in the predominance of autocratic, rather than democratic, group processes (Woolley et al., 2010). As such, a number of authors argue that firms should aim for gender balance (e.g., Fenwick and Neal, 2001). Indeed, Fenwick and Neal (2001) found that groups with equal numbers of men and women performed better than homogeneous teams, due to their more effective collaborative processes and norms. Hypothesis 3, which posits that the positive consequences of gender diversity in the R&D team on the firm’s propensity to engage in OI practices are stronger in female-dominated, rather than male-dominated firms, is not supported. Contrary to predictions, findings show that the dominance of women in the firm does not moderate the impact of female participation in the R&D team. While surprising, this result is in line with the findings of Tartari and Salter (2015), who explore the differences between men and women in their academic engagement with industry. Indeed, the authors find little evidence that the presence of females in the local work

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 298

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and diversity in R&D teams ­299

context attenuates the differences across genders; they explain this by pointing to the lack of granular measures on the presence of women in the work context, and to the lack of female role models shaping patterns of behaviour for women. These arguments point, once again, to the importance of context. As argued by Joshi and Roh (2009), in fields dominated by males the impact of gender diversity is frequently found to be negative; instead, in gender-balanced fields, gender diversity generates significantly positive effects on team performance. Nonetheless, the authors call for further research to clarify the influence of the wider work context on the effects of team-level gender diversity.

14.8 CONCLUSION This chapter has contributed to extant literature by investigating the association of gender diversity in the R&D team with Spanish firms’ propensity to engage in open innovation. In doing so, this study has shed light on the positive influence of females in the R&D team in supporting organizational efforts to adopt OI practices, thus providing further support for the employment of a balance of males and females within organizations. As Bear and Woolley (2011, p. 151) point out, gender diversity has frequently been promoted for social and political reasons, and ‘is a worthy social goal in and of itself’. The results in this study clearly suggest that nurturing gender diversity within R&D teams has significant positive consequences for firms’ external engagement capabilities that should not be ignored. While it is challenging to link this study to existing studies, given the lack of research exploring the gender diversity‒OI relationship, it is certainly reassuring that the results are in line with past work supporting a positive relationship between diversity and firm outcomes. This is likely due to the fact that the presence of women enhances group processes and internal and external cooperation, factors which have become increasingly important in the field of scientific development. This study bears a number of important practical implications. In terms of its managerial implications, the findings promote and encourage firms to hire equal numbers – or at least, a balance – of male and female employees in their R&D departments. In terms of its policy implications, the research results support the positive impact, and encourage the perpetuation, of policy makers’ efforts to increase the proportion of women in STEM. Indeed, as mentioned by Tartari and Salter (2015), over the past 30 years the under-representation of women in science has generated proactive efforts on behalf of policy makers to overcome this inequality. The

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 299

13/12/2019 15:47

300

Gender, science and innovation

findings of this study support such efforts by shedding light on the positive aspects of gender diversity in the R&D team. Like all research, this study presents some limitations. First, the study focuses on a specific type of team: R&D teams. While an important element of the innovation process, in order to gain a more comprehensive picture of the effects of gender diversity on a firm’s OI practices, research investigating other levels of the firm would be required. Second, this study focuses on firms in the context of Spain. Selecting a specific country was critical for the purpose of this study, but as the institutional and policy environment within which firms operate cannot be ignored when exploring OI processes, generalizations of the research findings to other geographic contexts should be made with caution. Further studies could explore the research question in the context of other countries.

REFERENCES Alexiev, A.S., J.P. Jansen, A.J. Van den Bosch and H.W. Volberda (2010), ‘Top management team advice seeking and exploratory innovation: The moderating role of TMT heterogeneity’, Journal of Management Studies, 47 (7), 1343–64. Alexy, O., E. Bascavusoglu-Moreau and A. Salter (2016), ‘Toward an aspirationlevel theory of open innovation’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 25 (2), 289–306. Alexy, O., P. Criscuolo and A. Salter (2012), ‘Managing unsolicited ideas for R&D’, California Management Review, 54 (3), 116–39. Alexy, O., J. Henkel and M. Wallin (2013), ‘From closed to open: Job role changes, individual predispositions, and the adoption of commercial open source software development’, Research Policy, 42 (8), 1325–40. Allmendinger, J. and R.J. Hackman (1995), ‘The more, the better? A four-nation study of the inclusion of women in symphony orchestras’, Social Forces, 74 (2), 423–60. Asheim, B. and M. Gertler (2005), ‘The geography of innovation: Regional innovation systems’, in J. Fagerberg, D. Mowery and R. Nelson (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 291–317. Asociación de Empresas de Electrónica, Tecnologías de la Información y Telecomunicaciones (2007), Estudio de salarios y política laboral en el sector de la electrónica, las tecnologías de la información y telecomunicaciones, Madrid: AMETIC. Autio, E., S. Kanninen and R. Gustafsson (2008), ‘First- and second-order additionality and learning outcomes in collaborative R&D programs’, Research Policy, 37 (1), 59–76. Bagshaw, M. (2004), ‘Is diversity divisive? A positive training approach’, Industrial and Commercial Training, 36 (4), 153–7. Bear, J. and A.W. Woolley (2011), ‘The role of gender in team collaboration and performance’, Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 36 (2), 146–53. Berdahl, J.H. and C. Anderson (2005), ‘Men, women and leadership centralization in groups over time’, Group Dynamics, 9 (1), 45–57.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 300

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and diversity in R&D teams ­301

Blackwell, L.V., L.A. Snyder and C. Mavriplis (2009), ‘Diverse faculty in STEM fields: Attitudes, performance, and fair treatment’, Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 2 (4), 195–205. Bordons, M., E. Mauleón, I. Gómez, F. Morillo, R. Sancho, M.T. Fernández and E. Arias (2009), Indicadores de actividad tecnológica desagregados por sexo, Madrid, Spain: Instituto de la Mujer. Bowers, C.A., J.A. Pharmer and E. Salas (2000), ‘When member homogeneity is needed in work teams: A meta-analysis’, Small Group Research, 31 (3), 305–27. Carli, L.L. (2001), ‘Gender and social influence’, Journal of Social Issues, 57 (4), 725– 41. Chávez, S.M.A. (2011), ‘Behavioural additionality in the context of regional innovation policy in Spain’,  Innovation: Management, Policy and Practice,  13 (1), 95–110. Chesbrough, H.W. (2003), Open Innovation: The New Imperative For Creating and Profiting From Technology, Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press. Chowdury, S. (2005), ‘Demographic diversity for building an effective entrepreneurial team: Is it important?’, Journal of Business Venturing, 20 (6), 727–46. Cohen, W. and D. Levinthal (1990), ‘Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35 (1), 128–52. Cox, T., S.A. Lobel and P.L. McLeod (1991), ‘Effects of ethnic group cultural differences on cooperative and competitive behavior on a group task’, Academy of Management Journal, 34 (4), 827–47. Craig, J.M. and C.W. Sherif (1986), ‘The effectiveness of men and women in problem-solving groups as a function of group gender composition’, Sex Roles, 14 (7/8), 453–66. Díaz-García, C., A. González-Moreno and F. Sáez-Martínez (2013), ‘Gender diversity within R&D teams: Its impact on radicalness of innovation’,  Innovation: Management, Policy and Practice, 15 (2), 149–60. Dosi, G. (1982), ‘Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: a suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change’, Research Policy, 11 (3), 147–62. Eagly, A.H. and B.T. Johnson (1990), ‘Gender and leadership style: A metaanalysis’, Psychological Bulletin, 108 (2), 233–56. Escribano, A., A. Fosfuri and J.A. Tribo (2009), ‘Managing external knowledge flows: The moderating role of absorptive capacity’, Research Policy, 38 (1), 96–105. Faulkner, W. (2006), Gender in/of Engineering, University of Edinburgh: ESRC. Fenwick, G.D. and D.J. Neal (2001), ‘Effect of gender composition on group performance’, Gender, Work and Organization, 8 (2), 205–25. Garcia Martinez, M., F. Zouaghi and T. Garcia Marco (2017), ‘Diversity is strategy: The effect of R&D team diversity on innovative performance’, R&D Management, 47 (2), 311–29. Guisado-González, M., C. Ferro-Soto and M. Guisato-Tato (2016), ‘Assessing the influence of differentiation strategy and R&D subsidies on R&D cooperation’, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 28 (7), 857–68. Gupta, N., C. Kemelgor, S. Fuchs and H. Etzkowitz (2005), ‘Triple burden on women in science: A cross-cultural analysis’, Current Science, 89 (8), 1382–86. Haans, R.F.J., C. Pieters and Z. He (2016), ‘Thinking about U: Theorising and test U- and inverted U-shaped relationships in strategy research’, Strategic Management Journal, 37 (7), 1177–95.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 301

13/12/2019 15:47

302

Gender, science and innovation

Hoetker, G. (2007), ‘The use of logit and probit models in strategic management research: Critical issues’, Strategic Management Journal, 28 (4), 331–43. Jehn, K.A., G.B. Northcraft and M.A. Neale (1999), ‘Why differences make a difference: A field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 44 (4), 741–63. Joshi, A. and S. Jackson (2008), ‘Managing workforce diversity to enhance cooperation in organizations’, in M.A. West, D. Tjosvold and K.G. Smith (eds), International Handbook of Organizational Teamwork and Cooperative Working, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 277‒96. Joshi, A. and H. Roh (2009), ‘The role of context in work team diversity research: A meta-analytic review’, Academy of Management Journal, 52 (3), 599–627. Kanter, R.M. (1977), Men and Women of the Corporation, New York: Basic Books. Katz, R. and M. Tushman (1979), ‘Communication partners, project performance, and task characteristics: An empirical evaluation and integration in an R&D setting’, Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 23 (2), 139–62. Kearney, E., D. Gebert and S.C. Voelpel (2009), ‘When and how diversity benefits teams: The importance of team members need for cognition’, Academy of Management Journal, 52 (3), 581–98. Kim, N., D. Kim and S. Lee (2015), ‘Antecedents of open innovation at the project level: Empirical analysis of Korean firms’, R&D Management, 45 (5), 411–39. Kochan, T., K. Bezrukova, R. Ely, et al. (2003), ‘The effects of diversity on business performance: Report of the diversity research network’, Human Resource Management, 42 (1), 3–21. Laursen, K., V. Mahnke and P. Vejrup-Hansen (2005), ‘Do differences make adifference? The impact of human capital diversity, experience and compensation on firm performance in engineering’, Druid Working Paper Series, 5(4). Lucena, A. (2016), ‘The interaction mode and geographic scope of firms’ technology alliances: Implications of balancing exploration and exploitation in R&D’, Industry and Innovation, 23 (7), 595–624. Lyngsie, J. and N.J. Foss (2017), ‘The more, the merrier? Women in top-management teams and entrepreneurship in established firms’, Strategic Management Journal, 38 (3), 487–505. Manolova, T.S., N.M. Carter, I.M. Manev and B.S. Gyoshev (2007), ‘The differential effect of men and women entrepreneurs: Human capital and networking on growth expectancies in Bulgaria’, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31 (3), 407–26. Miller, T. and M.C. Triana (2009), ‘Demographic diversity in the boardroom: Mediators of the board diversity‒firm performance relationship’,  Journal of Management Studies, 46 (5), 755–86. Milliken, F.J. and L.L. Martins (1996), ‘Searching for common threads: Understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups’, Academy of Management Review, 21 (2), 402–33. Mortara, L. and T. Minshall (2011), ‘How do large multinational companies implement open innovation?’, Technovation, 31 (10/11), 586–97. Myaskovsky, L., E. Unikel and M.A. Dew (2005), ‘Effects of gender diversity on performance and interpersonal behavior in small work groups’, Sex Roles, 52 (9), 645–57. National Science Foundation (2009), ‘Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering’, Arlington, VA: Division of Science Resources Statistics, NSF 09-305.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 302

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender and diversity in R&D teams ­303

Nelson, R.R. and S.G. Winter (1982), An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge, MA, USA and London, UK: Harvard University Press. Nielsen, S. and M. Huse (2010), ‘Women directors’ contribution to board decisionmaking and strategic involvement: The role of equality perception’, European Management Review, 7 (1), 16–29. Nonaka, I. and H. Takeuchi (1995),  The Knowledge-Creating Company, New York: Oxford University Press. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (1992), Proposed Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Technological Innovation Data – The Oslo manual, 1st edn, Paris: OECD. Østergaard, C., B. Timmermans and K. Kristinsson (2011), ‘Does a different view create something new? The effect of employee diversity on innovation’, Research Policy, 40 (3), 500–509. Page, S.E. (2007), The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools and Societies, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Pearsall, M.J., A.P.J. Ellis and J.M. Evans (2008), ‘Unlocking the effects of gender faultlines on team creativity: Is activation the key?’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 93 (1), 225–34. Pelled, L.H., K.M. Eisenhardt and K.R. Xin (1999), ‘Exploring the black box: An analysis of work group diversity, conflict, and performance’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 44 (1), 1–28. Point, S. and V. Singh (2003), ‘Defining and dimensionalising diversity: Evidence from corporate websites across Europe’, European Management Journal, 21 (6), 750–61. Porter, M.E. (1998), On Competition, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School. Priem, R.L., D. Harrison and N.K. Muir (1995), ‘Structured conflict and consensus outcomes in group decision making’, Journal of Management, 21 (4), 691–710. Rosener, J.B. (1995),  America’s Competitive Secret: Utilizing Women as a Management Strategy, New York: Oxford University Press. Ruiz-Jiménez, J.M., M.M. Fuentes-Fuentes and M. Ruiz-Arroyo (2016), ‘Knowledge combination capability and innovation: The effects of gender diversity on top management teams in technology-based firms’, Journal of Business Ethics, 135 (3), 503–15. Salter, A., P. Criscuolo and A.L.J. Ter Wal (2014), ‘Coping with open innovation: Responding to the challenges of external engagement in R&D’, California Management Review, 56 (2), 77–94. Sandberg, K.W. (2003), ‘An exploratory study of women in micro enterprises: Gender-related differences’,  Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 10 (4), 408–17. Simons, T., L.H. Pelled and K.A. Smith (1999), ‘Making use of difference: Diversity, debate, and decision comprehensiveness in top management teams’, Academy of Management Journal, 42 (6), 662–74. Singh, V., S. Terjesen and S. Vinnicombe (2008), ‘Newly appointed directors in the boardroom: How do women and men differ?’, European Management Journal, 26 (1), 48–58. Sonnert, G., M.F. Fox and K. Adkins (2007), ‘Undergraduate women in science and engineering: Effects of faculty, fields, and institutions over time’, Social Science Quarterly, 88 (5), 1333–56. Stewart, G.L. (2006), ‘A meta-analytic review of relationships between team design features and team performance’, Journal of Management, 32 (1), 29–54.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 303

13/12/2019 15:47

304

Gender, science and innovation

Tartari, V. and A. Salter (2015), ‘The engagement gap: Exploring gender differences in university‒industry collaboration activities’, Research Policy, 44 (6), 1176–91. Van de Vrande, V., J.P.J. De Jong, W. Vanhaverbeke and M. De Rochemont (2009), ‘Open innovation in SMEs: Trends, motives and management challenges’, Technovation, 29 (6/7), 423–37. van Knippenberg, D., C. De Dreu and A.C. Homan (2004), ‘Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 89 (6), 1008–22. Williams, K. and C. O’Reilly (1998), ‘Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research’, in B. Staw and L. Cummings (eds), Research in Organizational Behavior, Greenwich: JAI Press, pp. 77–140. Woolley, A.W., C.F. Chabris, A. Pentland, et al. (2010), ‘Evidence of a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups’, Science, 330 (6004), 686–88. Wood, W. (1987), ‘Meta-analytic review of sex differences in group performance’, Psychological Bulletin, 102 (1), 53–71. Wuchty, S., B.F. Jones and B. Uzzi (2007), ‘The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge’, Science, 316 (5827), 1036–9. Zahra, S. and G. George (2002), ‘Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension’, Academy of Management Review, 27 (2), 185–203.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 304

13/12/2019 15:47

15. The entrepreneurial intention in female university students: an Italian case Alessandra Micozzi and Francesca Micozzi 15.1 INTRODUCTION In recent years, women’s entrepreneurial activity has been recognized as critical to boost economic development and growth (Minniti and Nardone, 2007). According to Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) research (Singer et al., 2015), women’s entrepreneurial activity has been a key factor in the economic growth of countries, especially in emerging economies. Entrepreneurship is also becoming an increasingly important source of employment for women. While several studies in different countries show a growing number of women entrepreneurs and women-owned businesses, findings also show that the level of male entrepreneurial activity is still higher compared to that of women. Despite a growing literature on the subject, more research on female entrepreneurship is needed in order to accurately address its impact on economic and sustainable growth (De Bruin et al., 2006). As new businesses are essential element for economic growth (Acs and Szerb, 2006; Martin et al., 2010), female entrepreneurship is important for the same reason; it is important to understand which factors foster or prevent women from starting new ventures, analysing differences among individuals and across countries. In this study we aim to analyse an aspect of entrepreneurship, the entrepreneurial intention and in particular the entrepreneurial intention of female undergraduate students. The motivation to set up a new venture is theoretically related to the idea of entrepreneurial intent, that is, namely the ‘self-acknowledged conviction by a person that they intend to set up a new business venture and consciously plan to do so at some point in the future’ (Thompson, 2009, p. 676). Entrepreneurial intention should be analysed taking into account many features of the personal (for example, intrapersonal characteristics and interpersonal relations) and social (for example, family, school and society) context in which future e­ ntrepreneurs ­305

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 305

13/12/2019 15:47

306

Gender, science and innovation

live, together with external variables, such as the economic, social, cultural and institutional context in which the business will be operating (Davidsson, 1995; Haus et al., 2013; Segal et al., 2002; Thompson, 2009). To analyse the entrepreneurial intention of female students, an electronic questionnaire was distributed to 16 417 students enrolled at the Polytechnic University of Marche in the academic year 2014/2015. Participants were contacted by e-mail and invited to complete an online questionnaire. Participation was voluntary. The sample consisted of about 2000 students from the Polytechnic University of Marche (the sample actually used in the empirical analysis differs depending on the presence of missing values in specific variables). Several factors that influence entrepreneurial behaviour were identified and divided into three groups: psychological, experiential and environmental factors. This study analyses the entrepreneurial intention of undergraduates due to the fact that they embody the knowledge and serve as a conduit for transmitting knowledge from the university where it is created, to a firm where it becomes commercialized (Audretsch et al., 2012; Audretsch and Lehmann, 2005). Fresh graduates can be important channels for disseminating the latest knowledge from academia to local high-tech industry (Anselin et al., 2000). It should be emphasized that our starting point is the assumption that university students constitute a significant portion of the pool of potential entrepreneurs in both developed and developing countries, and that the focus on young potential entrepreneurs is justified by the possibility of anticipating future trends in the entrepreneurial supply (Yli-Renko et al., 2001). Graduate entrepreneurship refers to the ‘interaction between the graduate as the product of university education and business start-up in terms of an individual’s career-orientation and mind-set towards self-employment’ (Nabi and Holden, 2008, p. 446). Moreover, interest in the most educated segment of the population originates from the observations that entrepreneurs’ education is generally associated with higher levels of entrepreneurial skills, with higher rates of firms’ creation (Galloway and Brown, 2002) and with better firm performance (Van Der Sluis and Van Praag, 2008). The main results of the study are that male students are, on average, more oriented toward entrepreneurship than female students; and that generally, self-efficacy and achievement motivations are significant predictors of entrepreneurial propensity. Entrepreneurship seems to be strongly affected by the psychological dispositions of people, independently of contingent circumstances. Experiential factors, such as role models, work experiences and the lack of competencies, have a positive impact on the entrepreneurial intention of students, while the parents’ role model is significant only for females. University support is perceived as salient for

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 306

13/12/2019 15:47



The entrepreneurial intention in female university students ­307

men and women, while friends’ and family support is important only for women. The rest of this chapter is organized as follows. Section 15.2 provides a review of the literature on the entrepreneurial intention of students and on the gender difference. Section 15.3 describes the data and methodology used in the empirical part of the chapter. Section 15.4 discusses the empirical results, and section 15.5 offers some conclusions.

15.2  BACKGROUND OF LITERATURE Theoretically, entrepreneurial intent refers to two models of individual behaviour: Ajzen’s (1991) theory of planned behaviour (TPB), and Shapero and Sokol’s (1982) model of the entrepreneurial event (EE). The TPB postulates that intention is the most important determinant of behaviour (Armitage and Conner, 2001; Autio et al., 2001). The essential assumption of this model is that the stronger the intention to implement a given action, the higher the probability that such action will be implemented (Ajzen, 1991). Entrepreneurship is the typical example of planned behaviour to which the model can be applied (Krueger et al., 2000; Schwarz et al., 2009). Using the TPB, we analyse: (1) the gender differences in entrepreneurial intention and (2) the factors that influence the entrepreneurial intention of university students. 15.2.1  Gender Differences in Entrepreneurial Intention Despite the increasing of the number and share of women entrepreneurs (Brush et al., 2009; de Bruin et al., 2006; Westhead and Solesvick, 2016; Bergland et al., 2018), entrepreneurship is still a male domain and it is associated with masculine behaviours (Ahl, 2006). Women’s entrepreneurship is still significantly lower than men’s (Blanchflower, 2004; Langowitz and Minniti, 2007). The motivations that foster people to start an entrepreneurial career are a combination of ‘push’ and ‘pull’ factors rather than a single reason, and ‘a pull/push’ model reflects most entrepreneurial motivations (Schjoedt and Shaver, 2007). ‘Push’ factors are elements that drive people into entrepreneurship, such as the need for greater income or dissatisfaction within the labour market. ‘Pull’ factors are elements that induce people to become entrepreneurs, such as the desire for autonomy and independence, the wish ‒ rather than the need ‒ for a greater income, the desire for personal satisfaction and achievement, or the recognition of an opportunity in the market. Most of the literature on the e­ ntrepreneurial motivations of

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 307

13/12/2019 15:47

308

Gender, science and innovation

women entrepreneurs has highlighted the desire for autonomy and independence, as well as the desire for personal satisfaction and achievement (Orhan and Scott, 2001; Micozzi and Lucarelli, 2016). Pioneer studies conducted in North America and the United Kingdom have focused on the search for independence and the need to control their own future (Carter, 2000) as main motivations that women exhibited in creating a company. Other factors may be the search for greater job flexibility to reconcile professional and family life (Brush et al., 2003; Greer and Greene, 2003; Orhan and Scott, 2001), or the greater importance they attribute to the existence of a ‘glass ceiling’ than their male counterparts (Ezzedeen and Zikic, 2012). For example, DeMartino et al. (2006) found no differences in the achievement orientation of women entrepreneurs versus women nonentrepreneurs, whereas men entrepreneurs possessed a higher need for achievement than men non-entrepreneurs. Langowitz and Minniti (2007) found self-confidence and perceptions of opportunity were positively related to women’s likelihood of starting a new venture: if women believe they have the abilities to become an entrepreneur, and a belief that these abilities will lead to successful outcomes, they are more likely to pursue entrepreneurship. However, there are recent studies suggesting that the perceptual factors in starting a business such as risk tolerance, self-efficacy and knowing other entrepreneurs are not gender dependent (Arenius and Minniti, 2005). Arenius and Minniti (2005) claim that perceptual factors are drivers of entrepreneurial behaviour for both men and women, and since these factors are subjective, they could be biased. Watson and Newby (2005) investigated the relationship between the attributes of owners of small and medium-sized enterprises and gender-role orientation, and concluded that gender-role orientation (or ‘stereotypical sex-roles’) might be a better indicator of when the analysis intends to investigate the differences between male and female owners’ attributes. In addition to such psychological factors, other variables associated with work experience, competence acquisition and role models can be important sources of entrepreneurial intent. In some contributions, work experience is found to be an important factor for the creation of a new business (Galloway and Brown, 2002; Lans et al., 2010). An exception involves the estimates presented by Singh et al. (2011), finding no significant relationship between work experience and self-employment. Similar to work experience, individual skills and prior knowledge can also significantly influence the intention to form a new firm (Dickson et al., 2008; Aldrich and Martinez, 2001). Knowledge and skills are seen as resources that stimulate the capability to identify opportunities in the

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 308

13/12/2019 15:47



The entrepreneurial intention in female university students ­309

market that is the first phase of the entrepreneurial process (Liñán et al., 2011; Autio et al., 2001; Fini et al., 2009; Park, 2005). By contrast, limited knowledge of organizational and managerial practices, lack of technical expertise and operational experience, tend to reduce the entrepreneurial intentions of young adults. DeTienne and Chandler (2007) found that the number of jobs held and the retail work experience of women were positively related to the number of opportunities women identified (for men, their number of jobs was positively related to the number identified). Women and men also use different processes to identify opportunities. Furthermore, women pursue opportunities in lower-growth and lower-performance industries such as service and retail compared to men (Alsos et al., 2006; Fellnhofer al., 2016). Thus, it is no wonder that their businesses have lower revenues and profits, fewer employees, and grow more slowly than male-owned firms (Boden and Nucci, 2000). However, this may not be surprising, as prior work experiences of women are generally in lower-growth industries (DeTienne and Chandler, 2007). Finally, entrepreneurial intent is also related to the type of exchanges that develop within the family and network of friends. In this sense, entrepreneurial intent is strongly influenced by the contact with people that have business experience (Ahmed et al., 2011). Having a family member (or close friend) who is an entrepreneur may reassure a young adult about the feasibility of self-employment and facilitate the identification with ‘role models’ (Tung et al., 2011). Some studies have examined the association between having entrepreneurial parents and children’s entrepreneurial motivations. Broadly, this research suggests that both men and women are motivated if either parent was an entrepreneur (Sullivan and Meek, 2012). Similarly, Malach-Pines and Schwartz (2008) found that, compared to men, women entrepreneurs were more likely to have an entrepreneurial mother. Finally, having a self-employed husband increases the likelihood of a woman being self-employed (Sullivan and Meek, 2012). With regard to women’s social networks (for example, the relationships entrepreneurs have with others who provide business support and resources), women rely more on family to help with opportunity recognition than men. Analysing the behaviour of angel investors, Harrison and Mason (2007) found interesting differences in the entrepreneurial investments made by men and women angels. They found that women angels utilize different sources of opportunity identification: they are less likely to invest by themselves, and they are more likely to mentor the businesses within which they invest. Further, they are more willing to act as network partners via mentoring women entrepreneurs.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 309

13/12/2019 15:47

310

Gender, science and innovation

In addition to family, another important variable is the support of i­ nstitutions. Institutional barriers refer to both informal and formal mechanisms that prevent the creation of new business (Krueger and Brazeal, 1994). Informal mechanisms consist of norms and rules prevailing within a population of potential entrepreneurs; while formal mechanisms include lack of explicit support on the side of public and private organizations (Sandhu et al., 2011). Furthermore, one of the main institutional barriers is often associated with limited access to credit. There is broad evidence concerning the difficulties faced by firms during the start-up phase to amass funds (Blanchflower and Oswald, 1998; Li, 2007; Shapero and Sokol, 1982). In addition to financial support, there are other forms of institutional support, such as specialist advice and training (Shapero and Sokol, 1982). Sandhu et al. (2011) show that the lower entrepreneurial intent recorded in some developing countries could be attributed to a lack of adequate institutional support. Universities can also be an important source of support for young entrepreneurs. As we discussed above, skills, education and work experience strengthen entrepreneurial competencies and increase the likelihood that new firms show a positive performance (Van Der Sluis and Van Praag, 2008). Over two decades ago Dyer (1994) found that the provision of courses on entrepreneurship and procedures for starting a new business raises the confidence of potential entrepreneurs about the feasibility of their project. Similarly Krueger and Brazeal (1994) emphasized the importance of entrepreneurial education in fostering self-efficacy. Franke and Lüthje (2003) suggest that the university environment significantly contributes to the view of an entrepreneurial career that students have and affects their orientation towards launching a new business. Further evidence on the role played by the university context in affecting business decisions is provided by Schwarz et al. (2009) and Turker and Selcuk (2009). Beyond acquiring formal competencies, the university is seen as a social environment affecting individual creativity, spirit of independence and autonomy. 15.2.2  The Entrepreneurial Intention of University Students Early research in the areas of entrepreneurship and graduate choices for career mainly focused on the individual’s personality (Gartner, 1988; Low and MacMillan, 1988), confirming a significant relationship between several personality dimensions and entrepreneurship intentions and performance, with risk propensity deeply linked to intentions (Zhao et al., 2010). Demographics, such as age, gender and employment experience, have also been empirically investigated (Hatten and Ruhland, 1995).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 310

13/12/2019 15:47



The entrepreneurial intention in female university students ­311

Sandhu et al. (2011) show that postgraduate Malaysian students who are more mature and have greater job experience are more likely to be inclined towards entrepreneurship. The work indicates that male postgraduate students are more inclined towards entrepreneurship compared to female postgraduate students. Married students will also be more likely to engage in entrepreneurial activities after graduation. Karimi et al. (2013) explored the effects of gender and role models on entrepreneurial intention on a sample of Iranian college students. Results indicated that entrepreneurial role models indirectly influenced entrepreneurial intention. The study found no gender differences in the relationship between perceived behavioural control and entrepreneurial intention. However, they found that attitude towards entrepreneurship was a weaker predictor, and subjective norm a stronger predictor, of entrepreneurial intention for female students than for male. Entrepreneurship among students is perceived as something that men do (Brush et al., 2009). In an experimental study of undergraduate business students, men were found to have higher expectancies of entrepreneurial performance than women, regardless of the feedback (positive or negative) received (Brush et al., 2006). Similarly, Wilson et al. (2007) found that within samples of teenagers and MBA students, women had lower entrepreneurial self-efficacy and entrepreneurial intentions than men. Previous evidence suggests that female students, compared with male students, have lower confidence in their business abilities (Wilson et al., 2007). In addition, women perceive their environment to be more difficult or less satisfying for entrepreneurial activity, and will be likely to have a lower sense of personal control over many career activities than men (BarNir et al., 2011). DeTienne and Chandler (2007) analysed gender differences in identifying entrepreneurial opportunities by using two samples of individuals (95 graduate students and 189 entrepreneurs belonging to high-tech industries), and conclude that men and women use their unique stocks of human capital to identify opportunities and use different processes of opportunity identification. Previously, Chandler et al. (2005) had proposed four processes for identifying opportunities (learn/reply, learn/ innovate, learn/acquire and innovate/educate) to show that differences in human capital are related to choosing and applying different processes for the identification of opportunities. Veciana et al. (2005) used entrepreneurial intention models to compare university students’ attitudes towards entrepreneurship in Catalonia and Puerto Rico. They found that in Catalonia male students showed greater propensity for entrepreneurship and were more serious about creating a new venture. Women were less willing to take risks, and the perception that they have greater household responsibilities makes them less willing

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 311

13/12/2019 15:47

312

Gender, science and innovation

to start up their own businesses. Specifically, female students had a more positive perception of attributes relating to responsibility, discipline and independence. By contrast, the male students assigned themselves higher scores in attributes which are related to initiative, creativity, selfconfidence and optimism. Regarding the obstacles to business start-up, a lack of capital and the high risk are important for both men and women. Female students also attach greater importance to their lack of business knowhow and the fear of failure, as well as doubts regarding their own entrepreneurial capacity; while male students are more concerned than their female counterparts about aspects such as tax burdens and having to work too many hours. El Harbi et al. (2009) explored the entrepreneurial intentions of young males and females in Tunisia. Their findings suggest that entrepreneurial intentions vary with gender and are grounded on traditional social norms. Cañizares and García (2010) examine gender differences in-depth by means of an empirical study using a large sample of university students. The fieldwork was conducted at the University of Cordoba (southern Spain) and the study shows the gender differences in the entrepreneurial attitudes and motivations of university students. We chose to analyse a case study from an Italian university due to the fact that in Italy, studies on entrepreneurial orientation of students are few. Chelli and Rosti (2009) investigate the gender impact of the education of Italian students on the probability of entering and remaining in selfemployment. Education may either enhance individual entrepreneurial ability, thereby increasing the probability of choosing self-employment, or education may increase opportunities for employment, thereby reducing the likelihood of becoming an entrepreneur. The data show that education not only significantly increases the probability of entering selfemployment for both male and female graduates, but also significantly increases the transition from self-employment to dependent employment for female graduates. As a consequence, self-employed female graduates exhibit lower survival rates than self-employed male graduates, thereby increasing the percentage of women in dependent employment and reducing the percentage of women in entrepreneurial activities. The study shows that the probability of male graduates persisting in self-employment is nearly the same as for paid employment, while the probability of female graduates persisting in self-employment is much lower than that for paid employment.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 312

13/12/2019 15:47



The entrepreneurial intention in female university students ­313

15.3  SAMPLE AND METHODOLOGY The reference population for the study is composed of 16 417 students enrolled at the Polytechnic University of Marche in the academic year 2014/2015. The sample consisted of about 2000 students from the Polytechnic University of Marche; the sample actually used in the empirical analysis differs depending on the presence of missing values in specific variables. The sample is fairly large compared to previous studies. The response rate was about 13 per cent. The mean age of the sample was 24.6 years (SD 5 5.5 range 5 19‒64 years). Table 15.1 shows the population and the sample by faculty, programme and gender. The sample distribution across faculties broadly reflects the underlying population, with an over-representation of engineering students and an under-representation of students from the Faculty of Medicine. There is also a slight bias towards more senior students (PhD and postgraduate). Overall, the sample distribution across gender, faculty and year of programme is in line with the underlying population. Table 15.1  Population and sample by faculty, programme and gender Population

Sample

Total

%

Total

%

Faculty Agriculture Economics Engineering Medicine and Surgery Sciences Total

893 3713 6443 3615 1753 16 417

5 23 39 22 11 100

77 444 777 255 137 1690

5 26 46 15 8 100

Programme PhD Postgraduate (6 years) Postgraduate (5 years) Postgraduate Undergraduate Total

418 1356 575 3124 10 944 16 417

3 8 4 19 67 100

115 71 81 500 1017 1784

6 4 5 28 57 100

Gender Female Male Total

7439 8978 16 417

45 55 100

757 1033 1790

42 58 100

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 313

13/12/2019 15:47

314

Gender, science and innovation

15.3.1  Descriptive Statistics The participants were asked about their intention to start a new firm: 44 per cent have no intention to start a business, and only 3 per cent declare that they will work in their family business. The remaining students show an intention to start a business, though with different level of confidence (high or low intention). In a scale of intention between 0 and 5 the mean is 3.31 and the standard deviation is 1.50. Most of the interviewees who show a propensity to start a business do not have a clear idea about the timing to engage in such activity; this is probably due to the fact that they are still students. The students were asked about the importance of different motivations or obstacles in setting up a new firm (on a scale of 1 to 6: 1 5 strongly disagree to 6 5 strongly agree). The main motivation for starting a business is ‘to be economically independent’, followed by ‘to develop my own idea’ and ‘to build something on my own’, and the variables linked to the need for achievement. The middle-ranked motivations are more related to the ‘leadership’ and ‘economic’ side. In the very last position is ‘lack of interest for other jobs’. This means that the entrepreneurial choice is not a ‘residual’ choice and it is viewed as an opportunity and not as a necessity. It is interesting to notice that ‘create a non-profit business’ seems to be in contrast with the entrepreneurial choice. The main obstacles in setting up a company are the ‘lack of start-up capital’ and the variables linked to the context: ‘legal and fiscal duties’, ‘current economic trends’, the ‘bureaucracy’ and the ‘high risk’. In the middle rankings, there are variables linked again to the context, but more focused on the specific professional supports to the start-up of new businesses. In the bottom positions, we find ‘lack of support from family and friends’ and ‘doubt on personal skills’. Replicating the same analysis, separating the sample between those who declare propensity and those who do not, it can be noted that all the differences are statistically significant. The main differences between higher-propensity students and lower-propensity ones are in the perception of the fact that to be an entrepreneur gives the possibility ‘to build something on my own’ and ‘to be a leader of an organization’. While related to the obstacles, the higher-propensity students are more confident with their skills and competencies. When replicating the same analysis by gender, it can be noted that females are more sensitive to the social impact of the business and the relevance of the non-profit entrepreneurship as a motivation for starting a new business. In general, females perceive the obstacles more intensively. Females are more ‘pessimistic’, especially on the perceptions of their

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 314

13/12/2019 15:47



The entrepreneurial intention in female university students ­315

­ ersonal skills and competencies, both entrepreneurial and technical, and p show a higher ‘fear of failure’. Considering only the respondents who showed entrepreneurial intention, it seems that the differences between males and females are mainly on the ‘social’ aspects. The aspect of economic independence (‘to be autonomous and independent’) is more highlighted by women, while ‘need of achievement’ appeared less relevant. For the obstacles, the ‘fear of failure’ is still more intensive. 15.3.2  Methodology To gain some insights about the factors explaining the propensity to engage in the start-up of a new business, a multivariate analysis was conducted. The analysis aimed at measuring the impact of several personal and context variables on the probability of expressing an entrepreneurial intention. The variables used in this analysis are constructed according to the factors examined in the previous sections. 15.3.3  Dependent Variable The dependent variable is ‘propensity’. This is a dummy variable taking the value 1 if the student answer to the question ‘Have you ever thought to create your own business?’ is the following: (1) ‘Yes, vaguely’; (2) ‘Yes, I do and this may be a future possibility’; or (3) ‘Yes, I am working to build an enterprise’/‘I have already set up a business’. It takes the value of 0 if the answer is: (1) ‘No, I have no interest’; (2) ‘No, I have never thought about it’; or (3) ‘I think I will work in my family business’. 15.3.4  Independent Variables Psychological variables Psychological factors were captured by the answer to several questions on a six-point Likert scale (1 5 strongly disagree; 6 5 strongly agree): need for achievement (for example, ‘To improve the quality of my life’, ‘To be autonomous and independent’), self-efficacy (for example, ‘I have the competencies to be a successful entrepreneur’), risk-taking propensity (for example, ‘The main obstacle is the high risk’) and leadership (for example, ‘The main motivation to start a new firm is to be the leader of an organization’). Experiential variables The second group of variables consists of experiential variables, including presence of role models, previous work experience, and lack of

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 315

13/12/2019 15:47

316

Gender, science and innovation

e­ ntrepreneurial and managerial competences. Presence of role models was measured with dichotomous items asking participants to indicate whether their parents, brothers/sisters, other relatives, friends or others are entrepreneurs. Work experience was measured with a single dichotomous item asking participants to indicate whether they had some past work experience (in which 1 5 yes and 0 5 no). Lack of competencies was measured with three items asking participants to indicate the extent to which they perceived each item as an obstacle to start a new firm (for example, ‘The lack of entrepreneurial competencies’, ‘The lack of managerial and administrative experience’), recording each answer on a six-point Likert scale (in which 1 5 strongly disagree; 6 5 strongly agree). Entrepreneurial context variables The third group of variables refer to the context. Participants were asked to indicate the extent to which they consider that the existing economic situation can be an obstacle for the creation of new businesses, on a sixpoint Likert scale (1 5 very unimportant; 6 5 very important). They were also asked about: friends and family support, which is measured by two items asking participants to indicate whether they would be supported by family or friends when starting a new business (for example, ‘If I started a company, I would be supported by my family/friends’); institutional support, where participants indicated the extent to which they believed that some institutional aspects could hinder the starting of a new business (for example, ‘The lack of business association supporting entrepreneurs’, ‘The bureaucracy required to start a business’); university support, which is measured by asking participants to indicate their agreement with five statements about the role of the university’s support in entrepreneurship (for example, ‘The university developed my entrepreneurial competence and skills’, ‘The university provides me the knowledge to start a business’); professional support, which is measured with three items asking if the lack of professional services for the start-up of a firm can be seen as an obstacle to start-up (for example, ‘The lack of support for idea validation’, ‘The lack of legal and operative services’); and local support, which is measured by asking if the participants are aware of the local services supporting entrepreneurship (for example, ‘Is there a Technology Transfer Office at your university?’, ‘Is there a business incubator?’). Some of the variables used in the estimates were obtained through a principal component analysis (PCA) aimed at extracting a synthetic variable capturing several questions that were related to the same factor. In other cases the variable was constructed considering the answers to a specific question. The variables used in the model are summarized in Table 15.2.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 316

13/12/2019 15:47



The entrepreneurial intention in female university students ­317

Table 15.2  List of variables

Psychological variables Experiential variables

Context variables

Description

Variables

Measurement

Need of achievement Self-efficacy Risk-taking Leadership Role models Role models Role models Work experience Lack of competences Friends’ and family  support Institutional support University support Professional support Local support

achievement efficacy risk leadership parents relatives friends work_experience lack_of_competences friend_family_support

PCA PCA Likert scale PCA Dummy Dummy Dummy Dummy PCA Likert scale

institutional_support university_support professional_support local_support

PCA PCA PCA PCA

The following hypothesis summarizes the expectations about the relations between the explanatory variables and the dependent variable. Hypothesis 1:  Being a woman reduces the probability to behave as a ‘nascent entrepreneur’, taking all the other heterogeneities under control. Control variables In the empirical estimation, we also include a set of control variables (for example, the field of study).

15.4  EMPIRICAL RESULTS The correlation matrix for the analysis is given in Table 15.3. The following tables show the descriptive statistics. In particular, Table 15.4 shows the motivations to start up a new firm by gender, and Table 15.5 the obstacles to start up a new firm by gender. The tables report the statistical significance of difference between male and female. The results show that females are more sensible to the social impact of the business and the relevance of the non-profit entrepreneurship as a motivation for starting a new business. In general, females perceive the obstacles more intensively. Females are

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 317

13/12/2019 15:47

318

Gender, science and innovation

Table 15.3  Correlation matrix

achievement efficacy risk leadership parents relatives friends work_exper~e lack_of_co~s friend_fam~t university~t institutio~t profession~t local_supp~t female age

achiev~t

efficacy

1.0000 0.3146 0.0499 0.3939 0.0466 0.0308 0.0740 0.0552 0.0178 0.1521 0.1126 20.0873 0.0630 0.0591 0.0080 0.0029

1.0000 20.2728 0.2685 0.0618 0.0899 0.1602 0.1729 20.4733 0.1562 0.1991 0.1069 20.2887 0.1281 20.1066 0.0942

risk

leader~p

parents

relati~s

friends

1.0000 20.0032 1.0000 20.0466 0.0344 1.0000 20.0121 0.0292 0.1465 1.0000 20.0335 0.0644 0.1347 0.1859 1.0000 20.0627 0.0417 0.0070 20.0036 0.0682 0.3816 20.0421 20.0452 20.0676 20.0692 20.0367 0.0673 0.0770 0.0415 0.0558 20.0320 0.2438 0.0095 0.0374 0.0631 20.1980 0.0001 20.0176 20.0280 0.0373 0.4240 0.0534 20.0673 20.0446 20.0651 20.0568 0.0955 20.0197 0.0490 0.1729 0.0668 0.0032 20.0084 0.0227 20.1257 20.0003 20.0025 20.0283 20.0536 0.0693

more ‘pessimistic’, especially on the perceptions of their personal skills and competencies, both entrepreneurial and technical, and show a higher ‘fear of failure’. Considering only the respondents that showed entrepreneurial intention, it seems that the differences between male and female are mainly on the ‘social’ aspects. Women highlighted more the aspect of the economic independence (‘to be autonomous and independent’), and less ‘need of achievement’. For the obstacles the ‘fear of failure’ is still more intensive for females. To test our research hypothesis, logit estimates were performed for the full sample (column 1) and for sub-samples split by gender (column 2 male, column 3 female) (Table 15.6). The main results of the study are that male students on average are more oriented toward entrepreneurship than female students; and, generally, self-efficacy and achievement motivations are significant predictors of entrepreneurial propensity, while risk-taking reduces the students’ entrepreneurial propensity. The sense of leadership is not statistically significant. This result is probably caused by the overlap between variables included in self-efficacy and in leadership, or can be explained by the shift from a ‘solo entrepreneur’ to an ‘entrepreneurial team’. Work experiences are positively related to students’ entrepreneurial propensity, and having someone’s experience of entrepreneurship (that is, the existence of entrepreneurial role models within the family) enhances students’ entrepreneurial propensity. In rela-

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 318

13/12/2019 15:47



The entrepreneurial intention in female university students ­319

work_e~e lack_o~s

friend~t univer~t

1.0000 20.1398 20.0742 0.0442 20.0230 20.0819 0.0774 20.0196 0.2954

1.0000 0.1050 1.0000 0.0734 0.1626 1.0000 20.0628 20.0669 20.4180 1.0000 0.0692 0.2340 0.2031 20.1361 0.0080 20.0329 20.0272 0.1102 20.1310 0.0147 20.0245 20.0246

1.0000 20.0141 20.0751 20.1904 0.6238 20.1209 0.1387 20.0773

instit~t

profes~t

local_~t

female

age

1.0000 20.0328 1.0000 0.0872 0.0287 1.0000

tion to the role model, the results show some difference when considering the presence of role models within the family or among relatives or friends; only friends is statistically significant. The perceived lack of technical and managerial competences is negatively related to students’ entrepreneurial propensity. Concerning the main hypothesis, being a woman reduces the probability to behave as a ‘nascent entrepreneur’, controlling for all the other heterogeneities. When gender differences are considered, the main variables of need of achievement, self-efficacy, work experience and university support are statistically significant for both men and women. However, there are some differences: parental role model, family support and lack of competences are statistically significant only for females.

15.5 CONCLUSIONS There is no doubt that a favourable local context enhances entrepreneurial intention, but it is important to understand the kinds of factors that impact on young well-educated people’s decisions to start a new business. Some of the findings of our study on entrepreneurial propensity confirm previous empirical evidence. As suggested by a large portion of the literature (Davidsson, 2006; Lans et al., 2010; Wa and Zhao, 2011), the results show that male students on average are more oriented toward

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 319

13/12/2019 15:47

320

Gender, science and innovation

Table 15.4  M  otivations to start up a new firm by gender (descending order) Description

Mean (male)

Mean (female)

MeanDiff by gender

To develop my own idea To be economically independent To build something on my own To be autonomous and independent To improve the quality of my life To receive an adequate salary To create jobs To improve my status To create personal wealth To earn more than a salaried employee Be the leader of an organization To organize others’ work To create a non-profit or a high social   impact business Difficulty to find a job To have more spare time Lack of interest for other jobs To follow a family tradition Obs

5.171 5.149 5.131 5.040 5.015 4.901 4.641 4.439 4.419 4.318 3.864 3.807 3.435

5.086 5.213 5.119 5.151 5.044 4.864 4.849 4.396 4.498 4.143 3.808 3.872 4.045

0.085** 20.064 0.012 20.111** 20.028 0.037 20.209*** 0.042 20.079 0.175*** 0.055 20.065 20.610***

3.411 3.343 2.723 2.693 1033

3.606 3.338 2.671 2.931 757

20.195*** 0.005 0.052 20.238***

Notes:  *** Significant at 1%; ** significant at 5%; * significant at 10%. Obs: Number of observations.

entrepreneurship than female students; and that self-efficacy and achievement motivations are significant predictors of entrepreneurial propensity. However, this common result is qualified by the fact that their significant effect is not hindered when contextual variables such as economic barriers and lack of institutional support are taken into account. Thus, to some extent entrepreneurship is strongly affected by the psychological dispositions of people, independently of contingent circumstances. Experiential factors, role models, work experiences and the lack of competencies affect the hypothesized direction. But our results in part do not confirm the previous literature: the parents’ role model is only significant for females, while for males the friends’ role model is significant. The university support is perceived as salient, while on the contrary the lack of institutional and professional support, and perception of friends’ and family support, do not affect the propensity; with the exception of females, who do consider friends’ and family support as important.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 320

13/12/2019 15:47



The entrepreneurial intention in female university students ­321

Table 15.5  Obstacles to start up a new firm by gender (descending order) Description

Mean (male)

Mean (female)

MeanDiff by gender

Legal and fiscal duties Lack of start-up capital Current economic trends The bureaucracy to start up a business High risk The lack of managerial and   administrative experience The lack of support for idea validation The lack of support and advice during   the start-up phase The lack of entrepreneurial skills The lack of business association   supporting entrepreneurs The lack of legal and operative service The lack of technical skills The fear of failure Variable incomes The lack of entrepreneurial ideas Trouble on human resources  management Doubt on personal skills The lack of support from my social   networks (family, friends, etc.) Much time to spend at work Obs

4.985 4.980 4.820 4.653 4.483 4.408

4.897 5.070 5.044 4.604 4.624 4.587

0.088* 20.090* 20.224*** 0.050 20.140*** 20.179***

4.361 4.356

4.559 4.507

20.198*** 20.151***

4.236 4.047

4.522 4.272

20.286*** 20.225***

4.028 3.785 3.711 3.683 3.602 3.146

4.296 4.201 4.077 4.034 3.724 3.333

20.268*** 20.416*** 20.366*** 20.351*** 20.122* 20.187***

3.013 2.853

3.321 3.151

20.308*** 20.298***

2.830 1033

3.028 757

20.198***

Notes:  *** Significant at 1%; ** significant at 5%; * significant at 10%. Obs: Number of observations.

In general, females perceive the obstacles more intensively. Females are more ‘pessimistic’, especially regarding the perceptions of their personal skills and competencies, both entrepreneurial and technical, and they show a higher ‘fear of failure’ and are more sensible to the ‘social’ aspects of the entrepreneurship. Finally, in a country characterized by the widespread and relevant role of ‘strong ties’ and where the family is crucial in feeding a strong entrepreneurial supply, it is interesting to observe that family support is perceived to be hardly relevant in stimulating entrepreneurship. When we consider the intensity of the intention of being an entrepreneur, the results are similar. On the theoretical side, this demonstrates the close association between the propensity to become an entrepreneur and the

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 321

13/12/2019 15:47

322

Gender, science and innovation

Table 15.6  Entrepreneurial propensity: logit estimations Dependent variable

Propensity

Independent variables Psychological achievement  variables       efficacy       risk       leadership     parents Experiential  variables       relatives       friends       work_experience       lack_of_competences     friend_family_support Context  variables       university_support       institutional_support       professional_support       local_support     Control female  variables       age       constant       observation   pseudo R-squared

Full sample

Male sample Female sample

0.3150***

0.2866***

0.3526***

(0.000) 0.3758*** (0.000) 20.1657*** (0.008) 20.0702 (0.184) 0.1412

(0.000) 0.4422*** (0.000) 20.1574* (0.057) 20.1599** (0.024) 20.1674

(0.000) 0.3276***   20.1683* (0.082) 0.0390 (0.631) 0.5203**

(0.383) 0.0187 (0.894) 0.3266*** (0.004) 0.5789*** (0.000) 20.1127** (0.042) 0.0946**

(0.437) 0.0152 (0.938) 0.4652*** (0.002) 0.7029*** (0.000) 20.0529 (0.472) 0.0506

(0.037) 0.0287 (0.891) 0.1963 (0.270) 0.4193** (0.021) 20.1527* (0.079) 0.1610**

(0.025) 0.1354*** (0.000) 20.0060 (0.901) 0.0922 (0.104) 0.0763** (0.041) 20.7122***

(0.377) 0.0926* (0.050) 0.0174 (0.780) 0.1195 (0.105) 0.1412*** (0.005)  

(0.013) 0.1817*** (0.000) 20.0564 (0.466) 0.0446 (0.626) 20.0036 (0.950)  

(0.000) 0.0305*** (0.008) 20.2707 (0.545) 1789 0.205

  0.0057 (0.719) 0.3902 (0.520) 1033 0.194

  0.0553*** (0.001) 21.7847*** (0.008) 756 0.199

Notes:  p-values in parentheses; *** significant at 1%; ** significant at 5%; * significant at 10%.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 322

13/12/2019 15:47



The entrepreneurial intention in female university students ­323

intensity of the intention to start a new business. On the empirical side, this demonstrates the robustness of the independent variables used to predict the propensity and intention to start an entrepreneurial career. The fundamental role of universities in influencing the students’ entrepreneurial propensity is in line with considering universities as the source of new knowledge for building up a knowledge society. Besides teaching and research, serving society is becoming a coherent domain of the ‘entrepreneurial university’. These results have a number of implications not only for academics but also for policy makers. Education and development programmes and work experiences during the formal education period (since primary and secondary education) should take these results into account. The results suggest that macroeconomic difficulties, particularly in a country affected by a deep economic crisis such as Italy, influence entrepreneurial supply only marginally through a reduction in the propensity to start a business. This study has several limitations: for example, the use of cross-­sectional questionnaires instead of a panel study. However, the very large and heterogeneous (in terms of faculty and year of the course attended) sample used in this research, as well as the consistency between these results, mitigates these shortcomings.

REFERENCES Acs, Z.J. and Szerb, L. (2006). Entrepreneurship, economic growth and public policy. Small Business Economics, 28(2/3), 109–22. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187006-9012-3. Ahl, H. (2006). Why research on women entrepreneurs needs new directions. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 30(5), 595–621. http://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1540-6520.2012.00504.x. Ahmed, I., Nawaz, M.M. and Ramzan, M. (2011). Do external factors influence students’ entrepreneurial inclination? Actual Problems of Economics, 125(11), 348–55. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179‒211. Aldrich, H.E. and Martinez, M.A. (2001). Many are called, but few are chosen: an evolutionary perspective for the study of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship, Theory and Practice, 25(4), 41–56. C:\Documents and Settings\IST DI INFOR​ MATICA\Documenti\Ricerca\Bib\Entrepreneurship\Aldrich_Martinez_​2001. pdf. Alsos, G.A., Isaksen, E.J. and Ljunggren, E. (2006). New venture fi ­ nancing and subsequent business growth in men- and women-led businesses. Entrepreneurship, Theory and Practice, 30(5), 667–86. Anselin, L., Varga, A. and Acs, Z. (2000). Geographical spillovers and university research: a spatial econometric perspective. Growth and Change, 31(4), 501–15. http://doi.org/10.1111/0017-4815.00142.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 323

13/12/2019 15:47

324

Gender, science and innovation

Arenius, P. and Minniti, M. (2005). Perceptual variables and nascent entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 24(3), 233–47. http://doi.org/10.1007/ s11187-005-1984-x. Armitage, C.J. and Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471–99. Audretsch, D.B. and Lehmann, E.E. (2005). Does the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship hold for regions? Research Policy, 34(8), 1191–202. Audretsch, D.B., Lehmann, E. and Wright, M. (2012). Technology transfer in a global economy. Journal of Technology Transfer, 39(3), 301–12. Autio, E., Keeley, R.H. Klofsten, M., et al. (2001). Entrepreneurial intent among students in Scandinavia and in the USA. Enterprise and Innovation Management Studies, 2(2), 145–60. http://doi.org/10.1080/1463244011009463. BarNir, A., Watson, W.E. and Hutchins, H.M. (2011). Mediation and moderated mediation in the relationship among role models, self-efficacy, entrepreneurial career intention, and gender. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41, 270–97. Berglund, K., Ahl, H., Pettersson, K. and Tillmar, M. (2018). Women’s entrepreneurship, neoliberalism and economic justice in the postfeminist era: a discourse analysis of policy change in Sweden. Gender, Work and Organization, 25(5), 531–56. Blanchflower, D.G. (2004). Self-employment: more may not be better. Swedish Economic Policy Review, 11(2), 15–73. Blanchflower, D.G. and Oswald, A.J. (1998). What makes an entrepreneur? Journal of Labor Economics, 16(1), 26–60. Boden, R. and Nucci, A. (2000). On the survival prospects of men’s and women’s new business ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 15, 347–62. Brush, C.G., de Bruin, A. and Welter, F. (2009). A gender-aware framework for women’s entrepreneurship. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 8–24. Brush, C., Carter, N., Gatewood, E., et al. (2006). Growth-Oriented Women Entrepreneurs and their Businesses: A Global Research Perspective. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing. Brush, C.G., Duhaime, I.M., Gartner, W.B., et al. (2003). Doctoral education in the field of entrepreneurship. Journal of Management, 29(3), 309–31. http://www.sci​ encedirect.com/science/article/B6W59-48D3K3K-2/1/dd77a6145a7c742b6a3d7​ c71f90169cb. Cañizares, S.M.S. and García, F.J.F. (2010). Gender differences in entrepreneurial attitudes. Equality Diversity and Inclusion An International Journal, 29(8), 766–86. http://doi.org/10.1108/02610151011089519. Carter, S. (2000). Gender and enterprise. In S. Carter and D. Jones-Evans (eds), Enterprise and Small Business: Principles, Practice and Policy (pp. 168–81). London: Prentice Hall. Chandler, G., Lyon, D. and DeTienne, D. (2005). Antecedents and exploitation outcomes of opportunity identification processes. Paper presented at the National Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, Honolulu, HI. Chelli, F. and Rosti, L. (2009). Self-employment among Italian female graduates. Education + Training, 51(7), 526–40. Davidsson, P. (1995). Determinants of entrepreneurial intentions. Mimeo. Davidsson, P. (2006). Nascent entrepreneurship: empirical studies and developments. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 2, 1–76. de Bruin, A., Brush, C. and Welter, F. (2006). Introduction to the special

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 324

13/12/2019 15:47



The entrepreneurial intention in female university students ­325

issue: towards building cumulative knowledge on women’s entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(5), 585–94. DeMartino, R., Barbato, R. and Jacques, P.H. (2006). Exploring the career/ achievement and personal life orientation differences between entrepreneurs and nonentrepreneurs: the impact of sex and dependents. Journal of Small Business Management, 44(3), 350–68. DeTienne, D. and Chandler, G. (2007). The role of gender in opportunity identification. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31, 365–86. Dickson, P.H., Solomon, G.T. and Weaver, K.M. (2008). Entrepreneurial selection and success: does education matter? Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(2), 239‒58. http://doi.org/10.1108/14626000810871655. Dyer, J.W.G. (1994). Toward a theory of entrepreneurial careers. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 19, 7–21. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=tr ue&db=bsh&AN=9510010487&site=ehost-live. El Harbi, S., Anderson, A. and Mansour, N. (2009). The attractiveness of entrepreneurship for females and males in a developing Arab Muslim Country: entrepreneurial intentions in Tunisia. International Business Research, 2(3), 47–53. Ezzedeen, S.R. and Zikic, J. (2012). Entrepreneurial experiences of women in Canadian high technology. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 4(1), 3. http://links.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=17004942. Fellnhofer, K., Puumalainen, K. and Sjögrén, H. (2016). Entrepreneurial orientation and performance – are sexes equal? International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, 22(3), 346–74. Fini, R., Grimaldi, R. and Sobrero, M. (2009). Factors fostering academics to start up new ventures: an assessment of Italian founders’ incentives. Journal of Technology Transfer, 34(4), 380–402. Franke, N. and Lüthje, C. (2003). The ‘making’ of an entrepreneur: testing a model of entrepreneurial intent among engineering students at MIT. R&D Management, 33(2), 135–47. Galloway, L. and Brown, W. (2002). Entrepreneurship education at university: a driver in the creation of high growth firms? Education and Training, 44(8/9), 398–406. Gartner, W.B. (1988). ‘Who is an entrepreneur?’ is the wrong question. American Journal of Small Business, 12, 11–32. Greer, M.J. and Greene, P.G. (2003). Feminist theory and the study of entrepreneurship. In J.E. Butler (ed.), New Perspectives on Women Entrepreneurs (pp. 1‒24). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Harrison, R.T. and Mason, C.M. (2007). Does gender matter? Women business angels and the supply of entrepreneurial finance. Entrepreneurship, Theory and Practice, 31(3), 445–72. Hatten, T.S. and Ruhland, S.K. (1995). Student attitude toward entrepreneurship as affected by participation in an SBI program. Journal of Education for Business, 70(4), 224‒7. Haus, I., Steinmetz, H., Isidor, R. and Kabst, R. (2013). Gender effects on entrepreneurial intention: a meta-analytical structural equation model. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 5(2), 130–56. Karimi, S., Biemans, H.J.A., Lans, T., et al. (2013). Understanding role models and gender influences on entrepreneurial intentions among college students. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 204–14. Krueger, N.F. and Brazeal, D.V. (1994). Entrepreneurial potential and potential

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 325

13/12/2019 15:47

326

Gender, science and innovation

entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18(3), 91–104. http://ssrn. com/paper=1505244. Krueger, N.F., Reilly, M.D. and Carsrud, A.L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5/6), 411–32. Langowitz, N. and Minniti, M. (2007). The entrepreneurial propensity of women. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(3), 341–64. Lans, T., Gulikers, J. and Batterink, M. (2010). Moving beyond traditional measures of entrepreneurial intentions in a study among life-sciences students in the Netherlands. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 15(3), 259–74. Li, W. (2007). Ethnic entrepreneurship: studying Chinese and Indian students in the United States. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 12(4), 449–66. Liñán, F., Rodríguez-Cohard, J.C. and Rueda-Cantuche, J.M. (2011). Factors affecting entrepreneurial intention levels: a role for education. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 33(3), 593‒617. http://doi.org/10.10​ 07/s11365-010-0154-z. Low, M. and MacMillan, I. (1988). Entrepreneurship: past research and future challenges. Journal of Management, 35, 139–61. Malach-Pines, A. and Schwartz, D. (2008). Now you see them, now you don’t: gender differences in entrepreneurship. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(7), 811–32. Martin, M.-A.G., Picazo, M.M. and Navarro, J.A. (2010). Entrepreneurship, income distribution and economic growth. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6(2), 131–41. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-010-0142-3. Micozzi, A. and Lucarelli, C. (2016). Heterogeneity in entrepreneurial intent: the role of gender across countries. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 8(2). http://doi.org/10.1108/IJGE-06-2015-0021. Minniti, M. and Nardone, C. (2007). Being in someone else’s shoes: the role of gender in nascent entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 28(2/3), 223–38. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-006-9017-y. Nabi, G. and Holden, R. (2008). Graduate entrepreneurship: intention, education and training. Education and Training, 50(7), 545–51. Orhan, M. and Scott, D. (2001). Why women enter into entrepreneurship: an explanatory model. Women in Management Review, 16(5), 232‒47. Park, J.S. (2005). Opportunity recognition and product innovation in entrepreneurial hi-tech start-ups: a new perspective and supporting case study. Technovation, 25(7), 739–52. Sandhu, M.S., Sidique, S.F. and Riaz, S. (2011). Entrepreneurship barriers and entrepreneurial inclination among Malaysian postgraduate students. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 17(4), 428‒49. Schjoedt, L. and Shaver, K.G. (2007). Deciding on an entrepreneurial career: a test of the pull and push hypotheses using the panel study of entrepreneurial dynamics data. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 31(5), 733–52. Retrieved from 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00197.x. Schwarz, E.J., Wdowiak, M.A., Almer-Jarz, D.A. and Breitenecker, R.J. (2009). The effects of attitudes and perceived environment conditions on students’ entrepreneurial intent: an Austrian perspective. Education and Training, 51(4), 272–91. Segal, G., Borgia, D. and Schoenfeld, J. (2002). Using social cognitive career theory to predict self-employment goals. New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 5(2), 47–56.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 326

13/12/2019 15:47



The entrepreneurial intention in female university students ­327

Shapero, A. and Sokol, L. (1982). Social dimensions of entrepreneurship. Encyclopedia of Entrepreneurship, 7240, 72–90. Singer, S., Amoros, J.E. and Moska, D. (2015). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, 2014 Global Report. GEM Consortium. Singh, M., Shaufique, S., Sidique, F. and Riaz, S. (2011). Entrepreneurship barriers and entrepreneurial inclination among Malaysian postgraduate students. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 17(4), 428–49. Sullivan, D.M. and Meek, W.R. (2012). Gender and entrepreneurship: a review and process model. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 27(5), 428–58. Thompson, E.R. (2009). Individual entrepreneurial intent: construct clarification and development of an internationally reliable metric. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 33(3), 669–94. Tung, M., Yin, L.A. and Mui, L.D. (2011). Young adult responses to entrepreneurial intent. Mimeo. Turker, D. and Selcuk, S.S. (2009). Which factors affect entrepreneurial intention of university students? Journal of European Industrial Training, 33(2), 142–59. Van Der Sluis, J. and Van Praag, M. (2008). Education and entrepreneurship selection and performance: a review of the empirical literature. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22(5), 795–841. Veciana, J.M., Aponte, M. and Urbano, D. (2005). University students’ attitudes towards entrepreneurship: a two countries comparison. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1(2), 165–82. Wang, H. and Zhao, H. (2011). Analysis of university students’ entrepreneurial attitudes and influence factors of their entrepreneurial orientation. 2011 2nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Management Science and Electronic Commerce, AIMSEC 2011 – Proceedings (pp. 5429–32). Watson, J. and Newby, R. (2005). Biological sex, stereotypical sex-roles, and SME owner characteristics. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 11(2), 129–43. Westhead, P. and Solesvik, M.Z. (2016). Entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial intention: do female students benefit? International Small Business Journal, 34(8), 979–1003. Wilson, F., Kickul, J. and Marlino, D. (2007). Gender, entrepreneurial self-­ efficacy, and entrepreneurial career intentions: implications for entrepreneurship education. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 31(3), 387–406. http:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00179.x. Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E. and Sapienza, H.J. (2001). Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology-based firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6/7), 587–613. http://doi.org/10.1002/smj.183. Zhao, H., Seibert, S.E. and Lumpkin, G.T. (2010). The relationship of personality to entrepreneurial intentions and performance: a meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 36(6), 381–404.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 327

13/12/2019 15:47

16. Gender, race and entrepreneurship in the United States Cheryl B. Leggon 16.1 ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN THE UNITED STATES: A SOCIO-HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Entrepreneurship is ‘a mind-set – a way of thinking and acting . . . imagining new ways to solve problems and create value’ (Fernandes, 2016). Although there is no single definition, entrepreneurship has been described as: ●  seeing

an opportunity and gathering the resources to turn a possibility into a reality ●  imagining new ways to solve problems and create value ●  fundamentally . . . the ability to recognize [and] methodically analyze [an] opportunity, and ultimately, to capture [its] value (Fernandes, 2016).

In the United States, entrepreneurship both reflects and reinforces the belief that an individual can achieve the ‘American dream’ through hard work. Successful entrepreneurship benefits not only individual entrepreneurs but also the entire society. For example, gender gaps in entrepreneurship reduce wages, labour force participation, the average level of talent of entrepreneurs, and aggregate productivity (Cuberes and Teignier, 2018). Moreover, research in business, economics and social science literatures contends that entrepreneurship can be an effective means of economic advancement for disadvantaged racial, ethnic and gender groups in American society. In the 1970s, the approach to entrepreneurial research was to identify the characteristics associated with entrepreneurship, and to compare individuals and various groups on these characteristics. This research focused on the relationship between entrepreneurial success and individual personality traits such as, for example, the extent to which an individual was willing to take risks. Research indicated that women scored low in the willingness to take risks, leading some to conclude that women had low levels ­328

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 328

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender, race and entrepreneurship in the United States ­329

of interest in entrepreneurship. Deeper analyses revealed that low rates of entrepreneurship among women were not due to lack of interest but to lack of access to sufficient resources to start and maintain a business. Researchers compared groups categorized as minority ethnic groups in terms of their success – or lack thereof – in entrepreneurship. These comparisons focused on the role of ‘culture’ to explain economic success, especially the extent to which their community was characterized by cohesion and mutual aid (Butler, 2005). Implicit in this approach was the assumption that economic activities in ethnic enterprise (based on the Protestant ethic that values hard work) is an indicator of a group’s potential to succeed economically, and successfully ‘fit’ (assimilate) into American society. This formulation was problematic because African Americans were categorized as an ethnic group rather than a racial group. Unlike ethnic groups that migrated voluntarily to the United States for a better life, African Americans’ ancestors were brought against their will and forced into servitude. Skin colour not only distinguished them from other groups, but also limited the extent to which they could assimilate into American society. Recent research demonstrates that the greatest obstacles to entrepreneurship in the United States are posed by its ‘context of reception’; that is, the social, economic and government structures that impact upon different groups differently depending on their place in the social structure (Romero and Valdez, 2016). Findings indicate that both women and African Americans view entrepreneurship as a means for economic advancement, and as a response to existing inequality (Wingfield and Taylor, 2016). This chapter consists of five sections. Section 16.2 focuses on the problem(s) of the gender gap in entrepreneurship, and section 16.3 discusses public and private efforts to address the problem. Section 16.4 presents recommendations and section 16.5 discusses conclusions and further work.

16.2 STEM AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN THE UNITED STATES Entrepreneurship fuels economic growth and is often linked to innovation which, in turn, is driven by the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM).1

1  http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2015/04/when_did_science_edu​ cation_become_STEM.html.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 329

13/12/2019 15:47

330

Gender, science and innovation

White women 31.0%

Asian men 2.7% Asian women 3.0% Black men 6.1% Black women 6.6%

Hispanic men 8.7%

White men 31.0%

Hispanic women 8.3%

Other women 1.3%

Other men 1.2%

Notes:  Hispanic may be any race. Other includes individuals not of Hispanic ethnicity who reported more than one race or a race not listed separately. Source:  NSF (2017).

Figure 16.1  Non-institutionalized resident population of the United States ages 18–64 by race, ethnicity and sex, 2014 The groups that are under-represented both in STEM fields and among entrepreneurs are also the fastest-growing parts of the population in the United States. As shown in Figure 16.1, in 2014, among the non-­ institutionalized resident population of the United States aged 18‒64, women comprised about 50.2 per cent, Hispanics2 about 17 per cent and blacks3 about 12.7 per cent. This under-representation has significant negative consequences: for individuals in terms of limited economic success for nations and societies; in terms of innovation and global competitiveness; and for STEM 2   The US Census Bureau (http://www.census.gov) defines Hispanic origin as ‘the heritage, nationality, lineage, or country of birth of the person or the person’s parents or ancestors before arriving in the United States’; Hispanics can be of any race. 3   Black or African American: a person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 330

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender, race and entrepreneurship in the United States ­331

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ENTREPRENEURSHIP INDUSTRY SUPPORT • TRAINING • EDUCATION

Figure 16.2  Path to commercialization via STEM fields fields. According to Page’s logic of diversity, the ability to see problems from different points of view is often the key to a breakthrough and, in fact, enhances overall quality (Page, 2007) which, in turn, increases global competitiveness. A recent report (Demiralp et al., 2017), conceptualized the path to commercialization via STEM fields (see Figure 16.2) as consisting of three stages: education and training in STEM fields; STEM entrepreneurship; and development of intellectual property. At each stage, women are under-represented. 16.2.1  Stage 1: Education and Training in STEM Fields Since the 1990s in the United States, women have obtained 57 per cent of all bachelor’s degrees, and approximately 50 per cent of all science and engineering (S&E) bachelor’s degrees. Across S&E fields among whites, women obtain a smaller share than men at all degree levels – especially at the doctoral level. Since 1995, low participation fields for women include: physics, mathematics and statistics, computer science and engineering. Moreover, over the last two decades, despite increases in the numbers of women obtaining engineering degrees at all levels, women’s participation remains less than that of men’s in aerospace engineering, biomedical engineering, electronic/computer engineering, mechanical engineering and systems engineering (National Science Foundation, 2017). Disaggregating gender by race and ethnicity reveals contrasts between white women on the one hand, and African American and Hispanic women on the other. African American women and Hispanic women obtain a higher share of S&E degrees than do their male counterparts at each degree level, especially at the bachelor’s level. However, since 1995,

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 331

13/12/2019 15:47

332

Gender, science and innovation

the shares of bachelor’s degrees earned by African American women have declined in computer science, mathematics and statistics, and engineering; and the share of bachelor’s degrees earned by Hispanic women in engineering is low, while their share in computer sciences has remained flat at 2 per cent over the past 20 years. 16.2.2  Stage 2: STEM Entrepreneurship Empirical analyses yield two proxies for entrepreneurship. Data from the American Community Survey identify entrepreneurs based on selfemployment, specifically in terms of the job in which they spend the greatest number of hours;4 data from the Survey of Business Owners focus on primary business owners with a greater share of ownership than any other single owner. In both non-STEM and STEM fields, women-owned businesses are more likely to have been in existence for a shorter period of time than men-owned businesses. Among women, self-employed women in STEM are more likely to be non-white (11.9 per cent) compared to men who are self-employed in STEM (10.7 per cent) (United States Census Bureau, 2015). Among African Americans, women (5.3 per cent) are more likely than men (5.2 per cent) to be self-employed in STEM fields. A larger percentage of ­self-employed women in STEM are Hispanic relative to men (6.5 per cent and 5.5 per cent, respectively). It is noteworthy that men and women business owners in non-STEM firms identify as racial or ethnic minorities more often than do owners of firms in STEM fields; moreover, this trend is particularly pronounced among African American women. Research indicates that higher education plays a critically important role in STEM entrepreneurship. Both male and female entrepreneurs in STEM fields have higher education attainment than business owners in non-STEM fields. Moreover, the gender gap in STEM education persists in entrepreneurial performance. Compared to self-employed men, selfemployed women in STEM are more likely to have a master’s degree but less likely to have a professional or doctoral degree. Compared to women, males of single-owned businesses across industries more often have advanced degrees, especially in STEM fields; this disparity increases at the master’s and doctorate degree levels. According to the United States Small Business Administration (2014):   This tends to underestimate the number of entrepreneurs because it does not include those who own businesses but also spend more time working at other jobs. 4

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 332

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender, race and entrepreneurship in the United States ­333 in high-technology industries, women are more likely to start firms that provide research and consulting services and are less likely to start firms in semiconductor and aerospace manufacturing, navigational instruments or communications equipment, which may correlate with lower reported rates of R&D [research and development] activities for women STEM PhDs.

Blume-Kohout (2014) disaggregated factors accounting for the gender gap and found that: less than 25 per cent of the gender gap is attributed to differences in PhD of degree field; almost 50 per cent is attributable to gender differences in the number of years of experience and propensity to academic employment; and approximately 20 per cent of the gender gap in entrepreneurship is attributed to differences in graduate and postdoctoral training. Across sectors, men-owned businesses outperform women-owned businesses in terms of sales, profit and employment, and firm survival (Demiralp et al., 2017; Fairlie and Robb, 2009; Robb and Watson, 2012). Moreover, data indicate that the gender gap exists ‘in successful commercialization of research and development investments’, especially in STEM fields (Demiralp et al., 2017). What accounts for this gender gap? Two competing explanations are individual choice and gender role stereotypes. According to the theory of individual choice, women perceive STEM fields and activities as not contributing to research with outcomes that make meaningful contributions to society; consequently, women participate less frequently in commercialization of STEM research (BarNir, 2012). Another possible reason that women do not frequently participate in commercialization is that they are much less likely than men to have access to and participate in the networks through which connections are made for identifying potential funders. Traditional gender beliefs disadvantage women entrepreneurs in general and in STEM fields in particular vis-à-vis their male counterparts. For example, Thebaud (2015) found evidence that ‘unconscious cognitive biases’ disadvantage women because they tend to be perceived as lacking the ‘kinds of traits and skills’ commonly – and stereotypically – ­associated with entrepreneurship (see also, Heilman and Chen, 2003). This perception is heightened even more when the entrepreneurial enterprise is technology-based. Repeatedly experienced over time, cumulative effects of these perceptions may indeed discourage women from becoming entrepreneurs; not from individual choice, but from cumulative disadvantages rooted in gender role expectations. It is noteworthy that even when women start their own STEM business, cumulative effects of gender role biases persist and contribute to women doubting their ability to carry on their business. On the other hand, Thebaud (2015) also points out that women are advantaged by innovation in a business model which has both a

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 333

13/12/2019 15:47

334

Gender, science and innovation

stronger and more positive impact on ratings of women’s entrepreneurial ability and overall support for their business. At the individual level, therefore, women may be able to counter part of this disadvantage by focusing on their ‘unique set of qualifications and experiences’ (Thebaud, 2015).5 To address these issues systematically, the Diana Project™ was established in 1999 to engage in research activities, forums and scholarship focusing on women entrepreneurs and their growth. The thesis of the Diana Project is that widely held gender-biased myths about the aspirations, skills and behaviours of women entrepreneurs are effectively preventing them from acquiring the venture capital funding they need. A second explanation contends that the gender gap comes from ‘external exogenous barriers that discourage women’s participation in STEM training and entrepreneurship and limit women’s commercialization outcomes’ (Demiralp et al., 2017). Compared to 20 years ago, women business owners face fewer barriers to firm start-up and entry. Nevertheless, regardless of race or ethnicity, women entrepreneurs in the United States encounter what has been called the ‘second glass ceiling’: ‘a gender bias that obstructs women-owned small firms from accessing the financial capital required to start new firms and fuel the growth of existing firms’ (Bosse and Taylor, 2012). In the early stages before much data on a company’s performance are available, early stage investors decide whether to invest in a start-up based on ‘pattern recognition’: assumptions about the type of people who build successful tech-driven businesses, that is, non-Hispanic white males (Gouw, 2014). This pattern recognition both reflects and reinforces gender discrimination in patent-intensive high-tech fields such as engineering. The major barrier that women entrepreneurs encounter is access to capital (National Women’s Business Council, 2017). Compared to men, women – especially women of colour – continue to have a harder time obtaining start-up capital. African American and Latina women tend to found businesses in lower-paying services such as healthcare and social services instead of in high-tech or professional services (Gehrman, 2015). This is primarily attributable to the fact that there are fewer structural barriers in these areas than in others. Malstrom et al. (2017) found that women are put at a disadvantage by both language and rhetoric used when venture funding decisions are made, because gender stereotypes are socially constructed and activated when assessing people. Compared to men, women on average start businesses with half as much

5   However, this is a temporary counter to gender disadvantages; in the long term, society must change its cultural beliefs about gender roles.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 334

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender, race and entrepreneurship in the United States ­335

money, are more likely to use personal savings to finance their business, and are less likely to access bank loans. Moreover, firms managed by women are 5 per cent less likely to get a bank loan approved, and – on average – pay a higher interest rate of about 0.5 per cent more on the loan. Women-owned businesses are over-represented among bankruptcies due to the following factors: lower access to capital and capitalization; lower earnings; greater reliance on high cost financing; and smaller size of business. Overall, STEM firms are more likely than non-STEM firms to use business profits to expand. However, in both STEM and non-STEM fields, men-owned firms are more likely than women-owned firms to use business profits to fund expansion. A recent study conducted for the National Women’s Council identified significant gender differences in terms of STEM workforce participation and commercialization. This study found that, compared to women: ●● ●●

●●

Men are almost twice as likely to be self-employed in STEM fields. Self-employed men in STEM are almost twice as likely to be employed in computer or mathematics occupations, and three times as likely to be employed in engineering occupations. Self-employed men are less likely to be employed in a health field.

16.2.3  Stage 3: Development of Intellectual Property There are also gender gaps in patents. The Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR) reports that 76 per cent of venture capital investors take patents into account when making funding determinations (National Women’s Business Council, 2017). In fact, Meng (2016) contends that gender segregation within STEM fields accounts for 31 per cent of the commercial patenting gap. Research indicates that women remain underrepresented in such patent-intensive STEM fields as engineering (IWPR, 2016). Women’s low rates of patenting tend to negatively impact obtaining venture capital. In the United States, women are rarely the ‘primary inventor’ on a patent. Among those who are, most are concentrated in patent technologies associated with traditional female industries such as travel goods, jewellery and apparel. In 2010, 18.8 per cent of all patents included at least one woman, with only 7 per cent having a woman as the primary inventor. At the current rate, women are not expected to reach parity with men in patenting until 2072. Blume-Kohout (2014) finds that for women PhD students, future patenting behaviours were significantly influenced by having been in programmes funded by industry and/or by prior access to industry-funded opportunities in research and development. Similarly, Meng (2016) found that having

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 335

13/12/2019 15:47

336

Gender, science and innovation

industry contacts is a strong predictor of patenting involvement. Overall, women have fewer industry contacts than men; women life scientists have networks that are smaller and at a lower level than those of men. Patenting is not the only form of innovative activity. Within STEM firms there exists a distinct gender gap in all measures of commercial licensing, including trademarking and copyrighting. Patents are major indicators of both invention and innovation. The United States Constitution is the basis for the structural framework for patents and trademarks (Neal et al., 2011). Specifically, article 1, section 8 gives Congress the power to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writing and discoveries. Ashcroft and Breitzman (2012) found that information technology (IT) patents with mixed-sex teams have more citations than IT patents with allmale teams. While women might be included on publications related to a patent, between the article about the patent and the patent itself, women’s names disappear (Sugimoto et al., 2015). Men-owned firms are much more likely than women-owned firms to hold at least one piece of intellectual property. It is noteworthy that this gender gap in intellectual property ownership does not exist in nonSTEM businesses. Findings from studies focused on commercialization as opposed to entrepreneurship indicate that women are much less likely than men to patent or commercialize innovations.6 Other studies (Hunt et al., 2013) found that women’s performance in STEM firms is due to lack of previous experience in and with the commercial sector, less training in engineering-specific disciplines, and the fact that fewer women are in ‘patent-intensive jobs’. Gender gaps in patenting and commercialization vary by sector. Sugimoto et al. (2015) found that female patenting is proportionally more likely to occur in academic institutions than in corporate or government environments. Women’s patents have a lower technological impact than those of men, and the gap is wider in the case of academic patents. One major factor that can impact upon commercialization in academe is the gender gap in research start-up money. Although these data are not usually disclosed,7 available data indicate that the median start-up pack6   This is consistent with gender gaps worldwide in which men patent more frequently than women; this gap has decreased only a little since the 1970s (Sugimoto et al., 2015). 7   This lack of disclosure puts women at a disadvantage, because they do not know how much to ask for in a start-up package. Moreover, many do not know that negotiation of a start-up package is even possible.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 336

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender, race and entrepreneurship in the United States ­337

ages for men are $899 000, but only $350 000 for women. Cadwaler (2013) attributes this to the fact that compared to industry, little incentive is given in academe for commercialization. However, this seems to be changing, as indicated by the fact that some universities in the United States are beginning to include ‘inventions’ as products to include in tenure and promotion dossiers. Moreover, some universities have begun to establish Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) to facilitate the commercial exploitation of inventions resulting from research funded by the federal government. Whittington (2011) finds that the decision to have children did not affect women’s patenting output in industry. In contrast, women with children in academe were less likely to patent at the rate of women without children. Because many universities still do not include them as part of the tenure or promotion portfolio, women – particularly women with children – may see patents and commercialization as optional activities from which they often opt out (Sugimoto et al., 2015).

16.3 CLOSING THE GENDER ENTREPRENEURSHIP GAP IN THE UNITED STATES Gender and entrepreneurship encompass a host of inextricably intertwined issues. Addressing this complexity requires a variety of interventions at multiple points (as shown in Figure 16.3). Efforts to close gender gaps in entrepreneurship in general and STEM entrepreneurship in particular are being made by organizations from the public and private sectors individually and in combination. 16.3.1  United States Government National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship (NACIE) The National Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship (NACIE) was created in 2009 to provide colleges and universities with a framework to advance university innovation and entrepreneurship. Representatives from the Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship collected information from a variety of United States colleges and universities, including community colleges, regional colleges, and Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). This information revealed that the leadership of these institutions: ‘emphasized the pedagogical value of entrepreneurship, their vision for entrepreneurship in their communities, and the organizational infrastructure they are developing to maximize the research, ideas, and talent associated with their colleges and universities’ (US Department of Commerce, 2013). From this information, the NACIE

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 337

13/12/2019 15:47

338

Gender, science and innovation GENDER ENTREPRENEURSHIP COMPLEX GOVERNMENT

FINANCE

INDUSTRY

MENTORING

EDUCATION

Figure 16.3  Current points of interventions and initiatives in the United States presidents identified five core elements of innovation and entrepreneurship to inform programmes, policies and practices: student entrepreneurship, faculty entrepreneurship, technology transfer, industry collaboration, and engagement in regional economic development. Student entrepreneurship Universities focus on the ‘pedagogical value of entrepreneurship as a set of skills that can be applied across professional environments and activities to supplement the students’ classroom experience’ and stimulate their interest in global problem solving (United States Department of Commerce, 2013). Universities achieve this through formal programmes that include degrees and certificates in entrepreneurship, and informal programmes such as start-up clubs. Faculty entrepreneurship To complement student entrepreneurship initiatives, universities are making policy changes to encourage more faculty to work with students in entrepreneurial activities. A key component of faculty entrepreneurship initiatives in academe is changing the rules governing faculty s­election,

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 338

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender, race and entrepreneurship in the United States ­339

tenure and promotion to include entrepreneurship. This means that women faculty will no longer have to choose between entrepreneurship and tenure or promotion. Overall, women have fewer industry contacts than do men. Faculty entrepreneurship initiatives provide opportunities for women faculty as well as women students to establish contacts with representatives from industry. Technology transfer Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) have expanded their mission from commercialization of individual technologies to provide a place for students, faculty, alumni, entrepreneurs, investors and industry to connect with each other. Moreover, TTOs identify and support entrepreneurship on campus, and create companies that will be based in communities around the universities (thereby contributing to regional development). In sum, these foci result in changing the culture of universities. University‒industry collaboration Increasingly, universities are strategically partnering with companies through internships and externships, and sharing facilities, faculty and staff with start-ups. An example of effective practices is the Georgia Institute of Technology’s (Georgia Tech) Flashpoint, which ‘is a startup accelerator that offers entrepreneurial education and access to experienced mentors, experts, and investors in an immersive, shared-learning, open workspace’.8 Engagement in regional economic development Historically in the United States, strong commitment to local and regional development has been at the core of the missions for some universities, especially the land-grant institutions. Increasingly, universities focus on innovation and entrepreneurship as prime factors in local and regional growth, and ask the federal government to include ‘innovation-driven economic development’ in their grant programmes. Federal laws Federal laws to address issues concerning under-representation in business include: ●●

US Equal Credit Opportunity Act (as amended in 1974)9 makes gender discrimination illegal. Women’s Business Ownership Act

 http://cdi.gatech.edu.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Credit_Opportunity_Act.

8 9

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 339

13/12/2019 15:47

340

●●

●●

Gender, science and innovation

(House of Representatives (HR) 5050) promotes equality for female entrepreneurs, bans discrimination against women seeking business loans, and improves access to educational and technical assistance. Inspiring the Next Space Pioneers, Innovators, Researchers, and Explorers (INSPIRE) Women Act [H.R. 321-115th Congress 2017‒2018]10 ‘compels the director of the  National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to encourage women and girls to pursue an education in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. It also compels the NASA administrator to support the following initiatives: NASA GIRLS and NASA BOYS, which are virtual mentoring programs that pair NASA mentors with young students. Aspire to Inspire, a programme that tasks young girls to investigate STEM career opportunities by providing information about the lives and jobs of early career women at NASA; Summer Institute in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Research. This programme is designed to increase awareness of nontraditional career opportunities with the Goddard Space Flight Center among middle school students’.11 Promoting Women in Entrepreneurship Act, Public Law No. 115-6 (02/28/2017) Act amends the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (Pub.L. 96–516) to authorize the National Science Foundation to encourage its entrepreneurial programmes to recruit and support women to extend their focus beyond the laboratory and into the commercial world.12

Figure 16.4 shows a timeline of federal government interventions. 16.3.2  Private Sector and Private‒Public Sector Partnerships The National Women’s Business Council (NWBC) This has been established as a ‘non-partisan federal advisory council created to serve as an independent source of advice and counsel to the President, Congress, and the United States Small Business Administration on economic issues of importance to women business owners’.13

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INSPIRE_Women_Act.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/INSPIRE_Women_Act. 12  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promoting_Women_in_Entrepreneurship_Act. 13  www.nwbc.gov. 10 11

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 340

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender, race and entrepreneurship in the United States ­341

Women and Entrepreneurship: United States Government Interventions INSPIRE Woman Act Women’s Business Ownership Act Equal Credit Opportunity Act

NASA encourage women and girls to study STEM and pursue careers in aerospace

2017

1974

1988

2017

Amended – made gender discrimination in lending iIlegal

H.R. 5050 Signed in 1988 Promote equality for female entrepreneurs

Promoting Women in Entrepreneurship Act

Figure 16.4  Timeline of United States government interventions The Diversity Project In June 2016, 30 investment companies and industry organizations signed on to the Diversity Project. The goal of this project is to ensure diverse recruitment across the asset management industry in terms of gender, ethnicity, socio-economic background, age, sexual orientation and disability. It is noteworthy, however, that race is not included and, therefore, is conspicuous by its absence. The Women in STEM and Entrepreneurship (WISE) Grant Program The overall goal of the WISE Grant Program is to improve gender equality by increasing the participation of women and girls in STEM and entrepreneurship, and in the innovation system more broadly. In addition, the WISE Grant Program seeks to increase participation of girls and women in other parts of the innovation ecosystem including innovative businesses, start-ups, and entrepreneurial activities and careers. Another goal of WISE is to increase awareness and participation of girls and women in STEM and entrepreneurship education and careers, from elementary and primary schools through to university and to the research sector. To date, WISE has resulted in grants totalling $3.9 million to 24 different projects in the United States.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 341

13/12/2019 15:47

342

Gender, science and innovation

Stanford (University) Latino Entrepreneurship Initiative (SLEI) The SLEI has developed a Fellows Program that matches Fellows to investors and successful mentors.14 The Small Business Association Microloan Program This program is designed to attract underserved entrepreneurs (for details, see Simon and Overberg, 2016). Million Women Mentors The goal of Million Women Mentors (MWM) is to ‘increase the number of women and girls entering STEM fields through mentoring and thus increasing their interest and confidence in STEM. In order to achieve this important goal MWM works with state and local governments as well as corporate sponsors.’15 Women Who Code This is a non-profit organization that focuses on attracting women to tech careers, teaches them skills for professional advancement, and provides environments to nurture networking and mentorship.16

16.4 RECOMMENDATIONS A number of recommendations follow from the above discussion: 1. Data collection and dissemination. ‘What gets measured gets managed, but what gets published gets managed even better’ (Brenda Trenowden, Chair of the 30 per cent Club17). Data about the size of start-up packages should be collected and broadly disseminated. This is important because, when funded, women tend to get smaller startup packages than men. One factor accounting for this difference is that women may not know how much to ask for, how to ask, and/or lack negotiating experience. 2. Funding. The number of women investment professionals should be increased through recruitment and the promotion of women investors to partner-level decision-making roles. To change the social percep www.gsb.stanforf.edu/faculty-research/centers-initiatives/slei.  www.stemconnector.com. 16  https://www.womenwhocode.com/. 17   Quoted in Financial Times, 8 August 2016, https://www.ft.com/content/ d66f1cea-c47d-11e7-a1d2-6786f39ef675. 14 15

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 342

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender, race and entrepreneurship in the United States ­343

tion that only male entrepreneurs can be successful in venture capital funding, the successes of growth-oriented venture capital-funded women entrepreneurs should be showcased and widely disseminated, as should information about the venture capital firms that fund women. 3. Patents. In addition to these acts, the federal government should modify some of the laws and regulations governing patents and the patenting process. Patent applications should be modified to include age, sex, race and ethnicity. These modifications would enhance the process of tracking progress toward equity in patenting among women, especially women of colour (IWPR, 2016). Partnership arrangements can be made through public‒private organizations to help under-represented groups pay the cost of patenting. In the United States, the cost of filing a patent application can change from one year to the next. In 2015, the cost ranged from $5000 to $16 000 (Quinn, 2015). Recommendations to close the gender entrepreneurship gap in the United States are summarized in Figure 16.5.

16.5  CONCLUSIONS AND FURTHER WORK Critical to the continued success of current initiatives is ongoing research on what works, for whom, and why; and what does not work, and why. This research would enhance understanding of the multifaceted dynamics of gender, race and entrepreneurship in the United States, and could even inform initiatives globally, and provide feedback to organizations sponsoring interventions and initiatives in these areas. Moreover, research on gender and race in STEM entrepreneurship in the United States can provide information and data to inform policy, programmes and practices to enhance as well as increase women’s participation in STEM entrepreneurial careers in the United States. Future research on entrepreneurship should focus on identifying and addressing structural barriers to participation in entrepreneurship. This research should focus on differences between and among groups in terms of their current positions in the social structure as well as their social, economic and historical circumstances. Research on under-represented groups among entrepreneurs in the United States should not compare African Americans (a racial group) to ethnic groups, because they are qualitatively different. Ethnic groups came willingly to the United States with resources with their culture intact. African Americans’ ancestors were brought to the United States against their will to be slaves, and systematically had their cultures destroyed. Visible

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 343

13/12/2019 15:47

­344

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 344

13/12/2019 15:47

• Showcase successful venture-capital funded women entrepreneurs

• More women investors at partner level

FUNDING

• Employers could help pay patent costs

• Modify patent applications to enhance tracking

PATENTING

Figure 16.5  Recommendations to close the gender entrepreneurial gap in the United States

• Major STEM companies should disclose data on the diversity of their employees by demographic categories and job level

• Modify the US patent application to include demographic data

• Disclose data on start-up packages

DATA COLLECTION & DISSEMINATION



Gender, race and entrepreneurship in the United States ­345

­ hysical differences facilitated segregating African Americans during and p after slavery; these visible differences continue to both reflect and reinforce their subordinate status in American society. The cumulative disadvantages of slavery, segregation and their aftermath constitute greater barriers for African Americans than those faced by other groups in the United States. Groups differ in terms of how they came to the United States, and with what resources. Resources include not only money but also education and culture, and form the basis of wealth. Therefore, the consequences of access – and lack of access – to resources are cumulative across generations. Understanding STEM entrepreneurship in the United States can be enhanced by findings from research on subgroups of entrepreneurs such as, for example, African American women and Latinas. Moreover, this research should include an intersectional perspective that takes into account gender differences within racial groups, and race and ethnic differences among women. Intersectionality is critically important because race and ethnicity impact how one experiences gender (being female or male); conversely, gender impacts how one experiences race and/or ethnicity. Programmes and initiatives to enhance and increase the participation of groups in entrepreneurship should be evaluated periodically to identify what works for whom, under what conditions. These evaluations would enable assessment of effectiveness in the short, medium and long term. Also, these evaluations should include longitudinal tracking of programme participants to follow their career pathways. Results from programme evaluations and participant tracking should be collected into a database not only for research purposes, but also to highlight best and effective practices to inform programmes, policies and practices.

REFERENCES Ashcroft, C. and Breitzman, A. (2012). ‘Who invents IT? Women’s participation in information technology patenting, 2012 update’, National Center for Women and Information Technology. https://www.ncwit.org/sites/default/files/ resources/2012whoinventsut_web_1.pdf. BarNir, A. (2012). ‘Starting technologically innovative ventures, reasons, human capital and gender’, Management Decision, 50 (3), 399–419. Blume-Kohout, M.E. (2014). ‘Understanding the gender gap in STEM fields entrepreneurship’, Final report submitted to the Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy. Bosse, D.A. and Taylor III, P.L. (2012). ‘The second glass ceiling impedes women entrepreneurs’, Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 17 (1), 52–68. Butler, J.S. (2005). Entrepreneurship and Self-help Among Black Americans. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 345

13/12/2019 15:47

346

Gender, science and innovation

Cadwaler, E. (2013). ‘Policy analysis: identification of barriers for women in university technology transfer activities’, American Association for the Advancement of Science. Cuberes, D. and Teignier, M. (2018). ‘Macroeconomic costs of gender gaps in a model with entrepreneurship and household production’, BE Journal of Macroeconomics, 18 (1). Demiralp, B., Morrison, L. and Zayed, S. (2017). ‘On the commercialization path: entrepreneurship and intellectual property outputs among women in STEM’, Washington, DC: National Women’s Business Council. Fairlie, R. and Robb, A. (2009). ‘Gender differences in business performance: evidence from the Characteristics of Business Owners Survey’, Small Business Economics, 33 (4), 375–95. Fernandes, P. (2016). ‘What is entrepreneurship?’, Business News Daily, 21 March. Gehrman, E. (2015). ‘The truth about women entrepreneurs and crowdfunding: female entrepreneurs tend to be excellent at scoring big-time equity funding. So why don’t more of them go for it?’, Boston Globe, 25 October, R.34. Gouw, T. (2014). ‘No more pipeline excuses’, Wall Street Journal, 8 August. Heilman, M.E. and Chen, L.J. (2003). ‘Entrepreneurship as a solution: the allure of self-employment for women and minorities’, Human Resource Management Review, 13 (2), 347–64. Hunt, J., Garant, J.P., Herman, H. and Monroe, D.J. (2013). ‘Why are women underrepresented amongst patentees?’, Research Policy, 42, 831–43. Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR) (2016). ‘Where are the women patent holders?’, IWPR Briefing Paper #C441, July. Malstrom, M., Johansson, J. and Wincent, J. (2017). ‘Gender stereotypes and venture support decisions: how governmental venture capitalists socially construct entrepreneurs’ potential’, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41 (5), 833–60. Meng, Yu (2016). ‘Collaboration patterns and patenting: exploring gender distinctions’, Research Policy, 45 (1), 56–67. National Science Foundation (NSF) (2017). Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities 2017. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation. National Women’s Business Council (2017). ‘On the commercialization path: entrepreneurship and intellectual property outputs among women in STEM’, National Women’s Business Council Report, March. Neal, H.A., Smith, T.L. and McCormick, J.B. (2011). Beyond Sputnik: US Science Policy in the 21st Century. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Page, S. (2007). The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, And Societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Quinn, G. (2015). ‘The cost of obtaining a patent in the US’, IP Watchdog.com, Patents & Patent Law, April 4. www.ipwatchdog.com/2015/04/04/the-costofobtaining-a-patent-in-the-us/id=56485. Robb, A.M. and Watson, J. (2012). ‘Gender differences in firm performance: evidence from new ventures in the United States’, Journal of Business Venturing, 27 (5), 544–58. Romero, M. and Valdez, Z. (2016). ‘Introduction to the Special Issue: intersectionality and entrepreneurship’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 39 (9), 1553–65. Simon, R. and Overberg, P. (2016). ‘Blacks lag in business ownership, but gap is narrowing’, Wall Street Journal, 1 September. Sugimoto, C.R., Ni., C., West, J.D. and Lariviere, V. (2015). ‘The academic

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 346

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender, race and entrepreneurship in the United States ­347

advantage: gender disparities in patenting’, PLOS ONE, 10 (5). doi:10.1371/ journal.pone.0128000. Thebaud, S. (2015). ‘Status beliefs and the spirit of capitalism: accounting for gender biases in entrepreneurship and innovation’, Social Forces, 94 (1), 61–86. United States Census Bureau (2015). American Community Survey, 2015. Washington, DC. United States Department of Commerce (2013). The Innovative and Entrepreneurial University. Washington, DC: Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, United States Department of Commerce. United States Small Business Administration (2014). ‘Understanding the gender gap in STEM fields entrepreneurship’, October. Whittington, K.B. (2011). ‘Mothers of invention? Gender, motherhood, and the new dimensions of productivity in the science profession’, Work and Occupations, 38 (3), 417–56. Wingfield, A.H. and Taylor, T. (2016). ‘Race, gender, and class in entrepreneurship: intersectional counterframes and black business owners’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 39 (9), 1676‒96.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 347

13/12/2019 15:47

17. Trends and determinants of women in patenting in the United States Sharmistha Bagchi-Sen and Peter Rogerson 17.1 INTRODUCTION Patenting is a proxy for measuring innovative activity. Among other measures (for example, academic citations, awards, leadership positions at universities and companies), patenting is a formal legitimization of an individual’s work. Furthermore, patent assignment is often used as a proxy for commercialization. Although historical anecdotes of patenting date back to medieval times, the first known patent law was passed in Venice in 1474.1 In 1624, England passed the Statute of Monopolies Act, which included a term for the monopoly (14 years). In 1791, the French Patent Law stated that the invention is the inventor’s property.2 Both the British and the French system influenced the United States (US) system. The US Constitution recognized the importance of granting exclusive rights to inventors and in 1790, the first US Patent Act was drafted. By 2 July 1836 the US had granted 10 000 patents. Many changes ensued in terms of definition, application process, appeals, and so on. Two recent relevant ones are the US Supreme Court case Diamond v. Chakrabarty and the Bayh–Dole Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-517, Patent and Trademark Act Amendments of 1980).3 The Supreme Court case decided that genetically modified organisms could be patented. The Bayh–Dole Act allowed a university, small business or non-profit institution to have ownership of inventions made with federal funding. The benefits and drawbacks of the patent system have been debated over the years:

  Kwong, M. (2014), ‘Six significant moments in patent history’, accessed 10 October 2017 at http://www.reuters.com/article/us-moments-patent-idUSKBN​ 0IN1Y120141104. 2   ‘US Patents – A Brief History’ (2006), accessed 10 October 2017 at http:// www.the-business-of-patents.com/us-patents.html. 3   ‘Bayh–Dole Act’ (2010), accessed 10 October 2017 at https://www.autm.net/ advocacy-topics/government-issues/bayh-dole-act/. 1

­348

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 348

13/12/2019 15:47



Trends and determinants of women in patenting in the US ­349 They facilitate the production and mainstreaming of new products and technologies. Patents protect innovations and grant to individuals and companies ownership rights over their research, which can also motivate companies or researchers to innovate. The record keeping of patents also creates an extensive database that documents scientific research and discovery over time and across place by different people . . . On the other hand, patents can result in reduced competition in the market by preventing other firms from replicating the product or process, which can result in fewer options for consumers and higher prices. (Milli et al., 2016, p. 1)

The aim of this chapter is to discuss the trend in patenting by women in the United States and provide some explanations of women’s under-­ representation in US patenting based on studies that have undertaken extensive analysis of patent data at different time periods. The task of examining gender patterns in US patenting has been difficult given that the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) does not collect information on gender. There is no other systematic documentation of patenting that identifies the gender of the applicants or inventors. Therefore, analysts use commercial name matching software with the USPTO data to identify the gender of inventors. Although the methodology has limitations, it is widely used for understanding patenting trends for men and women in the United States. Data show that women have been responsible for many breakthroughs but have not always been acknowledged for them. In other words, they have been missing out in terms of recognition of their inventions as well as their impact beyond patenting such as tech transfer and wealth creation. The rest of this chapter discusses trends in patenting by women, determinants of patenting, and policy discussions that are under way to incorporate demographic data on the inventors in the patenting process.

17.2 TRENDS In the Colonial Era, women inventors did not get recognition as inventors. Khan (2000, p. 164) uses ‘a data set of 4196 patents filed in the United States by approximately 3300 women inventors between 1790 and 1895’ to analyse nineteenth-century patenting trends by women in the United States. She states that: The first female patentee in America was possibly Sybilla Masters, a native of Pennsylvania, whose husband obtained two English patents on her behalf in 1717. Hazel Irwin, a Boston resident, obtained a United States patent for a cheese press in 1808. The following year Mary Kies of Connecticut obtained a patent for weaving straw. Only 77 patents were credited to women inventors from 1790 through 1860; 4773 patents were issued to male patentees in

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 349

13/12/2019 15:47

350

Gender, science and innovation

1860 alone. This discrepancy in patent grants persisted throughout the period. (Khan, 2000, p. 165)

The first possible US patent recipient (in 1793), Hannah Slater, developed cotton sewing thread.4 Given that women’s work was primarily at home until recent years, inventions centred around housework, including the invention of an early form of the modern dishwasher in 1886 (inventor: Josephine Cochran). Female inventors have been credited with discoveries of many indispensable items, such as windshield wipers, Scotchguard, liquid paper, Kevlar, and so on.5 Although numbers are important, these stories not only highlight the relevance of the discoveries but also reflect on the environment that facilitated women’s contributions to society. In later sections this chapter touches upon some policy issues that are being discussed in the United States (see also Chapter 18 in this volume on the Association of University Technology Managers Women Inventors Committee). Patenting has been increasing in the latter half of the twentieth century. From 1977 until 2010, the overall increase was from slightly more than 40 000 patents to than 120 000. During this time period, the number of women’s patents improved relative to the total, but the numbers are still small. In 1977 the number of patents with at least one female inventor was just over 1500 and that number increased to about 23 000 in 2010. During that period ‘the share of patents with at least one woman inventor grew from 3.4 percent . . . to 18.8 percent’ (Milli et al., 2016, p. 8). However, the numbers are dismal if data on primary inventors are considered. In 1977 only 2 per cent of all patents listed a woman as the primary inventor. In 2010, the percentage was 8 per cent. It should be noted, however, that often applicants are listed in alphabetical order, and therefore it is often difficult to determine the primary inventor. Data gathered by Delixus, Inc. and the National Women’s Business Council (2012a, 2012b) show that in 2010, ten categories have a significant percentage of patents (significantly greater than the overall average of 18.8 per cent) with at least one woman inventor. These categories (with percentage of patents having at least one female inventor shown in parentheses) are: (1) chemistry – natural resins and derivatives (50.1   ‘Women Inventors’ (2003), accessed 10 October 2017 at http://www.pbs.org/ opb/historydetectives/feature/women-inventors/. 5   ‘Kevlar Fibers’ (2017), accessed 10 October 2017 at http://www.dupont.com/ products-and-services/fabrics-fibers-nonwovens/fibers/brands/kevlar/products/du​ pont-kevlar-fiber.html. 4

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 350

13/12/2019 15:47



Trends and determinants of women in patenting in the US ­351

per cent); (2) organic compounds (43.3 per cent); (3) drug, bio-affecting and body treating compositions ‒ patent class 514 (41.4 per cent); (4) ­chemistry – molecular biology and microbiology (40.7 per cent); (5) drugs, bio-affecting and body treating – patent class 424 (37.9 per cent); (6) food or edible material (36.1 per cent); (7) travel goods and personal belongings (34.1); (8) radiation imagery chemistry (32 per cent); (9) packages and container for goods (31.1 per cent); and (10) apparel and haberdashery (29.2 per cent). Different categories emerge when the analysis is focused upon women as the primary inventor, with only two science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) areas. These are chemistry (natural resins and derivatives) and drugs (patent class 424). The other areas are travel goods and personal belongings; jewellery, symbolic insignia and ornaments; apparel; apparel and haberdashery; equipment for preparing or serving food or drink, packages and containers for goods; food or edible material; and furnishings. Although patent application numbers show a large gap, acceptance rates are not too far apart. In 2010–2016, women (listed as the first inventor) submitted 220 863 applications compared to 667 468 by men. The acceptance rates are 67.2 per cent and 73 per cent for women and men, respectively. In the report by Millie et al. (2016), the reasons for a difference in acceptance rates are attributed to fields (Carliy et al., 2014), the process of negotiation (Garber, 2016) and resources (Murray and Graham, 2007; Quinn, 2015). Mechanical and electronic fields, dominated by men, have higher numbers of applications. The process of negotiation with the patent office shows that women exchange more official communication than men; this process may dissuade some from following up with responses to rejections or objections by the patent examiner. Women may also not have access to resources to pursue patenting. Although patent assignment is a rough measure of commercialization, the data show some variations. The overall figure is that 80 per cent of all US patents were assigned to another entity (for example, a firm) between 1975 and 2010. The comparable figures are 81.7 per cent for patents with at least one woman inventor, 70.6 per cent with a woman as the primary inventor, and 80.2 per cent with a man as the primary inventor. Cook and Kongcharoen (2010) note that gender composition does play a role in patent assignment. The relationship between gender composition and patent citations (forward and backward citations) is another way to understand acceptance of discoveries (using patent as proxy) over time and across disciplines. Additional data are needed to understand the determinants of applications, acceptance, assignment and citations of various patents with different gender compositions.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 351

13/12/2019 15:47

352

Gender, science and innovation

17.3 DETERMINANTS 17.3.1  The Role of Networks and Experience Some broad observations are that women participate more in non-patentintensive fields. The most patent-intensive field is engineering (for example, mechanical, information technology). Studies in information technology (IT) or computing also find that women may start in computing but often move to non-tech areas (for example, sales). The role of network involvement by women is another factor; this limits knowledge acquisition about the process of patenting. A related variable is the cost of patenting: women often do not have access to funds. Meng (2013, 2016) finds that having collaborative ties with industry is an important predictor for patent activity among women, more so than for men. The results were based on data from ‘Women in Science and Engineering Network Access, Participation, and Career Outcomes’ (NETWISE), a survey of 1598 academic scientists and engineers at 150 research-intensive universities in the United States. Meng used logistic regression to predict patent involvement as a function of a large number of variables, including prior industry employment, number of years since PhD, number of students supervised, gender, size of collaboration network, and presence of ties to industry, government, universities and other disciplines. Importantly, interaction effects between gender and both collaboration size and presence of ties to other places were also included in the models. The binary dependent variable captured whether the individual had filed at least one patent application during the period 2006–2010. Patent involvement was positively and significantly associated with prior industry employment, joint appointments with other departments, number of years since PhD, number of conference proceedings, number of PhD students supervised, and working in the field of chemistry. For females, ties to industry were important. Allen et al. (2007) use as their dependent variable the propensity to patent, based on whether individuals had worked directly with those in industry on projects that resulted in a patent or copyright. Their data came from a 2004–2005 National Science Foundation (NSF)/Department of Energy Survey of academic researchers. Individuals represented a sample of scientists and engineers with a PhD at the 150 Carnegie ‘Extensive Doctoral/Research’ universities.6 Samples were drawn from each of 12 NSF science and technology disciplines, resulting in a total sample size of

6   ‘The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education’ (2016), accessed 10 October 2017 at http://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 352

13/12/2019 15:47



Trends and determinants of women in patenting in the US ­353

1335. Regression results were based on weights formed from the sampling proportions disaggregated by gender and field. A small percentage of the sample (78 faculty) was involved with patenting activity, and of these, 92 per cent were male. Tenured, relatively older and relatively experienced male faculty were most likely to be involved with patenting activity with industry, emphasizing the important role of human capital. Detailed study of gender effects was limited by the small size of the female population. 17.3.2  Discipline-Based Gender Differences Whittington and Smith-Doerr (2005) make use of a sample of 2820 individuals who received their PhD from programmes that received training grants from the National Institute of Medical Sciences. This was matched with patent information from the Patent Citations Data File maintained by the National Bureau of Economic Research (Hall et al., 2001). Strict criteria for matching resulted in a final sample size of 1084. They organize their discussion of the analysis into gender differences in: (1) the engagement of patent activity; (2) quantity of commercialization; and (3) quality and impact of commercialization. They confirm the oft-cited results that males patent more than females (30 per cent versus 14 per cent of the sample, respectively). They find that these results have held consistently throughout the 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s. Significant and persistent gender gaps also exist in productivity (defined in terms of total patents, and patents/year), although the gap is smaller when confining the comparison to those who have at least one patent. Interestingly, they conclude from an analysis of patent citations that there are no gender differences in impact: both males and females receive about one citation every two years for their patents. Whittington and Smith-Doerr (2008) also examine data consisting of a randomly selected subset of applicants to the cellular and molecular biology training grant programme of the National Institute of General Medical Sciences. In particular, they chose seven universities at random from the set of 42 programmes. Since the applications consist of a list of the educational background of all past doctoral and postdoctoral students, data were collected on more than 3000 students from more than 100 different US universities. This list was then matched with patent data from the Patent Citations Data File. They define two dependent variables: a binary variable indicating whether an individual has patented, and a variable measuring the total number of patents. They find that about twice as many males as females have patented (28 per cent for males, versus 14 per cent for females) and among those who have patented, males have roughly twice as many patents as females (4.8 versus 2.5 patents, respectively).

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 353

13/12/2019 15:47

354

Gender, science and innovation

In their logistic regression model, females and universities with low rank are associated with less patent activity. Those working in pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are more likely to patent than those in government, non-profit research hospitals or universities. They find that for females within science-based biotechnology settings, the gender gap disappears, and females are on an even footing with males regarding patent involvement. This result does not carry over, however, to their analysis of productivity as measured by total patents, where males maintain higher productivity across all organizational settings. 17.3.3  Patent to Commercialization Hunt et al. (2013) use individual-level data from the 2003 National Survey of College Graduates, a subsample of the 2000 US Census long-form, respondents having at least a bachelor’s degree. They note that the companion Survey of Doctoral Recipients, although potentially more relevant, is more limited in the amount of information captured. Their sample contains 88 094 individuals, representing 2070 patents. They confirm evidence of the gender gap via a logistic regression showing significantly lower probabilities of commercializing or licensing a patent for females. Among holders of science and engineering degrees, they find a significant gender gap of 9.7 per cent for the probability of commercialization, given that a patent has been granted. More generally, they conclude that the gap in patenting rate is due to women’s under-representation in patentgranting fields, and in patent-intensive tasks such as development and design. Less important in understanding the gap is females’ lower share of doctoral degrees. Like others, they do not find evidence for narrowing of gaps over time. Ding et al. (2006) use data from the UMI Proquest Dissertations database for those 4227 individuals who earned PhD degrees during the period 1967 to 1995 in selected fields related to the commercial life sciences, and who have at least five years of publishing experience at academic institutions. Among these individuals 13 per cent of the males held patents, in comparison with 5.7 per cent of the females; a gap similar to that found by others. The number of patents granted per male was 2.98, while it was 1.80 for females. The probability of patenting was increased significantly by the number of publications during a five-year period, the number of co-authors, and the presence of projects where there are collaborators in industry, among other variables. After accounting for these effects, a large gender difference remains, with females patenting at just 40 per cent the rate of males. Ding et al. corroborate the finding of others that there are few if any gender differences in impact of work. In particular, each of

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 354

13/12/2019 15:47



Trends and determinants of women in patenting in the US ­355

23 436 articles published by women was matched to randomly selected articles by men, and no difference was found in mean citation count. Journal impact factors were also similar for males and females (4.12 for females; 4.06 for males). Interviews revealed impediments to patenting associated with lack of contacts in industry, as well as concern that such connections might hinder academic careers. Collegial support and institutional assistance were found to be helpful in reducing barriers. Finally, they also find some evidence for improvement in the gender gap in the likelihood of patenting over time (with the relative ratio of the ‘hazard of patenting’ for males to females being cut by more than half, from 4.4 in the late 1960s, to 1.8 in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Colyvas et al. (2012) carry out an extensive effort aimed at data collection, combining primary (archival) and secondary sources. Primary sources included university bulletins to obtain data on faculty and rank by department, university and individual websites for demographic information, and university technology transfer offices for information on inventions and licenses. Secondary sources included the UMI INFORMS dissertation database, the US Patent and Trademark office database, the faculty database from the Association of American Medical Colleges, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools, and the PubMed database containing information on publications in medicine and life science. Four outcome measures are used: likelihood of reporting an invention, number of inventions, number of inventions licensed, and proportion of inventions converted to licences. Colyvas et al. find that females have a lower volume of disclosure, after controlling for factors such as rank, publishing and level of funding. In analysing the 389 faculty members with at least one invention, the number of inventions converted to licences was not related to gender, controlling for the independent variables mentioned above. There were also no gender effects present when the rate of conversion of disclosures to licences was used as the dependent variable. A primary conclusion is that gender gaps discussed in the literature are largely due to occupational and resource factors associated with the volume of activity, and are not due to either the inclination to commercialize inventions, or the rate of success in carrying out such commercialization. This clearly adds an important dimension to previous work. 17.3.4  International Evidence of Gender Differences Jung and Ejermo (2014) match information on: (1) inventors resident in Sweden and inventions from the Worldwide Patent Statistics database from the European Patent Office; with (2) an address directory of the

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 355

13/12/2019 15:47

356

Gender, science and innovation

Swedish population in 1990, and this in turn was matched with population register data from Statistics Sweden. For the period 1985–2007, 79 per cent of inventors were matched, resulting in a database of 19 687 inventors. They find a narrowing of the gender gap, with the share of female inventors increasing from 2.4 per cent in 1985 to 9.1 per cent in 2007. However, the rate of narrowing is slow, in comparison with how quickly the gender gap is closing in other areas (including PhD education in science and engineering, and advancement into legislative and managerial positions). Results also differed by subfield, with women having relatively more patent activity in biotechnology and chemistry, and relatively less in mechanical engineering. Nager et al. (2016) use information gathered primarily from triadic patents (patents  filed at the European  Patent Office, the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and the Japan Patent Office, either for the same invention, or by the same inventor) in the life sciences, material sciences, information technology, and large tech companies. In total, their sample consists of 9757 innovators and 2651 innovations covering the period 2011 to 2015. Not unexpectedly, they find a large gender gap, but they find that this gap is much lower among innovators born abroad than it is for those born in the United States. Furthermore, this finding for those born abroad varies by subfield, with the highest percentage of female innovators being in the material sciences (28 per cent). 17.3.5  Geographic Patterns and Future Possibilities of Research An emerging area of study is the geographic pattern of patenting within a country such as the United States. Khan (2000) addresses geographic patterns in her analysis of patenting by women in the nineteenth century. She discusses limitations of the data, but broader observations showed regional (for example, Midwest versus South) variations. Such extensive geographical analysis comparing men and women is not available for the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, but Rothwell et al. (2013, p. 12) in their study show that people living in metropolitan areas in the United States control patenting share: ‘the 100 largest metro areas are home to 65 per cent of the US population, but they are home to 80 per cent of all US inventors of granted patents since 1976 and 82 per cent since 2005’. Another observation is that between 1980 and 2011, the rank of metro areas in terms of patenting statistics (in this case, share of patents and five-year moving averages of patent counts) changed (Rothwell et al., 2013, p. 13): San Jose moved up from ninth to first, and San Francisco moved from seventh to fourth, moving ahead of Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, and Boston. Seattle and San Diego moved up fifteen and nine places, respectively, to become

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 356

13/12/2019 15:47



Trends and determinants of women in patenting in the US ­357 seventh and eighth. Meanwhile, Austin and Raleigh moved up 41 and 55 places, respectively, to become 11th and 20th. Cleveland fell 10 slots from 13th to 23rd, while Philadelphia fell from fourth to 13th.

San Jose dominates between 2001 and 2011 with 9237 patents per year, with the lead category being computer hardware and peripherals; this is 200 more than San Francisco, with its lead category being biotechnology. The ten largest subcategories in 2006–2010 are communications, computer software, semiconductor devices, computer hardware and peripherals, power systems, electrical systems and devices, biotechnology, measure and testing, information storage, and transportation. The above study argues that patenting is linked to economic performance and that patents coming out of federally funded projects (for example, small business research and devlopment funding, national labs, university) are of high quality. The study calls for local and regional actions by stakeholders to: target resources to address discrete gaps in regional innovation systems’ performance. In this respect, metropolitan and state interventions should be pursued .  .  . [to] attack specific system barriers .  .  . support top quality knowledge infrastructure, both at the university and K-12 level; mitigate market failures in finance[;] speed knowledge transfer; promote its commercialization .  .  . [and] enhance the flow of inventive exchange in regional innovation clusters. (Rothwell et al., 2013, p. 35)

Although the Rothwell et al. (2013) study does not specifically address male‒female patenting gaps as one of the discrete gaps, Chapter 18 in this book on the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) Women Inventors Committee and Milli et al. (2016) address specific efforts and the need to focus on gender gaps. One of the main needs is to have a better way to track patenting by diverse groups of individuals. Ongoing efforts by government agencies include data matching, surveys, and so on. However, there is no foolproof plan to account for demographic information along with patents. Related needs are to provide access to support services for inventors and foster networks for women inventors and entrepreneurs (Milli et al., 2016). Women’s patent ownership is a critical factor in obtaining funding (for example, venture capital) for entrepreneurial efforts. At universities the Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) provide information, but their effectiveness (for example, in closing the gender gap or to promote diversity) has not been analysed, although there has been discussion about implicit biases (Ding et al., 2006). The AUTM responded by forming a committee of women inventors to work with TTOs (see Chapter 18 in this book on the AUTM Women Inventors Committee). Other topics of discussion

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 357

13/12/2019 15:47

358

Gender, science and innovation

include whether or not translational research should be part of tenure and promotion decisions (Ding et al., 2006; Murray and Graham, 2007), how to mentor women to balance home and work responsibilities (Rosser, S., 2004a, 2004b; Rosser, V.J., 2004), and how to increase and sustain the participation of women in STEM disciplines, especially patent-intensive fields (Hunt et al., 2012).

17.4 CONCLUSIONS Without data, analysis of the evolution of trends in women’s patenting in the United States is a difficult task. Participation of women in inventive activity is critical, given the connection between inventive activity (for example, patenting) and prosperity. One path to prosperity is entrepreneurship; patenting is a clear indicator of funding success (for example, venture capital). Therefore, if women are not participating in patenting, they are starting out with a disadvantage as aspiring entrepreneurs. Data on patenting by women is crucial to understanding the multidimensional context that allows women to succeed in patenting and then commercialize their inventions. For women academics, industry connection is an important predictor of patenting. Attention is also drawn to TTOs in institutions of higher education and their efforts in fostering women’s participation in inventions. Federally funded projects yield higher-quality patents. Therefore, one future area of study would be to track women grant recipients and their participation in inventive activities. Efforts of several researchers to match patenting data with name recognition software yielded usable data, although the matching process is not perfect with respect to gender identification (Martinez et al., 2016). Other issues of diversity are not directly addressed. Another limitation has to do with data collection efforts: causal analyses must often use different sources with different sets of variables that do not often come from the same year. Nevertheless, patent data provide useful information about geographical patterns (for example, San Jose is one of the leading metropolitan centres of patenting in the United States, with its focus on computer hardware and peripherals). Whatever little is known about gender differences shows that patent-intensive fields (for example, computer hardware and peripherals) are dominated by men. From these observations, it can be suggested that perhaps those women who are working in computer hardware and peripherals in San Jose and other high-tech clusters may need some attention. Explanations of biases in external and internal labour markets are often given as reasons for women’s lack of participation and departure from patent-intensive fields such as computer hardware and peripherals. If ­

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 358

13/12/2019 15:47



Trends and determinants of women in patenting in the US ­359

gender-specific cases are available for metropolitan patenting, then future studies can analyse the context within which women have succeeded in order to inform both innovation practice and policy in universities, companies, laboratories and other institutions. Another approach would be to focus on San Jose or the broader San Francisco area and gather local data to understand how institutions (for example, University of California – Berkeley, University of California – UCSF, Stanford University, national laboratories in the area, Silicon Valley companies, local non-profits working with companies in facilitating research and development) are addressing gender disparities in STEM education and inventive activity across the board, including students, postdoctoral staff, scientists and faculty members. Since 1790 considerable progress has been made. However, if invention is the mainstay of prosperity, missing out on a large share of a population’s capabilities to invent because of systemic barriers is a sign of misalignment of economic, social and political institutions. This will eventually lead to social regression through proliferation of inequities in who benefits from prosperity.

REFERENCES Allen, S.D., Link, A.N. and Rosenbaum, D.T. (2007), ‘Entrepreneurship and human capital: evidence of patenting activity from the academic sector’, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31 (6), 937–51. Carley, M., Hegde, D. and Marco, A. (2014), ‘What is the probability of receiving a US patent?’, USPTO Economic Working Paper No. 2013-2, Office of Chief Economist, US Patent and Trademark Office. Accessed 10 October 2017 at http://funginstitute.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/CHMAllowance-2014_01_101.pdf. Colyvas, J.A., Snellman, K., Bercovitz, J. and Feldman, M. (2012), ‘Disentangling effort and performance: a renewed look at gender differences in commercializing medical school research’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 37, 478–89. Cook, L.D. and Kongcharoen, C. (2010), ‘The idea gap in pink and black’, NBER Working Paper 16331, Cambridge, MA: NBER. Accessed 10 October 2017 at http://www.nber.org/papers/w16331. Delixus, Inc. and National Women’s Business Council (2012a), ‘Intellectual property and women entrepreneurs’. Accessed 10 October 2017 at https://www.nwbc. gov/sites/default/files/IP percent20& percent20Women percent20Entrepreneurs. pdf. Delixus, Inc. and National Women’s Business Council (2012b), ‘Intellectual property and women entrepreneurs. Part II: Qualitative’. Accessed 10 October 2017 at https://www.nwbc.gov/sites/default/files/ QUALITATIVE percent20A​ NALYSIS percent20REPORT percent20(2).pdf. Ding, W.W., Murray, F. and Stuart, T.E. (2006), ‘Gender differences in patenting in the academic life sciences’, Science, 313, 665–7. DOI: 10.1126/science.1124832. Garber, Sarah (2016), ‘Gender and the USPTO’, Above the Law, 16 March.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 359

13/12/2019 15:47

360

Gender, science and innovation

Accessed 10 October 2017 at http://abovethelaw.com/2016/03/gender-and-theuspto/. Hall, B.H., Joffe, A.B. and Trajtenberg, M. (2001), ‘The NBER patent citation data file: lessons, insights and methodological tools’, National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 8498. Hunt, J., Garant, J-P., Herman, H. and Munroe, D.J. (2012), ‘Why don’t women patent?’ National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper 17888. Accessed 10 October 2017 at http://wwdw.nber.org/papers/w17888. Hunt, J., Garant, J-P., Herman, H. and Munroe, D.J. (2013), ‘Why are women underrepresented among patentees?’ Research Policy, 42, 831–43. Jung, T. and Ejermo, O. (2014), ‘Demographic patterns and trends in patenting: gender, age, and education of inventors’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 86, 110­–24. Khan, B.Z. (2000), ‘“Not for ornament”: patenting activity by nineteenth-century women inventors’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 31 (2), 159–95. Martinez, G.L., Raffo, J. and Saito, K. (2016), ‘Identifying the gender of PCT inventors’, Economic Research Paper No. 33, Geneva: World Intellectual Property Organization. Meng, Y. (2013), ‘Collaboration patterns and patenting in nanotechnology: exploring gender distinctions’, PhD dissertation, School of Social Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology. Meng, Y. (2016), ‘Collaboration patterns and patenting: exploring gender distinctions’, Research Policy, 45, 56–67. Milli, J., Williams-Baron, E., Berlan, M., et al. (2016), Equity in Innovation: Women Inventors and Patents, Washington, DC: Institute for Women’s Policy Research. Murray, Fiona and Leigh Graham (2007), ‘Buying science and selling science: gender differences in the market for commercial science’, Industrial and Corporate Change, 16 (4), 657–89. Nager, A., Hart, D., Ezell, S. and Atkinson, R.D. (2016), ‘The demographics of innovation in the United States’, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. Accessed 10 October 2017 at http://www2.itif.org/2016-demo​ graphics-of-innovation.pdf. Quinn, G. (2015), ‘The cost of obtaining a patent in the US’, IPWatchdog.com, April 4. Accessed 22 March 2018 at http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2015/04/04/ the-cost-of-obtaining-a-patent-in-the-us/id=56485/. Rosser, S. (2004a), The Science Glass Ceiling: Academic Women Scientists and the Struggle to Succeed, New York: Routledge. Rosser, S. (2004b), ‘Using POWRE to ADVANCE: institutional barriers identified by women scientists and engineers’, NWSA Journal, 16 (1), 50‒78. Rosser, V.J. (2004), ‘Faculty members’ intentions to leave: a national study on their worklife and satisfaction’, Research in Higher Education, 45 (3), 285‒309. Rothwell, J., Lobo, J., Strumsky, D. and Muro, M. (2013), ‘Patenting prosperity: invention and economic performance in the United States and its metropolitan areas’, Washington, DC: Metropolitan Policy Program, Brookings Institution. Whittington, K.B. and Smith-Doerr, L. (2005), ‘Gender and commercial science: women’s patenting in the life sciences’, Journal of Technology Transfer, 30, 355–70. Whittington, K.B. and Smith-Doerr, L. (2008), ‘Women inventors in context: disparities in patenting across academia and industry’, Gender and Society, 22 (2), 194–218.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 360

13/12/2019 15:47

18. AUTM Women Inventors Committee: working to close the gender gap in university patenting* 1

Kathleen Sohar, Forough Ghahramani, Jennifer Gottwald, Linda Kawano and Jennifer Shockro 18.1 INTRODUCTION While the percentage of United States (US) utility patents granted to university-based women as opposed to men has increased over the past several years, this level is still lower than predicted, given women’s representation in the science and engineering fields (Sugimoto et al., 2015). Only 7.7 per cent of all patents list a woman as the primary inventor, and more than 80 per cent of all patents list only men as inventors. The Institute for Women’s Policy Research reports that, without intervention, we will not see women represented as inventors on 50 per cent of patents until 2092 (Milli et al., 2016). The gender gap in patenting across academia has been noted in various studies (Milli et al., 2016; Rosser, 2009; Whittington and Smith-Doerr, 2008). Few researchers, however, have focused on what transpires at the point of invention disclosure; that is, when a faculty member decides to work with her institution to pursue patent coverage for her invention and initiate the technology transfer process. This chapter discusses how greater female participation is being encouraged by a group of technology transfer professionals: the Women Inventors Committee (WIC) of the *  AUTM WIC would like to acknowledge the contributions of the following past and present members.  Current active members (to June 2017): Jenni Finefield, Dimitra Georganopolou, Fourough Ghahramani, Lisa Goble, Jennifer Gottwald, Linda Kawano, Kirsten Leute, Ainslie Little, Bethany Loftin, Karen Maples, Nichole Mercier, Jane Muir, Jennifer Shockro, Kathy Sohar. Past active members: Mary Albertson, Alisa Band, Jean Baker, Abigail Barrow, Chidori Boeheim, Nikki Borman, Emily Egeler, Betsy Merrick, Heidi Nebel, Deepika Poranki, Lynn Scott, Kerry Swift, Cathi Ulrich, N’Goundo Magassa. Staff: Sheila Lee. ­361

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 361

13/12/2019 15:47

362

Gender, science and innovation

Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM). By outlining this example, it is hoped that other groups with similar goals can learn from the AUTM WIC and possibly collaborate with it to further diversity in innovation.

18.2  WHAT IS TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER? To appreciate why this group is well placed to start closing the patent gender gap, it helps to understand a few basics about technology transfer. It is the process of transferring scientific findings from one organization to another, which allows further development and commercialization of an invention. Technology transfer also plays a vital role in the research endeavour. When researchers make discoveries that might be patentable, they contact the licensing and commercialization unit at their institution, known as the Technology Transfer Office (TTO). Descriptions of inventions are submitted in written form to TTOs, in what is commonly called an ‘invention disclosure’. This places TTOs in the unique position of being exposed to early stage innovative research representing all disciplines across campus. Most disclosures are submitted from science, engineering and medical faculty. TTOs work closely with their faculty inventors to ensure that inventions are protected as broadly as possible. That includes consulting with patent attorneys to help assess invention disclosures for patentability. With that assistance, the TTO determines whether a patent application should be filed to cover the disclosed invention. Broad patent coverage adds value to the invention and is an important element for engaging a commercial partner in a licence agreement. Ultimately, the licensed invention will hopefully be developed into a commercialized product with a royalty return to the inventor and the institution. The TTOs’ commercialization efforts are supported by a non-profit organization called the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM). It provides education, professional development, partnering and advocacy for the global academic technology transfer profession and has more than 3200 members, including managers of intellectual property from more than 300 universities, research institutions and teaching hospitals around the world as well as professionals employed by numerous businesses and governmental organizations. Through the work of its Women Inventors Committee (WIC), AUTM is helping to address the gender gap in patenting.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 362

13/12/2019 15:47



AUTM Women Inventors Committee ­363

18.3 ORIGINS OF THE AUTM WIC: SEEKING A BETTER PATH FOR WOMEN INNOVATORS At the 2011 AUTM Annual Meeting, a small group of women gathered informally to discuss an intriguing research project that was currently under way. The project, the results of which were published the following year, addressed gender and possible biases within technology transfer offices (Shane et al., 2012). The discussion prompted much thought and inspired the creation of the AUTM Women Inventors Task Force to investigate these findings further. Within three years, it formally became a committee, known as the AUTM WIC. At the inception of the task force, then AUTM board member and now past President, Jane Muir, recognized that AUTM members who work in TTOs could play a key role in fostering greater inclusion of women academic researchers at several phases of the technology transfer process: from invention conception through to later stages of technology development. These AUTM members are strategically situated within their institutions as they work at the interface of faculty research and university administration. Through their need to have compliance with federal granting agencies, TTOs keep track of invention and patenting activities. They also have connections with other administrative offices on campus that may assist in providing additional statistics on research activity.

18.4  LITERATURE REVIEW The task force members believed that TTOs had the potential to address gender discrepancies in patenting, licensing and entrepreneurship directly by creating programmes and tools to educate, encourage and mentor female inventors. They also considered the long-term benefits of reducing gender bias in those areas, because patenting can play an important role in creating economic parity for women. Valuable patents are likely to be commercialized and create financial return to the inventor (Rosser, 2009). Involvement in the patenting process will also provide female inventors with entrepreneurial opportunities such as new business creation, in the form of start-up company formation and access to venture capital funding (Milli et al., 2016). Gender imbalance is also affecting technology development (Kaul, 2016). Since women are socialized differently than men, they have different interests and tend to ask different questions (Elsevier, 2017). Women’s perspectives need more inclusion in the development of automated technologies such as machine learning algorithms and artificial intelligence.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 363

13/12/2019 15:47

364

Gender, science and innovation

Currently, these fields lack diversity and have already shown some evidence of male-biased product features (Grossman, 2016; Bullock, 2017). Datasets making up automated technologies are predominately created by male scientists and engineers (Weissman, 2016). If this practice continues there is a risk that the products will not fully address the needs of roughly half of the world’s population (Bullock, 2017). Other examples of female inventors’ critical role can be found in areas of women’s health. Women have created affordable and accessible feminine hygiene products adaptable to the developing world (Elsevier, 2017). Others are working on replacements for painful procedures that have been commonly used to detect ovarian cancer and tube blockages (Williams, 2014). The low levels of female patent holders represent a part of the much larger international issue of economic inequality for women: annual costs are estimated at US$9 trillion in the developing world, €370 billion in Europe and $2440 billion in Asia and the Pacific (Watson, 2015; Mascherini et al., 2016; Ferrrant and Kolev, 2016). Studies have shown that closing the gender gap in patenting would increase gross domestic product (GDP) by 2.7 per cent (Hunt, 2012). Research indicates that advancing women’s economic equality will boost economies across the world (UN, 2017; Woetzel et al., 2015). Women account for half of the world’s working-age population (Woetzel et al., 2015). However, their representation in the overall global workforce remains lower than those of men in almost all member states of the European Union (Mascherini et al., 2016). It is anticipated that as women’s participation in the economic market grows, employment rates will increase (UN, 2017; Woetzel et al., 2015). Members of the European Union are striving to achieve an overall employment rate of 75 per cent by the year 2020 (Mascherini et al., 2016). Female worker participation is essential to meet this goal.

18.5  AUTM WIC EARLY FORMATION The task force recognized that AUTM could do its part to have a positive impact on the global economy. They saw that AUTM, as a multinational organization, could help to tackle the women inventor and patent disparities in universities throughout the world. To that end, the task force established some initial goals: increase AUTM members’ awareness of gender bias, provide guidance, and track the impact of task force efforts. Two subcommittees, Barriers and Metrics, were created to address these areas. The Barriers subcommittee began by researching the issues that potentially limit women from participating in the technology transfer

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 364

13/12/2019 15:47



AUTM Women Inventors Committee ­365

process. The results of that research would help to create best practices and specific tools for resource-strapped TTOs. Although the Metrics subcommittee’s initial mission was to track the efforts of the task force to determine the outcome of its work, preliminary investigation revealed that statistics related to gender and patenting were not readily available within many TTOs. The task force concluded that it needed to establish methods and tools to begin the collection of its own metrics on invention and patenting by gender. The Metrics subcommittee subsequently began developing a strategic plan for engaging TTOs to promote and implement gender tracking within their institutions. In 2014, the task force held its first event – a Special Interest Group (SIG) meeting – at the AUTM Annual Meeting. The task force members identified organizations with missions related to the advancement of women in innovation, established contacts within these organizations and invited representatives to attend the SIG meeting. Close to 20 people participated in this inaugural event. Presentations were given by some of the attendees, followed by a group discussion about women in innovation. The enthusiasm and extensive knowledge of the invited SIG attendees prompted the task force to create the Synergistic Organizations subcommittee to engage and build a network with outside organizations. Through the first SIG meeting, the task force was able to better assess where it fitted into the overall landscape of women in innovation. By the end of the year the task force had become an established committee within the AUTM: the Women Inventors Committee, known as the AUTM WIC. The group’s mission is described in its Charter: ‘To engage more women in the technology commercialization process. Due to AUTM’s expertise in technology transfer, we are predominantly focused on the role of the inventor.’ The AUTM WIC is a volunteer organization and currently has 15 active members, with diverse backgrounds that intersect technology transfer, including governmental agencies, industry, law firms and investor groups.

18.6 EFFORTS TO ENGAGE AUTM MEMBERS AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS Following the initial SIG meeting in 2014, the AUTM WIC has held one at every AUTM Annual Meeting. Starting in 2015, the format transitioned to an open forum that permitted AUTM Annual Meeting attendees to discuss the issues of gender disparity in the technology transfer process and to address what TTOs can do to address those problems. By 2016, interest in the WIC SIG meeting had grown significantly, and attendance exceeded expectations. The meeting organizers requested space

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 365

13/12/2019 15:47

366

Gender, science and innovation

to a­ ccommodate about 50 people, but the event attracted a standingroom-only crowd. Additionally, WIC members were encouraged by the increased male participation, a trend that has continued to grow at WIC SIG meetings over the years. The subcommittees gave presentations on research and accomplishments, and a top-level executive described her work to increase diversity in invention within her Fortune 500 company. In 2017 the WIC SIG meeting hosted three invited speakers to address gender disparity in science and technology in relation to each of the AUTM WIC subcommittee initiatives. Following the presentations, the attendees and presenters broke into three groups for round table discussions. AUTM WIC members took notes on those discussions, so that attendees’ insights could be used in the committee’s ongoing work. WIC SIG attendance has rapidly grown over the years as interest among the general AUTM membership expands. This is due to the subcommittees’ accomplishments as well as the dedicated work of many volunteers. The WIC has also received recognition beyond AUTM. Members of the committee are routinely invited to participate in conversations at the national level regarding innovation gender parity issues, and AUTM WIC initiatives have been recognized in industry publications such as Technology Transfer Tactics.

18.7 WIC SUBCOMMITTEES: A THREE-PRONGED APPROACH To understand how the AUTM WIC reached this point in just a few years, a more detailed discussion is required for the evolution and achievements of the three subcommittees: Barriers, Metrics and Synergistic Organizations. 18.7.1  Barriers Subcommittee: Identifying Problems and Success Strategies During the WIC SIG session at the 2014 AUTM Annual Meeting, the committee discussed how technology transfer professionals might encourage greater participation by women in the invention and innovation process. To address this issue, the AUTM WIC needed a better understanding of the scope of the problem, including the barriers that might prevent women from disclosing inventions and taking the necessary steps to become innovators and entrepreneurs. Committee members suggested some possible barriers during a brainstorming session, and the Barriers subcommittee was formally launched to investigate further.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 366

13/12/2019 15:47



AUTM Women Inventors Committee ­367

It hypothesized that the commercialization barriers faced by women would be similar to the career obstacles women encountered in other aspects of STEM fields. The subcommittee began researching literature on commercialization barriers faced by women inventors, but that presented a challenge. Although significant research existed on barriers preventing women from pursuing or staying in science and engineering careers, the initial investigation showed a dearth of peer-reviewed literature related specifically to barriers that discouraged women in the sciences from pursuing commercialization activities. The subcommittee therefore expanded the investigation to encompass literature describing barriers faced by women interested in evangelizing their research ideas, patenting their inventions and pursuing leadership roles. From this work, the subcommittee determined that the five most commonly reported barriers and unmet needs were (in no particular order): 1. The lack of an existing community of women innovators. 2. The need for both female and male mentors. 3. The lack of confidence many women felt in advocating for their ideas and inventions. 4. The need for management and leadership training. 5. The need for guidance and training in effective communication of ideas to peers, potential mentors, and potential investors and business partners. The investigation culminated with the presentation of a white paper by the Barriers subcommittee at the WIC SIG meeting during the 2016 AUTM Annual Meeting. During its two-year investigation, the Barriers subcommittee expanded the literature search to include other sources of information, including webinars, research proposals and existing university-based programmes focused on women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). This provided additional data sources for barriers faced by women inventors. The subcommittee was particularly interested in programmes with an entrepreneurial component or some aspect of helping women scientists and engineers to evangelize their inventive ideas. Many of these university programmes operated outside of TTOs; for example, projects awarded under the US National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded ADVANCE umbrella (a programme designed to foster gender equity by identifying and eliminating organizational barriers that affect women faculty in academic institutions). The Barriers subcommittee decided to seek a better understanding of how these programmes addressed common barriers and encouraged greater participation by women in the inventive

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 367

13/12/2019 15:47

368

Gender, science and innovation

process, because those insights could be applied to the goals of AUTM WIC. TTOs are uniquely positioned near the start of the innovation cycle within universities, and therefore have the opportunity for greater impact by addressing barriers to commercialization early in the process. If common practices within the programmes had proven particularly successful, that information could be useful for TTOs wishing to implement their own programmes. With this in mind, the subcommittee shifted its focus from simply identifying barriers to identifying and interviewing as many university-based programmes targeting women inventors as possible. The ultimate goal was to create a toolbox of successful practices that TTOs could adopt as desired. In developing this toolbox, the Barriers subcommittee aimed to discover not only the effective practices of these programmes, but also the unexpected challenges or issues that programmes had faced. Additionally, the subcommittee recognized that TTOs typically have limited budgets. To address that, the toolbox would need to include information on how the programmes were funded, and whether that funding approach could be widely used by the technology transfer world. Through a combination of networking and targeted introductory e-mails, the Barriers subcommittee conducted phone interviews with officers and directors of many of the identified programmes. The subcommittee chose to interview organizers or administrators of programmes based on perceived relevance to supporting university women inventors who wished to become entrepreneurs. Some of the programmes had connections to the AUTM WIC, while others were chosen based on the programmes’ online descriptions. Occasionally the organizers of one programme would recommend other relevant programmes for the subcommittee to interview. The phone interviews included a loosely structured discussion of the types of barriers and needs the programme addressed; for example, leadership training, classes or seminars on risktaking, mentorship opportunities, confidence building, or networking and communication skills. However, the Barriers subcommittee ensured that each interview covered three important points: ●●

●●

Capturing a brief description of the programme by defining its primary goals and objectives, whether the programme was open to both faculty and students or to others within or outside of the university, and how long the programme had been in place. Understanding what resources were necessary for the programme in terms of funding, time required, and in-office or professional support, as well as buy-in by faculty, students, administration and trustees of the university.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 368

13/12/2019 15:47



AUTM Women Inventors Committee ­369 ●●

Understanding what elements of the programme had proven most effective and what things the programme might recommend to others wishing to start a similar programme, as well as what data the programme had to support a conclusion of success and positive results.

By June 2017, the Barriers subcommittee had conducted six interviews and planned to interview more programme organizers throughout the year. Commonalities and trends have already emerged from the initial findings, including some that the subcommittee had not anticipated. While the majority of programme organizers interviewed do offer resources that might be expected (such as networking and mentorship opportunities), many of the programme organizers indicated that less prescriptive methods have been more successful in engaging their participants, particularly when they use a less formal presentation of resources. For example, rather than traditional mentorship matching, several programme organizers reported that women responded better to more spontaneous opportunities to make connections, such as cocktail hours or ‘brown bag’ lunches, and have structured their programmes accordingly. Funding schemes represent another surprising finding. These are even more diverse than expected, ranging from government grants, to sponsorship from the local venture capital community, to requiring that participants pay for the programme. The Barriers subcommittee presented the first iteration of this toolbox of recommended practices at the 2018 Annual Meeting and a version is now posted online on the AUTM website. TTOs are a key part of the innovation infrastructure within universities and should be an obvious vehicle through which to promote greater inclusion and positive change for women inventors. Combined with the work of the other AUTM WIC subcommittees, the Barriers subcommittee hopes that the availability of a toolbox of ideas will catalyse TTOs to adopt practices that will provide greater opportunities and resources for university women inventors and innovators. 18.7.2  Metrics Subcommittee: Improving Gender Data Tracking During early discussions, the task force recognized that it would need a way to demonstrate whether its initiatives were helping women inventors. This led to the creation of the Metrics subcommittee. Initially, it focused on measuring how AUTM WIC initiatives affected female participation in the commercialization process. The Metrics subcommittee planned to establish a baseline of existing data by gender through a survey of AUTM

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 369

13/12/2019 15:47

370

Gender, science and innovation

members, which would be followed by additional surveys to determine whether there were increases. To collect that baseline data, the subcommittee hoped to use the AUTM Licensing Activity Survey (ALAS). Conducted annually, it provides quantitative data and real-world examples about licensing activities at US and Canadian universities, hospitals and research institutions. It includes questions about invention disclosures and patent data information of individual TTOs. However, prior to the Metrics subcommittee inquiry, the ALAS had not included a gender variable. In 2015, the Metrics subcommittee received approval from AUTM to include two supplemental questions to gather this gender-specific data. The Metrics subcommittee then conducted research to determine which questions would be most appropriate to include in the survey to fulfil the AUTM WIC mission. To the surprise of the group, preliminary investigations revealed that gender tracking within TTOs was not being consistently implemented, and anecdotal reports seemed to indicate that the number of TTOs tracking gender might be relatively low. Furthermore, the Metrics subcommittee discovered that other organizations – such as the US Patent Trademark Office (USPTO) – were not collecting data by gender.1 This led the Metrics subcommittee to postpone the supplemental questions in the AUTM survey. Considering the limited number of TTOs collecting data by gender on patent and invention disclosure activity, the questions were likely to have yielded a low response rate. Instead, the subcommittee changed its approach and created the following objectives: ●● ●● ●●

Increase the number of universities collecting and tracking gender data for technology commercialization metrics. Develop a baseline list of TTOs currently tracking and those not tracking gender. Measure the impact of the AUTM WIC efforts in increasing the participation of women in the commercialization process of AUTMaffiliated universities.

The subcommittee designed the first two goals as needing to be addressed in the short term, and created the third as a longer-range goal to implement once gender tracking became a more established practice within TTOs.

1   At the time of writing in early 2019, the USPTO still does not track gender for patent applications.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 370

13/12/2019 15:47



AUTM Women Inventors Committee ­371

One of the subcommittee’s first actions was to conduct a baseline survey of TTOs at US academic institutions that participate in the ALAS to determine which were currently tracking gender. Launched in late 2015, the survey also included an advocacy component which emphasized the need for TTOs to include the gender variable in their metric tracking. The subcommittee also heavily promoted the fact that in the upcoming year, supplemental questions regarding gender would be included in the 2016 ALAS. This leverage was an important factor in motivating TTOs to implement gender tracking within their universities. TTOs have little extra time or resources to implement new procedures. This was something the AUTM WIC kept in mind from the beginning. To help TTOs with the additional work of tracking gender, the subcommittee conducted a review of the software database programmes most commonly used within TTOs. The subcommittee contacted each software company to explain the AUTM WIC’s mission, determine the capabilities of each technology, and encourage them to implement gender tracking if it was not already an option in their software. The subcommittee then created an online resource to provide TTOs with information such as software capability and company contact information to facilitate implementation. A software capability spreadsheet was developed and posted on the AUTM WIC website. Those efforts have already prompted changes. At the time of the initial outreach, two of the four leading TTO software providers did not have gender tracking capability; by June 2017, all four had implemented this feature. Along with the software capability spreadsheet, the AUTM WIC website also included a call to action. In the metrics section of the website, the Metrics subcommittee asked for ‘champions’ to help implement gender tracking within their TTOs. This call to action was reinforced at subsequent WIC SIG meetings where each AUTM WIC subcommittee had an opportunity to present. AUTM members were instrumental in convincing vendors to include gender tracking options in their systems. This grass-roots mobilization was a successful outcome of the Metrics subcommittee advocacy campaign. Response from the technology transfer community has been overwhelmingly positive, with the majority of TTOs interested to learn more about how to incorporate gender tracking. That said, the AUTM WIC has experienced some pushback. Although vocalized only by a small minority, specific concerns regarding tracking include the following: ●●

Additional burden on TTO staff. Concerns have been raised that implementing tracking may add additional burden to TTO offices that are already under-resourced.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 371

13/12/2019 15:47

372 ●●

●●

Gender, science and innovation

‘Domino’ effect. Some have expressed concerns that if gender tracking is implemented, what may be next? What other demographic variables will TTOs be asked to track? Image perception. Specifically, if a TTO began to implement gender tracking and the university was found to have significant disparity, this could create a negative impression.

It is important to reiterate that the positive comments regarding tracking gender were far more common than the concerns expressed. It is also worth noting that during the course of the AUTM WIC survey and campaign, questions emerged about gender identification. As the national conversation about transgender has developed, the subcommittee has observed a corresponding increase in TTOs’ questions about how best to address the issue of gender for metrics tracking; a simple binary male/ female answer may no longer be appropriate. To summarize the Metrics subcommittee’s work, consider the following accomplishments: raising awareness among TTOs and other organizations for the need to collect data by gender; working towards establishment of a baseline for the number of TTOs tracking data by gender; identifying gender-tracking efforts nationwide at other organizations that have similar goals; and gathering information and resources about tools available to TTOs for tracking data by gender to share with the AUTM community and beyond. In addition, as of 2016, two supplemental questions were included on the ALAS to encourage TTOs to track disclosures and patents involving women as reportable statistics. An investigative study of the AUTM WIC Metrics subcommittee’s findings was published in 2018 (Sohar et al., 2018). 18.7.3  Synergistic Organizations Subcommittee: Benefiting From Strategic Collaborations As the AUTM WIC members considered useful goals, they recognized the need to understand better the missions and efforts of like-minded organizations. The AUTM WIC was already in contact with groups such as the Association for Women in Science (AWIS) – a leading advocate for women in STEM – and saw that collaboration with such groups would be both efficient and valuable. With that in mind, AUTM WIC members invited organizations concerned with women and innovation to speak at the 2014 WIC SIG meeting in San Francisco. These organizations were asked to outline how they promoted women’s invention and entrepreneurship, and the attendees were excited to hear about the ongoing efforts of groups such as the California Life Sciences Association (then the Bay

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 372

13/12/2019 15:47



AUTM Women Inventors Committee ­373

Area BioScience Association), Women in the Enterprise of Science and Technology (WEST), Quantum Leaps Inc. and the Stanford Medicine SPARK Translational Research Program. This initial showcase confirmed that the AUTM WIC could identify and catalogue the programmes of groups working toward common goals. The Synergistic Organizations subcommittee addresses this aspect of the WIC’s mission. Through connections with these groups, the AUTM WIC can share useful information about it work and resources with AUTM members. By surveying the goals and work of like-minded organizations, the AUTM WIC can also identify gaps in the effort to promote women in innovation, and that then helps the AUTM WIC to refine its focus. Volunteers in the Synergistic Organizations subcommittee have identified many groups with goals that overlap those of the AUTM WIC. These groups can be categorized based on their focus. Organisations such as AWIS generally support and promote women in science and engineering innovation, with the goal of improving the practice of these disciplines by increasing the participation of women. The lack of women in information technology has been a more recognized issue recently: groups such as Women 2.0 and the National Center for Women and Information Technology (NCWIT) are focused on changing that. Other groups encourage women in entrepreneurship around innovation; Springboard Enterprises is one example. Quantum Leaps Inc. builds on years of policy work supporting women in business by focusing more on innovation businesses and supplier relationships between women-owned businesses. WEST is an example of a local networking group for women in innovation, and as the Barriers subcommittee has emphasized, more robust networks will aid women’s progress in invention and entrepreneurship. Many professional associations such as the Advanced Medical Technology Association (AdvaMed) and the Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) have formal groups established for their female members (the AdvaMed Women’s Executive Network and the IPO Women in IP committee). Both the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) have strongly stated their support for all demographics of inventors. The USPTO has held Women’s Entrepreneurship Symposia, and WIPO reported statistics for female representation among inventors on their applications. Patent advocacy groups such as the Innovation Alliance have included the patent gender gap in their studies about patenting and its importance for strong economies. There are also TTOs with formal programmes promoting women in invention and entrepreneurship. Examples include Empowering Women in Technology Startups (Ewits) at the University of Florida,

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 373

13/12/2019 15:47

374

Gender, science and innovation

and Women in Innovation and Entrepreneurship (WIE) at Washington University in St Louis. Those are just some examples of groups addressing the gender gap, and they underscore a general recognition of the need for more diversity in invention and innovation. While the Synergistic Organizations subcommittee found validation in the multitude and variety of groups, it also recognized that closer relationships with fewer groups would be more useful than a longer listing of potential resources. To that end, the subcommittee members identified potential partners with which to forge closer relationships. Some categories of organizations were specifically excluded, such as groups working within universities (often with federal funding) and groups focusing on encouraging girls in STEM. The Barriers subcommittee is already surveying university groups, and the AUTM WIC felt that AUTM members were not well situated to reach girls, while there are many other groups working on that goal. The relationships that the Synergistic Organizations subcommittee is establishing are in various stages of maturity, and the subcommittee is receptive to the new ideas of collaboration that are emerging from these interactions. Some examples of creativity in collaboration are outlined here. Women in Bio is promoting women in industry board positions through its high-profile Boardroom Ready programme. The AUTM WIC brought this information to the AUTM membership by offering a complementary webinar; it outlined the advantages of encouraging women faculty to put themselves forward for board membership and offered advice on how this can be done. AUTM members (TTO officers) were encouraged to share the webinar with their women faculty, and the webinar is now available on the AUTM WIC website. This is an example of how the AUTM WIC can tailor initiatives of partners to be accessible to the AUTM membership. The Innovation Alliance and the Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR) have been in discussion with the AUTM WIC for several years. AUTM WIC members have participated in Innovation Alliance events showcasing the results of IWPR’s research into the patent gender gap (Milli et al., 2016), and these results were also presented at the AUTM Annual Meeting in March 2017. This shows how the AUTM WIC can collaborate in research and dissemination of data and research results. The AUTM WIC is bringing attention to these partner organizations through the Featured Partner section of the AUTM WIC website. The goal is to make AUTM members aware of the other groups and also to highlight current events or initiatives in which AUTM members might participate. To give a recent example, in May 2017, the AUTM WIC website brought attention to the National Academy of Inventors (NAI)

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 374

13/12/2019 15:47



AUTM Women Inventors Committee ­375

and its solicitation of manuscripts for an issue of the journal Technology and Innovation focused on the patent gender gap. This demonstrates how simple cross-promotion can both raise awareness and assist in targeted outreach. As the AUTM WIC presence grows within the TTO community, the Synergistic Organizations subcommittee will continue with research, outreach and collaboration with partners. Its work has already helped to identify gaps wherein the AUTM WIC can focus. The AUTM WIC acts as a first point of contact to bring technology transfer into these discussions and efforts. This makes the group uniquely positioned to encourage AUTM members to make a difference in the patent gender gap and to provide them with the information and resources so to do.

18.8  CONCLUDING DISCUSSION The innovation landscape is currently experiencing a shift towards greater inclusion, and gender is at the forefront of this evolution. Research demonstrates that diversity is a vital component of innovation and that increasing gender parity can benefit economic activity. Industry, academia and governmental entities are increasingly focused on this issue and are working to develop strategies to help address the disparity. However, despite increased attention, female representation in patenting remains very low. Since its inception the AUTM WIC has pursued its mission to engage more women in the technology commercialization process, with particular focus on the role of the inventor, due to AUTM’s expertise in technology transfer. The AUTM WIC has worked to achieve its mission by focusing on three primary areas, as outlined in this chapter: barriers to entry, partnerships with like-minded organizations, and metrics tracking. Despite being a relatively young organization, the multi-pronged strategy of the AUTM WIC has proven to be effective and has helped to position the organization as a driving force in the innovation gender dialogue, particularly regarding academic technology commercialization. The success of the AUTM WIC can also be largely attributed to its affiliation with AUTM, an established leader within the technology transfer community. Founded in 1974,2 AUTM is uniquely positioned to influence TTO practices. Many of its members are decision makers within their ­organizations, and/or have

2   The original name of AUTM was the Society of University Patent Administrators.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 375

13/12/2019 15:47

376

Gender, science and innovation

job functions that either directly or indirectly intersect with faculty inventors at the earliest stage of discovery. This inspired the AUTM WIC founders to capitalize on AUTM’s positioning within the innovation ecosystem, which helps the group to advocate for gender parity issues and to determine how and where it can have the most impact. It is also important to emphasize that members of AUTM have engaged proactively in AUTM WIC initiatives. Some examples include: independently contacting vendors to ask for gender tracking fields to be added to their software; participating in surveys and interviews; implementing gender tracking within their TTOs; and attending WIC SIG meetings and panels. AUTM members are committed to improving participation in the steps towards commercialization of important discoveries, and they have visibly demonstrated a willingness to mobilize to enact change. Another vital component of the AUTM WIC’s strategy is collaboration with other organizations. Due to variables such as resource constraints, it is common for well-meaning change groups to focus internally, and that can hinder communication and idea-sharing. As a result, multiple organizations can be working in parallel and not be aware of available resources, initiatives and research. This phenomenon is often compounded where organizations are largely dependent upon volunteers, passionate people committed to changing the status quo but with a need to balance their time within the framework of full-time jobs. While good work may be happening, it can be challenging to effectively produce, market and disseminate information. Gender bias is a systemic issue, and working together to leverage efforts and minimize redundancy is imperative for the cause to have the best chance of success. As the AUTM WIC Barriers subcommittee has emphasized, more robust networks will aid women’s progress in invention and entrepreneurship. This philosophy was a primary motivator for the AUTM WIC to develop a collaborative framework and create a community portal which would provide access to resources from AUTM WIC and other affiliated groups. The impact of the AUTM WIC is further enhanced by the various members’ participation in the gender conversation on national and international levels. AUTM WIC members are frequent speakers at conferences on topics related to gender parity and innovation. In some instances they are also spearheading initiatives at their own institutions or are involved in broader dialogues to help shape policy. One example is the USPTO Women’s Entrepreneurship Symposium held in March 2017, which enlisted AUTM WIC members’ help with planning and recruiting speakers. Increasingly, organizations are asking the AUTM WIC to recommend speakers with expertise in gender innovation areas. To better address this need, in 2017 the committee included a form on its website

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 376

13/12/2019 15:47



AUTM Women Inventors Committee ­377

to help develop a robust database of speakers that can be interrogated by demographics such as discipline and geography. While the AUTM WIC has enjoyed many successes to date, research indicates that the gender gap in patenting and other innovation-related areas will not be resolved any time soon, and certainly not without dedicated effort. It also will not happen in isolation. The members of the AUTM WIC are committed to addressing this issue and collaborating with others in this arena to expand the dialogue and scope of progress. It is the hope of the AUTM WIC that this overview will help to raise awareness, provide guidance, and establish further collaborations among like-minded organizations to address the gender gap in innovation, which research indicates is imperative to realize the full technological and economic potential of inclusive innovation.

REFERENCES Bullock, C. (2017), ‘Women Demand a Voice in the Real World of AI Design’, Financial Times, available at https://www.ft.com/content/ca324dcc-dcb0-11e686ac- f253db7791c6?mhq5j=e2 (accessed 17 June 2017). Elsevier (2017), ‘Gender in the Global Research Landscape Report’, Elsevier, available at https://www.elsevier.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/265661/Elsevi​ erGenderReport_final_for-web.pdf (accessed 17 June 2017). Ferrant, G. and A. Kolev (2016), ‘The Economic Cost of Gender-based Discrimination in Social Institutions’, OECD Development Centre Report, available at https://www.oecd.org/dev/development-gender/SIGI_cost_final.pdf (accessed 3 June 2017). Grossman, B. (2016), ‘What the Gender Gap in Tech Could Cost Us’, Wall Street Journal, available at https://blogs.wsj.com/experts/2016/09/27/what-the-gendergap-in-tech-could-cost-us/ (accessed 3 June 2017). Hunt, J. (2012), ‘Why Don’t Women Patent?’, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) Discussion Papers, available at http://ftp.iza.org/dp6886.pdf. Kaul, M. (2016), ‘Why We Need More Women in STEM’, Entrepreneur, available at https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/271665 (accessed 3 June 2017). Mascherini, M., M. Bisello and I. Rioboo Leston (2016), ‘The Gender Employment Gap: Challenges and Soluntions’, Eurofound Report, available at https:// www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/report/2016/labour-market/the-genderemployment-gap-challenges-and-solutions?utm_campaign=Gender+Emplomen t+Gap&utm_medium=bitly&utm_source=General (accessed 3 June 2017). Milli, J., B. Gault, E. Williams-Baron, et al. (2016), ‘The Gender Patenting Gap’, Institute for Women’s Policy Research, IWPR #C44, available at https://iwpr. org/wp-content/uploads/wpallimport/files/iwpr-export/publications/C441%20(2)​ .pdf (accessed 19 May 2017). Rosser, S.V. (2009), ‘The Gender Gap in Patenting: Is Technology Transfer a Feminist Issues?’, National Women’s Studies Association Journal, 21(2), 65‒84. Shane, S., S. Dolmans, J. Jankowski, et al. (2012), ‘Which Inventors do Technology

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 377

13/12/2019 15:47

378

Gender, science and innovation

Licensing Officers Favor for Start-ups?’, Frontiers for Entrepreneurial Research, 32(18), 1‒16, available at http://digitalknowledge.babson.edu/fer/vol32/iss18/1/ (accessed 19 May 2017). Sohar, K., N. Mercier, L.a Goble, F. Ghahramani and B. Loftin (2018), ‘Gender Data Gap: Baseline of US Academic Institutions’, Technology and Innovation, 19, 671‒83. Sugimoto, C.R., N. Chaoqun, J.D. West and V. Larivière (2015), ‘The Academic Advantage: Gender Disparities in Patenting’, PLosONE, 10(5), available at http:// journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0128000 (accessed 19 May 2017). UN (2017), ‘Facts and Figures: Economic Empowerment United Nations Report’, UN Women, available at http://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/economicempowerment/facts-and-figures (accessed 3 June 2017). Watson, B. (2015), ‘Economic Inequality for Women Costs $9tn Globally, Study Finds’, Guardian, available at https://www.theguardian.com/sustainablebusiness/2015/jan/23/women-inequality-income-pay-actionaid-study-economy (accessed 3 June 2017). Weissman, C.G. (2016), ‘The Women Changing The Face of AI’, Fast Company, available at https://www.fastcompany.com/3062932/ai-is-a-male-dominated-fie​ ld-but-an-important-group-of-women-is-changing-th (accessed 17 June 2017). Whittington, K.B. and L. Smith-Doerr (2008), ‘Women Inventors in Context’, Gender and Society, 22(2), 194‒218. Williams, S. (2014), ‘Why We Need Women In Stem’, Inc., available at https:// www.inc.com/sue-williams/why-we-need-women-in-stem.html (accessed 17 June 2017). Woetzel, J.,  Madgavkar, A., Ellingrud, K., et al. (2015), ‘How Advancing Women’s Equality Can Add $12 Trillion to Global Growth’, McKinsey Global Institute Report, available at: http://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/employ​ ment-and-growth/how-advancing-womens-equality-can-add-12-trillion-to-glob​ al-growth (accessed 3 June 2017).

Additional Resources AdvaMed Women’s Executive Network, http://www.advamed.org/about/wen. Association for Women in Science, https://www.awis.org/. California Life Sciences Association, http://califesciences.org/about/. Cross Institutional Synergy for Women Scientists, The Gulf Coast ADVANCE Partnership, http://www.gulfcoastadvance.org/. Empowering Women in Technology Startups, http://ewits.org/. Innovation Alliance, http://innovationalliance.net/. Institute for Women’s Policy Research available at https://iwpr.org/. IPO Women in IP committee, https://www.ipo.org/index.php/about-ipo/commit​ tees/women-in-ip-committee/. LEAD-It-Yourself!, University of Washington ADVANCE Program, https:// advance.washington.edu/. National Academy of Inventors, http://academyofinventors.org/. National Center for Women and Information Technology, https://www.ncwit.org/. Ohio State ADVANCE, Ohio State University ADVANCE Program, http://adva​ nce.osu.edu/.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 378

13/12/2019 15:47



AUTM Women Inventors Committee ­379

Project REACH for Commercialization, Ohio State University, http://advance. osu.edu/resources/project-reach/. Quantum Leaps Inc., http://www.quantumleapsinc.org/. Springboard Enterprises, https://sb.co/. Stanford Medicine SPARK Translational Research Program, http://med.stanford. edu/sparkmed.html. University of Cincinnati LEAF, University of Cincinnati ADVANCE Program, http://www.uc.edu/orgs/ucleaf.html. Women 2.0, https://women2.com/. Women in Bio Boardroom Ready, http://www.womeninbio.org/executives/board​ room-ready. ‘Women Inventors Committee Charter’, http://www.autm.net/AUTMMain/med​ ia/Leadership-Committees/DOCUMENTS/AUTM_Committee_Charters_MA​ Y​20​16.pdf. ‘Women’s Entrepreneurship Symposium’, https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/even​ ts/womens-entrepreneurship-symposium-0.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 379

13/12/2019 15:47

19. Gender equity and equality: resistance and advance in academic science and innovation Henry Etzkowitz, Carol Kemelgor and Leila Maria Kehl 19.1 INTRODUCTION The persistent paucity of women at the upper reaches of academic science has called into question the classic pipeline model of encouraging entry (Berryman, 1983). Welcoming girls and women into science, ‘front loading’ the pipeline, is expected to induce upward flow, producing equality though an autonomous ‘social capillary action’. With career alternatives constricted (Wolfinger et al., 2009) and women extruded from the upper levels of academic sciences, the science career pipeline is a leaky bucket. Although ‘multiple pathways’ has been proposed as a more nuanced model (Cannady et al., 2014), a close observer noted that, ‘So much attention has been paid to making hard-science disciplines more inviting to women, and a lot of institutions can claim progress .  .  . But when you look at the big picture, you don’t see it’ (Shapiro, 2017), despite the appearance of ‘family-friendly’ and feminist-led research groups, Two apparently contradictory positive and negative dynamics are at work: (1) growth of women’s participation in the early phases of academic science, through the undergraduate degree, beyond the 50 per cent level of equality in some fields, evoking concerns about ‘disappearing men’ (Fried, 2019); and (2) a ‘vanish box’ of disappearing women (Etzkowitz and Ranga, 2011). An invisible membrane with filtration capabilities selects women out (Blinkenstaff, 2005). Although they are seldom privy to its inner dynamics, women who leave academia prematurely experience deleterious effects on their careers and lives. An invisible process, similar to the one that seemingly neutrally weeded out women disproportionately from large introductory engineering and science classes (Etzkowitz et al., 2000), is built into the upper reaches of the academic system, as well. It works through simple mechanisms such as the paucity of women on tenure ­380

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 380

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender equity and equality ­381

and promotion committees, noted in Chapter 1 of this volume, as well as in gendered assumptions about who shall do science. In suppressing overt expression, ‘unconscious bias training workshops’ may implicitly teach masking negative gender attitudes, whose sub-structural presence finds more subtle expression. Derived from observation in academia and interviews with women in industry, such inferences are subject to the usual caveat of ‘more research is needed’, but is that really the case? Why has academia fallen behind law, banking and other professional fields, heretofore even more resistant to women’s advancement than the university? A stalled gender revolution (England, 2011) is implicitly expected to be a temporary phenomenon. However, a lack of significant progress in women’s advancement into the upper levels of academic science following improved participation in the lower levels over the past 30 years suggests a more fundamental blockage. Chapter 1 proposed three levels of analyses, focusing on the meso level of university organization while also going one level down to the micro level of individual experience and one level up to the macro level of societal structure and values. In the following, and focusing mainly on the United States context, we follow such methodology: longitudinally, through periodization of the trajectory of women’s experience in academic science; and laterally, through an analysis of assumptions, practices and policies, past and prospective. In contrast to Silicon Valley, where equity, if not equality, is incentivized by extreme labour shortage; fundamental reforms are required in order to make academic science fit for women rather than women fit for academic science.

19.2  A DEEP DIVE INTO GENDERED ACADEMIA Academia exhibits a particularly selective barrier, a fine membrane that often works imperceptibly, for example, in discussions by hiring committees. The first author of this chapter was present in one such series of interviews where a female candidate naively said that she was not certain whether she would ultimately like to pursue an academic career. This admission was immediately taken as prima facie evidence of unsuitability for a term research position by most members of the committee, despite the candidate’s manifestly superior curriculum vitae (CV). In this instance, the recommendation of a less qualified male candidate was overruled, and the committee process was halted by the Research Group Head. In previous hiring decisions, deference to the Research Group Head had allowed the hiring of under-represented minority candidates. Finally, patriarchal authority was asserted, in the instance at hand, through a committee ­consisting of full professors, all male.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 381

13/12/2019 15:47

382

Gender, science and innovation

Over time, the filter has moved further up the pipeline, from the right for women to study to a more accessible entry into PhD programmes (Pell, 1996). Today, it prevents women from taking on higher academic positions, at the professorial and leadership levels, commensurate with their entry allowing time for advancement. Nevertheless, there are highly noted instances of women advancing to university top leadership roles with some, for example, at Brown University and Princeton University using their positions to advance under-represented minorities while others studiously avoid any attention to gender lest it be taken as unprofessional. Indeed, a distinguished female provost, towards the end of her term, expressed regret to an interviewer that she had not used the full authority of her office to make a difference. Western academia’s ‘scientific ascetic’ medieval monastic roots (Noble, 1992) engendered a system of asexual reproduction, with doctor fathers birthing generations of doctor son hermaphrodites, like reproducing like, in perpetuity. Indeed, the stages and phases of a male model of academic career advancement have been extrapolated to women. Gender issues have only marginally been taken into account in its functioning, without altering its fundamental structure, with early career amelioration focus (Kloxin, 2019). The academic science career pipeline is based on a stage theory of human development, expected to occur in rigid sequence. While many occupations have bent to accommodate women without breaking staged linearity, academic science has proved remarkably resistant to accommodating senior women. Occasionally, blatant inequities break through an implicit vow of silence taken by all but a few brave ‘troublemakers’ who challenge a gendered academic system that blithely reproduces itself. There are also the largely unheralded bottom-up ‘institution builders’, like the University of California, Berkeley computer science PhD students and alumni who created a programme to assist women’s return to complete their PhDs. ‘Good girls’ who have made it within the confines of the system are well aware of academia’s inequities and anomalies. Some discuss the workings of the system freely amongst themselves in the ‘safe spaces’ of gender and women’s research centres. Informal conversations note the departments that still have exceedingly few female members as well as colleagues who have experienced good fortune in their careers, sometimes assisted by exceptional measures that beg to be generalized. Others note ‘collateral career damage’ in interviews on related topics such as interdisciplinary research centres. Women who have supported the development of a centre later realize that they have been inadvertently deflected from a regular academic career path by a supportive director. Given an age-graded, linear academic system, they find it dif-

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 382

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender equity and equality ­383

ficult, if not impossible, to retrieve the high-level career path of their entry into academic science. The pipeline model is fundamentally a general career model describing a unidirectional career improvement pathway from career start to career end. The ‘pipeline’ focuses on the stream upwards, and thus career advancement, whereas backdrops are usually overlooked (see Dai et al., 2011; Fuhrmann et al., 2011). This model requires specifying a career path, which typically can be industrial, institutional or governmental. In a perfect career, a person would move upwards through the pipeline until the highest stage of the professional level. However, this is not true for every subject, and reality reflects rather inexact career paths. Therefore, ‘leakages’, ‘dropouts’ and ‘filters’ have been added to explain these cases within the model. One shortcoming of the pipeline model is that it does not allow mapping career paths which cross different industries or spheres (pipelines). Women who start in the scientific academic pipeline therefore ‘vanish’ (Etzkowitz and Ranga, 2011). Thus, most anyone who moves outside that narrow pipeline, even with only temporary intent, is impeded and all too often lost, since there is little consideration of providing a way back in. Women also leave the non-supportive, sometimes toxic environment of academic pipelines realizing they will not offer sufficient career options. The ‘gold standard’ United States (US) academic career model, with its seven-year ‘up or out’ tenure promotion rule, focused on early career accomplishment, expresses a linear life course theory most famously delineated by psychologist Erik Erikson (1950), predicated on a rigid stage model. Such a tenure system is relatively new as default option. As late as the early 1970s Stanford University debated whether it should follow the Harvard University model and disallow so-called ‘rolling tenure’ in which a permanent appointment could be made any time, especially at a later career stage (Miller, 1971). In the reported discussion, there was no taking account of women’s interests or needs, merely the wish to tighten criteria and provide an implacable face for colleagues to hide behind in performing distasteful, yet necessary personnel decisions. A timed rule required a critical decision to be made, without postponement, with little or no account taken of gender issues. Yet the gender effects of this policy have been considerable. A potential female-friendly career model was stillborn, with a rigid structure instituted that inexorably militated against women’s rise. An alternative academic career model that meets women’s needs would allow major life tasks and challenges to be pursued in a non-linear order. ‘Stages assume that development is hierarchical, sequenced in time and cumulative .  .  . In a three-dimensional space, utilizing spiral patterns of

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 383

13/12/2019 15:47

384

Gender, science and innovation

different expansion and contraction, typical patterns of role choices that vary in number and duration for different populations can be charted’ (Etzkowitz and Stein, 1978). However, non-linearity, opened up by extended life-span as well as cultural revolutions, legitimating single and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) lifestyles, can only go so far. To date, biological intractablities of human reproduction intersecting with academic rigidification create contradictions between biological and tenure clocks (Etzkowitz et al., 2000). Men are more typically advantaged and women more typically disadvantaged to meet this criterion. The ‘biological clock’ and social norms of childrearing have proved persistent in assigning greater responsibility to women than men. There are, of course, notable exceptions to these strictures that could be expanded upon, including a minority of ‘house husbands’, availability of infant care centres, the kibbutz concept of the children’s house, and participation of the extended family. Moreover, wealthy women and those with high-salaried positions, such as Sheryl Sandberg, the main author of Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead (Sandberg and Scorell, 2013) and Facebook’s Chief Operating Officer (COO), operate as ‘honorary men’. Transcending the difficulties their peers face, ‘lean in’ advocates advise a positive persona on the presumption that modest pressure will induce change; and indeed, in some arenas, it suffices. Attempts to remove road blocks have focused on ‘fixing’ women and sensitizing men. Indeed, while workshops for this purpose may have a positive effect on those men amenable to change, they may simply alert those opposed to change to better cover their tracks in impeding women’s advancement. At the organizational level reforms have had similarly mixed results to date: career breaks for childcare are offered equally to men and women; however, when taken advantage of by men it can propel career advancement, but when taken up by women it usually barely allows them to keep up, given typically differential domestic responsibilities. Moreover, realizing that exercising this option may be viewed negatively in tenure review makes women cautious of utilizing such ‘opportunities’. Exceptional women with deep reservoirs of cultural and social capital, such as Persis Drell, Stanford University’s Provost and daughter of legendary Stanford physicist Sidney Drell, are exceptions to the rule. Drell was able to carve out a special arrangement at Cornell University, including release from teaching while her children were young, thereby allowing her academic advancement. Whether recuperating the ‘rolling system’ or inventing a new model, a flexible non-linear architecture is required to break the log jam of a stalled academic gender revolution in science (Lechman, 2019). An alternative

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 384

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender equity and equality ­385

career model, with a higher time commitment after childrearing years, may be discerned. A Rockefeller University Professor, who started on her PhD at a later than usual age, exemplifies an alternative model that needs to be legitimized as an alternative path to high achievement. The scientific underground at the University of Rhode Island, where a cadre of women had invented temporary grant-funded positions as research associates not included in the regular university budget, also needs to be regularized and legitimized. Other hidden creative career models that have been invented sub rosa need to be brought to light and explored as potential alternatives to open up a rigidified system. We concur with Bennett (2004) that ‘in practice women can follow different orientations to work at different stages in their lives’, but social institutions, including academia, must accordingly adjust to make that practice a paradigm rather than an anomaly. Pell (1996) saw four critical periods for women: early childhood, adolescence, college, and the graduate school and job entry period. All those have already been addressed to some extent as the percentage of female students has gone up in STEM subjects. According to Shaw and Stanton (2012), ‘Across all disciplines, the career transition divergence least explained by demographic inertia effects is that from graduate student or post-doctoral researcher to the professoriate.’ A woman in academia may not even have the choice between staying on at lower academic career levels or leaving (leaking out). A ‘gender filter’ (Blickenstaff, 2005) prevents women from moving above a certain career level. Although the filter has moved progressively up in the pipeline, it is now stuck, blocking access to the more prestigious academic positions. Such institutionalized recalcitrance necessitates a higher order of change, going beyond minor adjustments to academic organization, such as those undertaken to date; for example, offering both men and women the opportunity to temporarily ‘stop the tenure clock’. Indeed, takenfor-granted academic structures and values, highly resistant to pressure from within, may require external impetus to change. Thus, Title IX of US Public Law No. 92‑318, aka the Civil Rights Act of 1972, led to the renovation of university athletic programmes, bringing women’s sports programmes into line with men’s in terms of resources.1 Some members 1   A participant in these changes, a female collegiate athlete in the 1980s and present Director of a university athletic programme, noted the slow flow of ‘academic molasses’. Older practices of female athletes paying for their uniforms, and competing without the elaborate coaching support structure commonplace for men, save for provision of a van to participate in intercollegiate meets, were still in transition during her student days, more than a decade after the legal shift.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 385

13/12/2019 15:47

386

Gender, science and innovation

of an earlier generation of Women’s Athletic Directors, although they appreciated status enhancement, regretted the infusion of highly competitive values and the concomitant decline of informal camaraderie among the girls and young women they mentored. Nevertheless, US university athletics are an academic oasis of gender equity and equality. 19.2.1  The Gender‒Status Conundrum The historical relationship between status and gender provides a clue to understanding the underlying dynamics of women and men’s careers in science. Typically, there is strong participation of women in the early stages of development of a new discipline, but as the new area becomes prestigious and rewards increase, women disappear. As fields attain recognition and fruition, and the Nobel and other prizes are awarded, it is men who are there to receive them. For instance, there were a significant number of women working in ‘the fly room’, the Drosophila genetics lab headed by Thomas Hunt Morgan at Colombia University, but as the field became prestigious, women virtually disappeared from classical genetics (Kohler, 1994). A similar dynamic has been identified in computer software. In the early days of the emerging field, men reserved the hardware for themselves and were content to allow women the presumed support role of programming. As the technological balance shifted from hardware to software, so did the gender imbalance, with men dominating the field and everyone forgetting that the first coders were women. For example, in the United Kingdom where software had been 50 per cent female in the early days, it reduced to 25 per cent (Larmour and Tener, 2004). To redress science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) imbalances, a 15 per cent threshold of women’s participation has often been sought on the premise that gender discrimination withers at this level. However, such an optimistic view has not always been supported. Indeed, resistance to women’s full participation in a field may persist, and even increase and take on new guises, as female presence rises (Etzkowitz et al., 1994).

19.3 STAGES AND PHASES OF WOMEN’S ADVANCEMENT AND RECESSION IN SCIENCE In the recent obituary of a Nobel scientist, his wife ‒ a Lasker prize winner ‒ said, ‘I was very, very lucky to have married Tom . . . He really believed I should have as equal an opportunity to succeed as he.’ He turned down a

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 386

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender equity and equality ­387

job after she had asked the Chair about a position as an Assistant Professor and was told, ‘All our wives like being research associates.’ They accepted positions in a department that offered two Assistant Professorships and both rose to the heights of their profession. Such arrangements, the result of serious efforts to identify a suitable position for a spouse, are no longer unusual in academic recruitment. Nevertheless, despite the best efforts of the US National Science Foundation’s (NSF) ADVANCE programme supporting experiments in individual departments to improve conditions for female faculty, women in higher academic ranks are substantially fewer than their male colleagues. As previously mentioned, notable exceptions are in the biological and agricultural sciences (National Science Foundation, 1998). 19.3.1  Stage 1: Fortuitous Families Women’s entry into modern science first occurred in family surroundings where a parent scientist (typically male) allowed, supported or even actively sparked a daughter’s interest in following his vocation. Londa Schiebinger (1989, 1993) has systematically studied this phase in the descriptive biological sciences in Europe, where women were botanized, labelled and categorized as members of ‘family research groups’. In the US, during the early nineteenth century, Maria Mitchell’s father encouraged his daughter’s interest in astronomy and proudly brought her comet discovery to the attention of Harvard University’s President, resulting in the Nantucket librarian receiving a medal from the King of Denmark, who commemorated her discovery. To this date, Nantucket’s Maria Mitchell Society, organized in her memory, preserves the original family household and adjacent buildings, including an observatory where Harvard female and male interns carry on summer research studies and one or two nights per week assist interested members of the general public in viewing the stars. A classical small natural history museum of cabinet exhibits, primarily of local flora and fauna, encourages girls and boys to take an interest in natural phenomena, along with a waterfront annex devoted to marine life. This early phase began to take organizational shape in so-called ‘flying universities’ where, on the side, male professors taught female students in private drawing rooms and living rooms converted into informal classrooms. Knowledge was transmitted and gratefully received, with little or no prospect of formal recognition in a degree, or accession to the regular activities, facilities and emoluments of academia. Nevertheless, such ‘quasi-academic spaces’ gave the necessary background to female academic pioneers such as Marie Curie and Lise Meitner, who were able to convince sceptical male professors to make a special exception and

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 387

13/12/2019 15:47

388

Gender, science and innovation

allow them into the formal academic structures for research training, even without a foreseeable prospect of a career (Sime, 1996). Nevertheless, such seemingly dead-end opportunities prepared the way for a next phase, in which women were able to join formal academic structures. These were limited in scale and scope, such as female undergraduate colleges, or more broad-based new universities that were democratically open to women as well as men of less than upper middle class provenance (Nevins, 1962). 19.3.2  Stage 2: A Separate (Unequal) Sphere When Matthew Vassar used his fortune to open Vassar College for Women in Poughkeepsie, New York, Maria Mitchell was called to a faculty position where she directed the research of her undergraduate students in developing star charts. Elements of the previous ‘family era’ carried forward as Maria brought her father with her to the college. Only an exceedingly rare student was able to continue her training at the graduate level and pursue an astronomical career. Nevertheless, an infrastructure was created for women to pursue academic studies, including in science if not engineering, with instructional positions that were open to women even if leadership positions were typically not during this founding era (Rossiter, 1982). These academic institutions for women were virtually all limited to the undergraduate level, with the notable exception of Bryn Mawr College. (Smith College later developed a few advanced training programmes, including a Social Work School as well as an engineering programme. Radcliffe College, then Harvard’s sister school, provided a home for female graduate students.) 19.3.3  Stage 3: Necessity Inclusion: A Wartime Tide Lifts All The first great breakthrough to equality in advanced research positions in the US occurred in the university-led government-financed and industry-partnered research and development (R&D) advanced weapons projects such as the Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) ‘Rad Lab’ for radar development. Project requirements for thousands of scientists, and similar needs in industrial production, broke down barriers against employing women. Support structures, such as a nationwide childcare centre programme, facilitated a transformation of work‒life balance that lasted for the duration of the war, with more limited follow-on effects. Women’s advancement in science traditionally occurs during periods of national emergency when there is a shortage of men. For example, at the advent of the second World War, female physicists who had worked as volunteers

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 388

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender equity and equality ­389

in their husbands’ laboratories were recruited into the Manhattan Project. After the war, some successfully attained good academic positions. For example, Maria Mayer, who subsequently was awarded the Nobel prize, was hired as full professor by the newly founded University of California, San Diego physics department in the late 1950s. 19.3.4  Stage 4: A Partial Policy Breakthrough Women’s advancement to virtual equality in undergraduate education occurred as a side-effect of the Soviet Union lofting a satellite ahead of the United States. Defined as a crisis, Sputnik allowed the US scientific establishment the opportunity to define inadequate funding of scientific training as a root cause. Soviet educational attainment statistics in engineering education, despite cavils that many of the Soviet degrees were technical diplomas short of a bachelor’s degree, encouraged passage of the National Defense Education Act. This 1958 law opened up universities to ‘millions of women’ who received undergraduate degrees, while also providing significant funds for graduate education that did not, however, greatly increase female participation in graduate-level STEM disciplines (Rose, 2018). Concomitantly, quotas limiting women’s participation in university education disappeared. Once the doors were opened, women entered in ever increasing numbers, with MIT, for example, moving from an early post-war 2 per cent to parity at present. 19.3.5  Stage 5: Call Up the Reserves Whenever there is a shortage, the first thought is usually to call up the reserves: typically women and minorities who are under-represented in science. The next ‘crisis’, in the 1980s, occasioned by ‘The Shortage that Never Was’ raised the issue of inclusion of women in PhD programmes. After directing research at IBM, Eric Bloch, the first industrial scientist to be appointed head of the NSF, raised the spectre of a shortfall of STEM PhDs negatively affecting US science-based productivity. Dr Bloch asked the head of NSF’s sociology programme, ‘Where are the women?’ Thus, the first author of this chapter soon received a phone call from Prof. Phyllis Moen, the head of the NSF sociology programme, in his capacity as Chair of the Section on Science Knowledge and Technology (SKAT) in the American Sociological Association. Dr Moen asked, ‘Who are the experts on women in science?’ After providing several names, he told her about the second author’s project on research groups: female faculty, postdocs and graduate students in the Genetics Department at a tier one university shared that, ‘Women organize their groups differently than men. Their

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 389

13/12/2019 15:47

390

Gender, science and innovation

groups are more collegial; less hierarchical than those of their male colleagues’ (Kemelgor, 1989). Upon hearing this Dr Moen said, ‘You’re in the field. You should do a study’, assuring that support would arrive. Interviews with female and male faculty members in four disciplines at an ‘urban research university’ were conducted. The final report was handed in virtually simultaneously with receiving news of a grant award. With supplementary university funding, a second tranche of four departments at a ‘suburban research university’ were also investigated. To scale up further, a collaboration was forged with Prof. Mary Frank Fox, an accomplished, quantitatively oriented, women in science researcher. The NSF’s Policy Division was solicited for funds. A successful application provided resources sufficient for a nationwide study, conducted quantitatively and qualitatively (ASA Footnotes, 1992). 19.3.6  Stage 6: The ‘Vanish Box’ of Women in Science We are all familiar with the old ‘vanish box’ magic trick. A person, usually a woman, goes into a closet-like cabinet. The door closes. A magician intones. The door reopens. No one is there. The door closes and, with the wave of a wand, reopens and the woman reappears. The audience does not know where she was in the interim. A significant number of highly qualified women in science apparently disappear from the scientific career pipeline as if into a vanish box. Highly motivated women, who are subtly not permitted to use their knowledge and training in traditional academic fields, are compelled to pursue alternative career paths. Blocked from pursuing high-level careers in academic science, these apparent dropouts are more appropriately characterized as ‘push-outs’. Some become full-time homemakers or pursue careers unrelated to science. Others retool and reappear in technology transfer and other science-related interface professions. A vanish box, rather than a pipeline, may be the most appropriate metaphor for the situation of women in science. The classic pipeline metaphor suggests a steady flow through the system: increase the numbers entering a field in secondary school and university, and in a predictable time they should appear at the upper reaches of the academic career ladder in relative proportion to their initial entry (Zuckerman et al., 1991). The pipeline and vanish box models exist simultaneously. Indeed, the vanish box is the explanation for the provenance of a significant, but yet to be precisely determined, proportion of the women who do not rise through the pipeline. Nevertheless, those vanished from academic science who reappear in science-related occupations are also the banished. What happens to women who, for one reason or another, leave an

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 390

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender equity and equality ­391

academic science career? One clue appeared during some interviews with women in academic science in the Athena Unbound study.2 Some spoke of colleagues who were no longer in the department; they were now in jobs elsewhere. In interviews, some of these women leaving academic science were found to be taking up careers in science-related professions such as science journalism, technology transfer, museology, and so on. They were using their scientific training in translating science into use and spreading the results of science to a broader public. Rather than being ‘lost to science’ as presumed by the ‘leaky pipeline’ thesis of career loss, these individuals were pursuing work‒life balance in their new careers. Rather than leave science, they found other avenues to pursue their interest. This hypothesis was tested in: Women in Science and Technology (WIST): the European Union’s concern about failure to fully utilize society’s investment in highly trained human resources was the basis for the WIST research project sponsored by the Science and Society programme in the Sixth Framework Programme (FP6). The four moments of the Vanish Box The first phase is disappearance of women due to exclusionary practices, whether explicit barriers such as the ‘tenure clock’ discussed above, casual practices such as few if any women on promotion committees, or implicit ways of doing science such as a ‘long hours’ culture that does not take women’s needs into account. Some of the relatively few women who remain may take to the ‘male model’ of doing science even more than men, reacting belligerently to members of their research group and taking ‘long hours’ to an extreme, questioning the devotion to science of ‘sluggards’ who do not show up at the lab on Christmas Day. ‘Stickers’ (those who remain in academic science) were not found at the highest levels of academic science to the extent that would be expected if the pipeline was working, with women flowing in and rising up over a period of time, as expected. The disappeared women are a reserve army in the second phase: if not employed in ancillary science occupations, they are at home or in part-time positions, typically unemployed or underemployed. In supplementary interviews conducted on the sidelines of the Athena study, we identified science news reporters, museologists and technology transfer officers, who were utilizing their academic science skills in ‘9‒5’ occupations (Etzkowitz et al., 2000). The reserve army is called upon when there is an emergency.   An NSF-sponsored study of ‘Women in US Academic Science’, conducted by the Science Policy Institute, State University of New York, Principal Investigators Henry Etzkowitz and Carol Kemelgor. 2

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 391

13/12/2019 15:47

392

Gender, science and innovation

For example, during World War II women with mathematical skills were recruited to work on ballistic calculations and to programme the first electronic computers. As is now well known, ‘computers’ denoted a female occupation, found in insurance firms and astronomical laboratories prior to artefactual instantiation (Rossiter, 1982) The third phase of the model is the creation of new opportunities, either by emergency situations, or by the creation of new professions that require people with scientific training. An example of this was the technology transfer profession that we studied: a new profession assisting in the licensing of inventions that required people with scientific training and background along with business acumen. Typically, such people had a scientific background and would learn the necessary business skills by taking courses or even a master’s degree in business. This provided opportunities, but there are still limitations. The new profession was not as prestigious as the old one, and had both advantages and disadvantages. Working in a Technology Transfer Office gives more of an opportunity for a work‒life balance, but the prestige of the profession is not that high and the opportunities for advancement are limited. In the fourth phase, as the knowledge society advances, professions that translate knowledge into use do become more prestigious, and the profession rises in status over time. That is what has been happening with technology transfer. The question that arises is: will it follow the same model of classical genetics, dominated once again by men, or will it lead to a new model of a gender-neutral profession, with men and women working at the highest levels in a situation that allows for work‒life balance? There is some evidence that this may be happening in small biotech firms. A recent study found that women recruited into these firms were taken seriously in their work and were being promoted, suggesting a changing dynamic between gender and career advancement; ‘but where academia crosses into industry, men still rule’, despite increasing laboratory participation (McCook, 2013).

19.4 POLICY FOR GENDER EQUITY AND EQUALITY The academic equity and equality shortfall, limiting the rise of many women to the upper reaches of academia, maintains a traditional male preserve that is waning in other classic professions. Social structures almost always seem invariant when they have existed long enough to become taken for granted by the predecessors who then pass them on to their successors. Alternatively, academic leaders can be disruptive

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 392

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender equity and equality ­393

innovators, such as University of Maryland Baltimore County (UMBC) President Hrabowski, who demonstrated methods of increasing minority participation in science and then passed the tradition of organizational innovation on to his PhD students. Many academic scientists regularly challenge received knowledge; indeed, doing so is well accepted. The academic order, however, with rigid sequenced stages, requires no less challenge. To achieve equity, the relationship between career structure and life cycle needs to be rethought. Although the stage model of sequential life tasks has been challenged, its influence in academia is institutionalized in a tenure regime that is spreading to an ever-widening range of academic institutions. The current taken-for-granted career path is based on implicit male assumptions that do not take into account women’s greater responsibilities for family maintenance and societal reproduction, even given good-faith efforts on the part of men to play a greater role in childcare (Kayyem, 2012). In the current male model imposed on women, significant early achievement, typically involving a high time commitment, is the prerequisite for subsequent higher-level positions. It is hypothesized that women’s difficulties in conforming to this model explain at least part of the variance in the paucity of women in high-level positions even as their entry-level participation rates increase. Sociologist Paula England (2011) has set forth the thesis of a stalled revolution: in the 1970s large numbers of women entered professions in law and medicine, but more recently, the advancement of women has halted. Pay differentials continue to exist. Women have not risen to positions of board directors of firms to the same extent that might be expected. However, women now make up a majority of bachelor’s degree recipients: more than 50 per cent in some places and as high as 60 per cent in others. Forty years ago, the percentage of female undergraduate students at MIT could be counted on the fingers of one hand. Today half of MIT’s students are female. Once the level of 20 per cent is achieved, social relations within organizations start to change; but they really transform at the 50 per cent level. Experiments in changing gender identifiers on job applications still identify significant differences of both male and female reviewers of the same qualifications (Corell, 2017). Discrimination can also be invisible, such as unconscious gender bias in selection and promotion procedures. This can have an impact on salary requests and awards. Yet unconscious bias training (UBT) has its limits and may serve to protect employers from lawsuits while leaving the employment needle stuck, unless more thoroughgoing measures are taken. Is gender equity in science at hand? Not yet, is the short answer. There has been remarkable progress in some

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 393

13/12/2019 15:47

394

Gender, science and innovation

areas. It has been a while now since gender parity was reached in undergraduate training at MIT and many other schools. However, the pipeline thesis that if the lower levels were filled it would simply be a matter of time until women would rise in equal proportions to the upper levels of STEM fields has been disconfirmed, with notable exceptions in the biological sciences. Significant barriers to advancement, if not entry, persist. 19.4.1  Sourcing a Change Dynamic During the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) conference in San Diego in 2006, the first author of this chapter met a female colleague who had long been active in the society. In response to a question from her about recent research, he mentioned the finding of women disappearing from leadership roles in research areas once that area had attained prestige. She responded that something like that might be happening in AUTM. Whereas in the early years, women who had been active in the profession were often elected to high positions in the society, that seemed to be declining in recent years. We decided to raise the issue by proposing a session on Gender in Technology Transfer for the following year’s meeting. The panel session in New Orleans was well attended, especially by AUTM’s leadership. During the question period, a woman announced that she had recently been elected President of the Society. Of course, there were likely many contributing factors, but the push for a gender session may have served as a ‘nudge’ to bring a repressed issue to the fore, bringing about change. AUTM was a basically receptive environment where up-and-coming male leaders in the profession had been mentored by senior female colleagues. Once the issue was brought clearly to their attention, they were receptive to making a positive response. However, if left unaddressed, a traditional dynamic of female disappearance as a consequence of the profession’s newly elevated status might have ensued in the absence of challenge. The classic 15 per cent rule ‒ that is, the presumption that conditions for women in an academic unit improve when this threshold of participation is attained ‒ was overoptimistic. Discrimination, overt and covert, disappears with 50 per cent equal participation. To achieve this objective, universities, industry and government must mandate equity and equality as a result, not merely as an opportunity. There is a narrow margin in which equity and equality perseveres, if not institutionalizes. However, if the female rate of participation moves significantly above 50 per cent, a reverse effect appears that never occurs when a field is male-dominated, indicating the fragility of gender equity. A field tends to lose status and

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 394

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender equity and equality ­395

resources as it becomes ‘feminized’; for example, veterinary science in Sweden. It takes strong countervailing measures to preclude biological ­differences ‒ for example, childbearing ‒ from being translated into deleterious consequences for women in the scientific or indeed any other workplace. Worksite or nearby infant and childcare facilities, a rescinding of youth as the default assumption of the locus of achievement, as well as legitimation of flexible job and career paths, can remove barriers to women’s entry and advancement in scientific occupations. Classic male ideological features of the social structure of science such as ‘time spent at the lab’ must be delegitimized, especially as ‘laptop science’ allows work and communication to be distributed. Indeed, an increasing number of research group leaders ‘meet their troops’ over the Internet when they travel or serve as visiting professors elsewhere. Table 19.1 summarizes some of the principles of gender equity in science in terms of the barriers, strategies and leadership imperatives. An alternative career model, as well as other measures that allow the same life chances not only for women but also for other potentially disadvantaged groups, refers to policies for equity. With considerations of skill set, qualifications and a person’s characteristics, gender inequalities cannot come into existence, since human capital becomes the desired resource. Companies and whole economies fail to use this capital and potential today. It would be in their best interest and could become their competitive advantage if they started to systematically change in order to build less hostile environments for our female fellows. Turning to the roots of discrimination, subtle bias still requires attention. A case study of Heidi Roizen, a successful entrepreneur and business personality and, most recently, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, was presented to students who were asked if they would work with a hypothetical person. Sometimes the name ‘Heidi’ was exchanged with ‘Howard’ (McGinn, 2000). In this and similar studies, successful women were rated ‘less likable’, and where performance was not directly apparent on either side, women were rated as less competent than their male counterparts (Bohnet, 2016). This experiment, and analogous European studies of authorship, alternating ‘male’ and ‘female’ names on the same article, highlight gender stereotypes that downgrade women. In the mid-1990s, a male science policy researcher of women in science asked a female colleague, who had expressed interest in his presentation on the topic at the Il Ciocco Science Policy Workshop, ‘Why don’t you study women in science?’ She replied, ‘You can do it, but we can’t.’ The implication was that women would be taken less seriously in the science policy field if they engaged with gender issues. During that same era, the first and

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 395

13/12/2019 15:47

396

Gender, science and innovation

Table 19.1  Some principles of gender equity in science Barrier

Strategy

Bias

●

Sexual harassment

●  Proactive

Salary inequity

●

Contradictions between biological and professional clocks

Mentorship

Isolation

Unconscious bias training Blinded resume review ●  Standardized interviews, adjusting likability scores ●

●

and enforced policies Bystander training

Transparent salary scales Standardized salary scales ● Negotiation training ●  Generous and transparent maternity leave policies ●  Support of lactation and integration of work and family responsibilities ●  On-site infant and childcare options ●  More flexible childcare options ●  Meetings scheduled during workday to avoid conflict with family responsibilities ●  Increase opportunities for networking and connecting PhD students, postdoctoral fellows and junior faculty with senior faculty ●  Encourage consulting opportunities for junior female faculty and invitations to scientific boards of start-ups as a propadeutic to academic entrepreneurship Increase opportunities for junior faculty to participate in specialist and interdisciplinary workshops ●

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 396

Leadership imperative Hiring and recruitment: representation of under-represented groups on recruitment committees ●  Active recruitment of women and underrepresented minorities ●  Monitor junior faculty achievement to insure that persons well qualified for promotion put themselves forward Transform culture: ●  Create culture that treats women with respect Honest assessment of salary inequities at institution ●  Increase

●

Model practices of inclusion and support clear policies

●  Implement

●  Create

and promote institutional and national career development programmes

●  Connect

faculty with university opportunities, such as internal support for developing new research projects

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender equity and equality ­397

second authors of this chapter met with an official of the European Union directorate on Science Policy to discuss possible support for research on women in science. The official opened the meeting by stating, ‘I usually meet with visitors for an hour but since your topic is gender, I give it a half hour.’ Not too long afterwards, during Edith Cresson’s period as EU Commissioner, the European Union initiated a significant gender research and action programme that has become a global leader in the field. In an increasing number of universities there has been reform of tenure procedures to try to accommodate women by extending the clock; that is, you can apply for a year’s extension to reduce your time in the workplace and/or take a break in order to have, or care for, a child. Even this attempt to ameliorate the male model of science and make it more amenable to women’s participation contains a contradiction: women are concerned that if they apply for this privilege that it will be held against them in the final review. Thus, some do not avail themselves of the opportunity. 19.4.2  Beyond the ‘Male Model’: An Alternative Female Model A female model of science, balancing work and family life, has been invented but it is a subsidiary and undervalued format that needs to be brought to the forefront and institutionalized. However, this would necessitate rethinking aspects of the academic system, especially the US model, that unintentionally yet systematically works against women’s inclusion in the higher levels of academic science. The US model of academic ­hierarchy ‒ front-loading in the academic career with a strong emphasis on youth and achievement in the early years ‒ is partly based on a mistaken idea that younger people are more productive in science than people who are of an older age. Zuckerman and Merton (1972) found that ‘productivity was as high or even higher at the later stages of a scientific career’, and that makes sense. When you are more advanced in your career you have more access to resources, more graduate students, more research associates, more people working with you. Co-authorship arises from having members of your research group being highly productive. Nevertheless, there is a strong, misguided belief that youth makes disproportionate scientific advances, and this has been the basis of a system with a strong emphasis on early career achievement. In Europe and elsewhere, where there is a move to introduce the American system of higher education, including tenure procedures with an emphasis on early achievement, there will likely be negative consequences for women. The introduction of the tenure system is driven by international ranking procedures which propels movement from a system of relatively equal universities. It should be asked seriously whether i­ntroducing

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 397

13/12/2019 15:47

398

Gender, science and innovation

extreme inequalities will overall advance or inhibit quality academic research, teaching and innovation. In introducing a system that is currently taken as the gold standard in higher education, policy makers in Europe and elsewhere may wish to examine its deleterious gender effects, and at least take steps to mitigate them. On the one hand, a female model of science with work‒life balance may gain traction as more male scientists are raised and mentored by female scientists, as was seen in the Athena Study. On the other hand, this positive effect might be washed out by those female scientists who persist in emulating the ‘male model’ of work‒life imbalance. They may demoralize some of their hopeful female mentees, who can never ‒ nor do they wish to ‒ live up to these standards. Sometimes these standards are ratcheted up higher for women than for men, on the grounds that this is ‘toughening them up’ for the harsh world of real-life academia.

19.5 CONCLUSION: OVERCOMING GENDERED RESISTANCE IN ACADEMIC SCIENCE Who shall take the lead to end the ‘gender stall’ in academic STEM? In South Africa, it took a broad-based, mostly non-violent movement, combining active and passive resistance, elite and bottom-up actions, individual iconic leadership of Ghandi and Mandela, a global international decolonization wave bolstered by World War II service in India, but also the ‘black sash’ anti-apartheid women’s movement, to achieve political regime change. Broad-based ‘Me Too’ movements have swept across entertainment and technology industries, reaching into academia, disrupting inequities but not challenging structures that inhibit equality by their everyday performance. A female questioner at a Stanford University event, honoring retiring Clayman Institute of Gender Research Prof. Shelley Corell, noted to subdued laughter that internships in industry last for six months or a year, whereas in academia there is a ‘seven-year internship’. Questioning assumptions underlying the academic organization, and bringing to light their implicit gender biases, is a necessary step. The Corell (2017) thesis of ‘small wins’ works well in technology firms, even those with strong masculine cultures, given current scarcity of talent in the industry, and the salient need to recruit and promote effectively and efficiently. Under such stringent conditions, a moderate strategy suffices to produce conditions amenable to women’s advancement. In academia, however, an artificial surplus of PhDs has been produced as a result of systematic ‘gigging’ of the academic economy, through most hires taking place as adjuncts over the past several decades. Long before the founders

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 398

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender equity and equality ­399

of Uber and Lyft disrupted the taxi industry, these academics received minimal per course salaries, few if any benefits and nil job security. Thus, a more disruptive strategy is required to end academia’s gender stall than industry’s. MIT took leadership in university‒industry relations, with universities across the US isomorphically following its classic compromise of a onefifth rule for external engagement, whether pecuniary or benevolent in nature. Similarly, Harvard took leadership in formulating tenure policy, with its seven-year model diffused domestically and, more recently, internationally. At present no clear gender leader can be identified, although Birkbeck, University of London, has a historical claim (see Chapter 1 in this volume) achieved in X-ray crystallography decades ago that earned the Bronze Athena, but not the Athena Silver or Gold. Gender equity and equality is a heterogeneous field with many modest models, but without a definitive role model, like MIT and Harvard, in their respective leadership spheres. Much has changed, yet much has not, in fraught university gender relations. Equity mandates removal of blockages to achievement, with parity of opportunity instituted. Equality focuses on outcomes, the principle that all share benefits, access, resources and positions. While gender equality is a long-sought objective, even gender equity is not yet realized in academic science, a field expected to be amenable to progress, since traditionally fewer complaints were received than from the humanities. University officials interpreted this difference as due to a better climate fostered by a presumptively universalistic science, rather than more numerous, betterorganized, female humanities academics. Such lacunae no longer exist, with the appearance of high-profile cases such as the two University of Chicago graduate students recently granted PhDs decades after experiencing extreme harassment (Kristoff, 2019). Such instances are likely a small sample of phalanxes of women driven from academia before attaining their goals. Providing a process to scale a remedy requires a project to systematically examine the experiences of women who left academia without PhDs. Who may undertake, and what institution will support, this recuperation task? Is the glass ‘half full’, emphasizing significant inroads made and progress achieved; or ‘half empty’, characterized by continuing resilient resistance to women’s full participation and issues to be addressed in academic science; or both, in tandem? Equity prioritizes enhanced process, exemplified by novel qualitative policies and practices; while equality demands reproducible results, assessable by quantitative metrics. Approaches to achieving equality often propose a ‘fix the woman’ solution based on the unstated premise of women assuming a traditional male role. A minority of women have

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 399

13/12/2019 15:47

400

Gender, science and innovation

been willing to make this adjustment and some have risen to high positions in science, but they are typically rejected as irrelevant role models by the majority of their female PhD students who are searching for, but only rarely find, women (and) men who provide a gender-neutral or ‘family-friendly’ model of science. In contrast, a focus on the organizational and structural level aims to ‘fix the system’: proponents ask how to best address institutionalized concealed and disguised gender inequities (Schmidt and Cacace, 2018). What actions can be taken to fix the broken pipeline? Can the academic filtration system be revised so that it does not discriminate? We have identified bias against women, sexual harassment and salary inequity as filter factors. Still remaining is also the childcare problem. Mothers (and fathers) need to be able to combine their career with their role in a family, which requires more flexibility in the pipeline. An international comparison shows alternatives to increase equity, equality and fairness in academia. Sweden reflects a role model for other countries. Today, more than 50 per cent of universities in Stockholm are led by a women, and women make up 28 per cent of all professors country-wide (Lundström, 2019). It should go without saying that failure to take full advantage of the creative potential in half the population is a competitive disadvantage; yet it is still worth repeating (Burke and Mattis, 2007). Rethinking scientific career paths and institutions to accommodate a broader range of persons than those ‒ women and men ‒ willing and able to follow the traditional male model is a priority for proponents of gender equity and equality in science. When an alternative female model is available for women and men, gender democracy in science, technology and innovation, as well as in the larger society, will be a reality. ‘Gender Satyagraha’, a confluence of bottom-up and top-down movements in academia and the larger society, must be inspirated to attain this objective (Gupta, 2019). When and if disruptive change occurs, it will likely be the result of academic leadership taken by a second- or third-ranking university, hiring clusters of accomplished female scientists in a Terman-like ‘steeples of excellence’ academic mobility strategy (Gillmor, 2004). And when the gates to the highly gender-restricted areas of elite academic science do finally open wide, it will no doubt be asserted by all that the ‘gender stall’ was merely a blip in the illustrious long march of women in to science. Accepted wisdom will doubtless be that it took relatively newly spawned female academic scientists sufficient acculturation time to achieve maturity before they could successfully climb traditionally daunting academic ladders. And then, in the fullness of time, there will come forth a revised narrative detailing the long-abandoned suppression strategies that in our time still deter women’s advancement.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 400

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender equity and equality ­401

REFERENCES ASA Footnotes (1992). Henry Etzkowitz and Mary Frank Fox receive major National Science Foundation grant. 20(3), 3. Bennett, M.J. (2004). Becoming interculturally competent. In J.S. Wurzel (ed.), Toward Multiculturalism: A Reader in Multicultural Education, Newton, MA: Intercultural Resource Corporation, pp. 62‒77. Berryman, S. (1983). Who will do science? Minority and female attainment of science and mathematics degrees: trends and causes. New York: Rockefeller Foundation. Blickenstaff, J.C. (2005). Women and science careers: leaky pipeline or gender filter? Gender and Education, 17(4), 369–86. Bohnet, I. (2016). What Works? Gender Equality by Design, 1st edn, Cambridge, MA, USA and London, UK: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Burke, R. and M. Mattis (2007). Women and Minorities in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics: Upping the Numbers, Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing. Cannady, M.A., E. Greenwald and K.N. Harris (2014). Problematizing the STEM pipeline metaphor: is the STEM pipeline metaphor serving our students and the STEM workforce? Science Education, 98(3), 443–60. Corell, S. (2017). Reducing gender biases in modern workplaces: a small wins approach to organizational change. Gender and Society, 31(6), 725–50. Dai, G., K. Yii Tang and K.P. De Meuse (2011). Leadership competencies across organizational levels: a test of the pipeline model. Journal of Management Development, 30(4), 366–80. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621711111126837. England, P. (2011). Reassessing the uneven gender revolution and its slowdown. Gender and Society, 25(1), 113–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243210391461. Erikson, E.H. (1950). Childhood and Society, New York: W.W. Norton & Co. Etzkowitz, H. and M. Ranga (2011). Gender dynamics in science and technology: from the ‘leaky pipeline’ to the ‘vanish box’. Cahiers économiques de Bruxelles / Brussels Economic Review, 54(2/3), 131‒47. Etzkowitz, H. and P. Stein (1978). The life spiral: human needs and adult roles. Journal of Economic and Family Issues, 1(4), 434‒46. Etzkowitz, H., C. Kemelgor, M. Neuschatz, et al. (1994). The paradox of critical mass for women in science. Science, 266(5182), 51‒4. Etzkowitz, H., C. Kemelgor and B. Uzzi (2000). Athena Unbound: The Advancement of Women in Science and Technology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fried, L. (2019). Personal communication to the first author, March. Fuhrmann, C.N., D.G. Halme, P.S. O’Sullivan and B. Lindstaedt (2011). Improving graduate education to support a branching career pipeline: recommendations based on a survey of doctoral students in the basic biomedical sciences. CBE ‒ Life Sciences Education, 10(3), 239–49. https://doi.org/10.1187/ cbe.11-02-0013. Gillmor, C. Stewart (2004). Fred Terman at Stanford: Building a Discipline, a University, and Silicon Valley. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Gupta, N. (2019). Women in Science and Technology: Confronting Inequalities. New Delhi: SAGE. Kayyem, J. (2012). The working moms debate. International Herald Tribune, 27 June, p. 8.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 401

13/12/2019 15:47

402

Gender, science and innovation

Kemelgor, C. (1989). Research groups in molecular biology: a study of normative change in academic science. Unpublished BA thesis, SUNY Purchase. Kloxin, A. (2019). Addressing the leaky pipeline through mentoring and support: a personal perspective. Nature Reviews Materials 4, 287–9. Kohler, R. (1994). Lords of the Fly: Drosophila Genetics and the Experimental Life, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Kristoff, N. (2019). Abused by her prof, then 5 decades to a PhD. New York Times, Sunday Review, 26 May, p. 11. Larmour, R. and D. Tener (2000). A study of gender imbalance in computer science education. 8th Annual Conference on Computer Science in Education. http:// citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.176.7881&rep=rep1&type= pdf. Lechman, E. (2019). Still ‘few, slow and low’? On the female dimension of technology, labour markets and economic activity: evidence for the period of 1990‒2017. Economics and Sociology, 12(1), 11‒38. Lundström, C. (2019).  White women. White nation. White cosmopolitanism: Swedish migration between the national and the global. NORA – Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research, 27(2), 96–111. DOI: 10.1080/08038740.2018.1 556226. McCook, A. (2013). Women in biotechnology: barred from the boardroom. Nature, 7 March, 495(7439), 25‒27. https://www.nature.com/articles/495025a. McGinn, K. (2000). Heidi Roizen. HBS Case Collection, Harvard Business School. Miller, W. (1971). Papers. Stanford University Archives. National Science Foundation (1998). Science and engineering indicators 1998 (NSB-98-1). www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind98/. Nevins, A. (1962). Origins of the land grant colleges and universities. Washington DC: Civil War Centennial Commission. Noble, D. (1992). A World Without Women: The Christian Clerical Culture of Western Science. New York: Knopf. Pell, A.N. (1996). Fixing the leaky pipeline: women scientists in academia. Journal of Animal Science, 74(11), 2843. https://doi.org/10.2527/1996.74112843x. Rose, D. (2018).  Citizens by Degree, Higher Education Policy and the Changing Gender Dynamics of American Citizenship. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rossiter, M. (1982). Women Scientists in America:  Struggles and Strategies to 1940. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Sandberg, S. and N. Scorell (2013). Lean In: Women, Work and the Will to Lead, London: WH Allen / Penguin. Schiebinger, L. (1989). The Mind Has No Sex? Women in the Origins of Modern Science, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Schiebinger, L. (1993). Nature’s Body: Gender in the Making of Modern Science, Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Schmidt, E. and M. Cacace (2018). Setting up a dynamic framework to activate gender equality. Science and Public Policy. scy059,  https://doi.org/10.1093/ scipol/scy059. Shapiro, D. (2017). US science PhD programmes still attract more men than women, except in biology and agricultural sciences. Nature, Blog. http://blogs.nature.com/ naturejobs/2017/05/08/gender-gap-in-us-science-phd-degrees-persists/. Shaw, A.K. and D.E. Stanton (2012). Leaks in the pipeline: separating demographic inertia from ongoing gender differences in academia. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 279(1743), 3736–41.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 402

13/12/2019 15:47



Gender equity and equality ­403

Sime, R. (1996). Lise Meitner: A Life in Physics, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Wolfinger, N.H., M.A. Mason and M. Goulden (2009). Stay in the game: gender, family formation and alternative trajectories in the academic life course. Social Forces, 87(3), 1591–1621. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.0.0182. Zuckerman, H. and R. Merton (1972). Age, ageing and age structure in science. In M. Riley, M. Johnson and A. Foner (eds), Ageing and Society, Vol. 3, New York: Russell Sage Foundation, pp. 292‒356. Zuckerman, H., J.R. Cole and J.T. Bruer (1991). The Outer Circle: Women in the Scientific Community, New York: Norton.

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 403

13/12/2019 15:47

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 404

13/12/2019 15:47

Index academic capitalism 16–17 academic medicine, see career paths of women in academia, embedded case study approach; feminization of medical profession; resistance to women in academic medicine academic science, gender equity and equality in 380–81 academia as gendered 381–6 gender-status conundrum 386 overcoming gendered resistance 398–400 policy 392–8 principles of 396 stages and phases of women’s advancement and recession in science 386–92 accountability 19 achievement mentoring 200–202 administrators, policies for 75 ADVANCE program (United States National Science Foundation, NSF) 2, 58, 60–61, 78–9, 387 African Americans 329, 331–2, 334, 343, 345 age, and productivity 397 alternative career models 383–5, 395, 397–8, 400 analytical mentoring model 200 angel investors 309 asexual reproduction 382 Association for Women in Science (AWIS) 60, 372, 373 Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) 362, 364–5, 375–6, 394 Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) Women Inventors Committee (WIC) 247, 361–2 Barriers subcommittee 366–9

concluding discussion 375–7 efforts to engage AUTM members and other organizations 365–6 literature review, patenting and gender 363–4 Metrics subcommittee 369–72 origins of 363 subcommittees 366–75 Synergistic Organizations subcommittee 372–5 technology transfer 362 Athena SWAN 8, 10, 11, 128–9, 136–7, 138–9 automated technologies 363–4 Baby Boomer Generation, and culture of academic medicine 132–3 Balance Programme 35–7 Balance Project (University of Agder, UiA) 36, 37–41 conclusions 53–4 disjunction between what is needed and what is rewarded 45–7 mapping and analysing ruling relations 41–4, 46–7 mapping from standpoint of female academics 44–5 reproducing or challenging gendered quality regimes? 51–3 ruling relations of gender 49–51 ruling relations of quality 47–9 Bayh–Dole Act 348 Beauvoir, Simone de 109, 119 benchmarking 19 biological clock 384 biomedical research centres (BRCs) 128 Birkbeck, University of London 2–3, 6, 8–9, 399 Athena SWAN 8, 10, 11 ­405

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 405

13/12/2019 15:47

406

Gender, science and innovation

TRIGGER project 9–11, 16, 250–51 see also commercialization of research, gender differences in business learning networks, see learning networks for female entrepreneurs business performance and survival rates, and learning network support 186 capitalism academic 16–17 and feminism 43 care responsibilities 9, 29, 30, 49, 65–6, 71, 84, 97–8, 120–22, 124, 130–31, 384, 397 career breaks 384, 397 career models alternative 383–5, 395, 397–8, 400 ‘masculine’ 50–51, 85, 382, 383, 391, 393, 395, 398 career paths of women in academia, embedded case study approach 82–3 analysing life histories from a meso– macro perspective 95–9 conclusions 99–102 findings: evidence from triangulation 91–9 interpreting statistical evidence from a micro–meso perspective 91–5 research design and sub-unit of analysis selection 87–91 theoretical framework 83–7 Carnegie Mellon University, closing computer science gender gap 7–8 Chief Medical Officer (CMO, UK) 128 childcare provision 73, 140 childcare responsibilities 9, 29, 30, 49, 65–6, 71, 84, 97–8, 120–22, 124, 130–31, 384, 397 Cold War 389 collaboration, see gender and international collaborations in science and technology (S&T) community building and policy agenda setting; R&D teams, gender diversity in and impact on external collaboration

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 406

collaborative networks 222–3, 227, 228–9, 230–35 commercialization barriers 366–9 gender data tracking 369–72 of patents 354–5 path to, via STEM fields 331 commercialization of research, gender differences in 242–3, 333, 336–7 conclusions 256–7 findings and discussion 252–5 organizational context 247–50, 257 study context and methodology 250–52 theory and practice 243–50 women and commercialization 243–7 see also spin-off creation, gender differences in intentions commitment to work 48–9 communication, interpersonal 287, 297 ‘communities of practice’ 172, 184 community building, see gender and international collaborations in science and technology (S&T) community building and policy agenda setting competition in academia 2, 3, 24–5, 27, 48, 49 computer science, gender imbalance in 6–9, 218, 331, 358, 386 contract types, Italy 101 copyrighting 336 culture, as ecosystem component 154, 162–3 culture of academic medicine 132–3 culture change 136–40 psychological perspectives on 133–6 Davies, Dame Sally 128 decision-making in groups, and diversity 298 developmental mentoring approach 191–2 Diana Project 334 disciplinary dimension of gender blindness 204, 205 discrimination, gender 5, 17–18, 119, 122–3, 130, 386, 395

13/12/2019 15:47



Index ­407

diversity 283, 297–8, 331 gender diversity, literature review 283–6 see also R&D teams, gender diversity in and impact on external collaboration Diversity Project 341 ‘double presence’ 93, 117 early career academics ‘sticky floor’ 85, 86 ‘vanish box’ 86, 96, 380, 390–92 early career academics, gender equality and neoliberalism 16–17 conclusions 31 current discourses 18 difficulty in obtaining grants 22–3 gender differences 27–9 gender (in)equality in present higher education context 17–21 publication, centrality of 22, 23, 24–5 study 21–31 time pressures 25–7 types of early career scholars 23, 24 undervaluation of teaching 23–4 see also junior women in science and engineering economic inequality 364 ecosystems approach, see networking, gender and academia: ecosystems approach education attainment in science and technology (S&T), women 215–16, 218 and entrepreneurship 312, 332–3 gender (in)equality in present higher education context 17–21 and training, in STEM fields 331–2 embedded case study approach, see career paths of women in academia, embedded case study approach engagement mentoring 200–201 entrepreneurial ecosystem framework 150–51, 153, 154 entrepreneurial intention in female university students 305–7 background literature 307–12 conclusions 319–21, 323

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 407

empirical results 317–19, 320, 321, 322 gender differences in entrepreneurial intention 307–10 motivations to start-up new firm (empirical results) 320 obstacles to starting-up new firm (empirical results) 317–18, 321 sample and methodology 313–17 see also spin-off creation, gender differences in intentions entrepreneurial universities 261, 266 entrepreneurs, female 3–5; see also Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) Women Inventors Committee (WIC); commercialization of research, gender differences in; entrepreneurial intention in female university students; gender, race and entrepreneurship in United States; learning networks for female entrepreneurs; patenting in United States, trends and determinants of women in entrepreneurship definition of 328 and education 312, 332–3 faculty 338–9 and gender 3–4, 168, 171, 308, 333–4 graduate 306, 310 and knowledge 308–9 and networks 309, 373 student 338 and universities 310, 323, 337–9 Equal Credit Opportunity Act 339, 341 excellence, definition of 19, 23, 47, 48–9 faculty entrepreneurship 338–9 family commitments 9, 20, 26, 28–9, 30, 49, 63–6, 68–71, 84, 93, 96–8, 120–22, 124, 131, 134 family-friendly policies 71–4, 87, 140 female labour market participation 85, 364 feminist approaches critiques of gender equality agenda 42–4 gender and entrepreneurship 3–4

13/12/2019 15:47

408

Gender, science and innovation

feminization of medical profession conclusions 123–5 female students, current position 112–15, 130 health and gender 106–7 historical development of 109–13 retheorizing sex and gender 107–9 TRIGGER project and research at University of Pisa 107, 114, 115–23 financial motivations for entrepreneurial activity 265, 270–72, 276 ‘fixing the woman’ 84, 135, 191–2, 384, 399–400 funding and finance as ecosystem components 152–3, 154 for entrepreneurship 5, 267–8, 310, 334–5, 336–7, 339–40, 341, 342–3 grants 22–3, 24, 25, 76, 341 gender ruling relations of 49–53, 54 and status 386, 392, 394–5 gender, race and entrepreneurship in United States closing gender gap 337–42 conclusions and further work 343, 345 development of intellectual property 335–7 education and training in STEM fields 331–2 private sector and private–public sector partnerships 340–42 recommendations 342–3, 344 socio-historical perspective 328–9 STEM and entrepreneurship in United States 329–37 United States government interventions/initiatives 337–40, 341 gender and international collaborations in science and technology (S&T) community building and policy agenda setting 215–17 background 217–18 collaborative productivity stimulus 222–3

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 408

conclusions 235–7 data and methods 226–9 findings and discussion 229–35 policy issues and agendas 223–6 S&T gender research 218, 219, 223–6, 227–8, 229–37 theoretical issues 218–22 gender blindness 204–5 gender conflict 123 gender discrimination 5, 17–18, 119, 122–3, 130, 386, 395 gender diversity, literature review 283–6 gender diversity in R&D teams, see R&D teams, gender diversity in and impact on external collaboration gender dominance 287–9, 298–9 gender equality agenda, feminist critiques of 42–4 hope for future 125 in Norway 35–6, 37, 38–9, 45 ‘stalled revolution’ 1, 381, 393 see also academic science, gender equity and equality in; early career academics, gender equality and neoliberalism Gender Equality Action Plans (GEAPs) 192–3 gender inequality, ‘lean-in feminist’ subject 43 gender mainstreaming 221, 224, 226 gender medicine 109–10 gender roles 30, 121, 122 and entrepreneurship 308, 333–4 responsibilities (at work) assigned to women 27–9, 46, 49–51, 93–4, 101–2 socialization of 83–4, 95–7 gender stereotypes 395 gendered evaluation 205–6, 208–9 gendered identity 206, 207 gendered societal relations 219–20, 221–2, 225 GENOVATE@UNINA case study, see mentoring relationships, gender perspective in (GENOVATE@ UNINA case study) ‘gigging’ of academic economy 398–9 glass ceiling 86–7, 334

13/12/2019 15:47



Index ­409

Glass Ceiling Index (GCI) 88–9, 124 globalization 220, 221–2 graduate entrepreneurship 306, 310 grants applying for, and gender 24 difficulty in obtaining, early career academics 22–3 increasing competition for 25 issues for junior and senior women 76 Women in STEM and Entrepreneurship (WISE) Grant Program 341 higher education, gender (in)equality in present context 17–21 Higher Education Business and Community Interaction Survey (HEBCI) 250, 251 hiring committees 381 household tasks and responsibilities, gender distribution of 9, 93, 96–8, 131 human capital 244–5, 311 identity early career academics 20–21 female 109 gendered 206, 207 and judgements of others 133 social 200, 201, 298 work 134 identity-fit with organization 133–4 identity mentoring 200–201, 202–3, 207 INSPIRE Women Act 340, 341 institutional ethnography 41–2 institutionalist perspective 221–2 institutions, and entrepreneurship 310 instrumental mentoring approach 191–2 intention, entrepreneurial, see entrepreneurial intention in female university students; spin-off creation, gender differences in intentions intentions, psychological theories 263–4, 307–8 International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship (IJGE) 3

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 409

intersectionality 59–61, 64, 345 invention disclosure 361, 362 inventors, female, historical trends (United States) 349–51, 356 junior women in science and engineering 61, 78, 79 facing similar issues as senior women 68–71 mentoring 74–5, 76, 197, 198–9, 202–3 policies for 71–6 understanding issues facing 62–8 see also early career academics, gender equality and neoliberalism knowledge and entrepreneurship 308–9 production, social organization of 222 labour market participation, women 85, 364 ‘leaky pipeline’ 1, 85, 86, 116–17, 218, 391 ‘lean-in feminist’ subject 43 learning networks for female entrepreneurs 168–9 conclusions, implications and future considerations 185–7 impact of structures and processes on sustained engagement 180, 181–2 networks and female entrepreneurs 169–72 positive effects of 178–85 recruitment and formation process 172–7 studying/data gathering 177–8, 179 levels of analysis 12, 82, 83–5, 381 life course approach 82, 85, 383 male breadwinner model 29, 98 Manhattan Project 388–9 ‘masculine career model’ 50–51, 85, 382, 383, 391, 393, 395, 398 masculine environments 134 ‘masculinization’ of women 124 Medical Association (Italy) 112–13

13/12/2019 15:47

410

Gender, science and innovation

medicine and medical profession, see career paths of women in academia, embedded case study approach; feminization of medical profession; resistance to women in academic medicine mentoring 74–5, 76, 342 Athena SWAN 8, 10, 11 mentoring relationships, gender perspective in (GENOVATE@ UNINA case study) 189–90, 192–4 approaches to mentoring 190–92 assessment process 199–205 conclusions 208–10 gender dimension in programme evaluation 205–8, 209, 210 implementation of programme 195, 197–9 rationale for programme 194–5 Million Women Mentors (MWM) 342 NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) 340 National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship (NACIE) 337–8 National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) 128 National Science Foundation (NSF) 58, 59–61, 78–9, 389–90 National Women’s Business Council (NWBC) 340 neoliberalism, and feminist critiques 42–3 neoliberalism and early career academics, see early career academics, gender equality and neoliberalism networking, gender and academia: ecosystems approach 146–7 adopting ecosystems approach 162–3 background literature 147–50 barriers to networking 149–50, 157–8, 161 benefits of networking 158–9, 161–3 compliance components 154 conclusions 163–4 culture components 154

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 410

data and methods 155–7 discussion 161–3 findings 157–61 future research 165 gender and networking 148–9 hard components 151–3 networks and network structures 147–8 role of networking within academic ecosystem 159–61 soft components 153 theoretical framework 150–54 networks collaborative 222–3, 227, 228–9, 230–35 and commercialization of research 245–6, 247, 253, 254–5, 256–7, 333 difficulties for women 67–8, 149–50, 157–8, 161 and entrepreneurship 309, 373 hierarchy and geography 246 ‘old boys’ network’ 87, 169 and patenting 335–6, 352 peer support 172 R&D teams, networking 286–7 for women 135 see also learning networks for female entrepreneurs Norway Balance Programme 35–7 gender equality in 35–6, 37, 38–9, 45 higher education sector 37, 38, 39 see also Balance Project (University of Agder, UiA) Norwegian Research Council 37 ‘old boys’ network’ 87, 169 open innovation (OI), see R&D teams, gender diversity in and impact on external collaboration ‘organizational fit’ 191 parental leave 74, 131, 140 part-time working, women 131, 135 patenting in United States, trends and determinants of women in 335–7, 343, 348–9 conclusions 358–9 determinants 352–8

13/12/2019 15:47



Index ­411

discipline-based gender differences 353–4 geographic patterns and future research possibilities 356–8 international evidence of gender differences 355–6 patent to commercialization 354–5 role of networks and experience 352–3 trends 349–51 see also Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) Women Inventors Committee (WIC) patents and patenting 248, 249, 251, 252, 254, 289, 335–7, 343 peer support networks 172 permanent positions, securing 22–3, 100–102, 383 ‘pipeline’ model 1, 380, 382, 383, 390, 394 ‘leaky pipeline’ 1, 85, 86, 116–17, 218, 391 policy agenda setting, see gender and international collaborations in science and technology (S&T) community building and policy agenda setting policy and regulatory frameworks 154, 163 Professional Opportunities for Women in Research and Education (POWRE) 58, 62–3, 79 professors in academic medicine 130 career paths of women case study 91, 92–5, 98, 100–102 feminization of medical profession case study 116, 117, 118–19 retirement 79 underrepresentation of women 39–40, 45–6, 189, 194–5, 196, 250, 385 Promoting Women in Entrepreneurship Act 340, 341 publication centrality of 22, 23, 24–5, 48 languages used 229, 230 lower rates for women 7, 222

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 411

and ‘masculine career model’ 50, 51 and policy development 227 published scholarship, gender in 3–4 quality, ruling relations of 47–9, 51–3, 54 race, and entrepreneurship, see gender, race and entrepreneurship in United States R&D teams, gender diversity in and impact on external collaboration 282–3 conclusions 299–300 data and methodology 290–91 discussion 296–9 findings 291–6 hypothesis development 286–9 literature review 283–6 Spanish context 289 regional economic development 339 regulatory frameworks 154, 163 reputation-oriented motivations for entrepreneurial activity 265, 270–72, 276 resilience 135 resistance to women in academic medicine 11–12, 128–9 conclusions 137, 140 culture change 136–7, 138–40 culture of academic medicine 132–3 entering academic medicine, work– life balance and leaving 130–32 psychological perspectives on culture 133–6 responsibilities (at work) assigned to women 27–9, 46, 49–51, 93–4, 101–2 role of scientists, expectations of 84 ‘saying no’ 43–4, 46, 49–50 science and engineering, women in 58, 78–80 policies for junior women 71–6 policies for senior women 73, 76–8 similar issues for junior and senior women 68–71 supporting 59–61 understanding issues facing senior women 61–8

13/12/2019 15:47

412

Gender, science and innovation

scientific method 108 ‘scissor effect’ 116, 117–18, 194–5, 196 ‘second glass ceiling’ 334 segregation, horizontal and vertical 88–9, 91–3, 194, 195, 196 self-belief 254 self-confidence 133–4, 308, 311 self-efficacy 264, 266–7, 311, 318 Self Theory 133 senior women in science and engineering 60–61, 78–80 facing similar issues as junior women 68–71 mentoring 74–5, 76, 198–9, 202–3 policies for 73, 76–8 understanding issues facing 61–8 sense of (not) belonging, women 135 She Figures 2015 122, 123–4 She Figures 2018 189 ‘shift presence’ 93, 117 Silicon Valley 5, 6, 8 Small Business Association Microloan Program 342 social capital 148, 245 social construction of science 83–4, 85, 204 social development-oriented motivations for entrepreneurial activity 265, 270–72, 276, 314, 315, 317–18, 333 social identity 200, 201, 298 social justice 221 social sensitivity 287, 298 social/societal relations 42, 219–20, 221–2, 225 socialization of gender and gender roles 83–4, 95–7, 122, 363–4 socio-spatial network analysis 231–5 Soviet Union 389 spin-off creation, gender differences in intentions 261–3 conclusions 277–8 control-related variables 266–7, 273–4, 276 discussion 275–6 influencing factors 266–8, 274–5 intention to create a spin-off (research results) 269–70 perceived behavioural control and self-efficacy 266–7

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 412

previous experience outside academia 266, 272–3, 274, 275–6 research method 268–9 research results 269–75 self-evaluation of capabilities 267–8, 274, 275, 276 willingness and motivations 263–5, 270–72, 276 see also commercialization of research, gender differences in ‘stalled revolution’ 1, 381, 393 Stanford University, closing computer science gender gap 8 Stanford (University) Latino Entrepreneurship Initiative (SLEI) 342 status, and gender 386, 392, 394–5 stereotypes of women 112 ‘sticky floor’ 85, 86 student entrepreneurship 338 success, styles of 85 Sustainable Learning Networks in Ireland and Wales (SLNIW), see learning networks for female entrepreneurs teaching, undervaluation of 23–4 technology transfer 262, 361–2, 392 Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) 247, 337, 339, 357, 362, 363, 365, 368, 369, 370–72, 373–4, 375–6, 392 tenure clock 65, 68, 69, 73–4, 86, 140, 384, 385, 397 theory of planned behaviour (TPB) 264, 266, 307 theory of self-efficacy (TSE) 264, 266 time dimension of gender blindness 204–5 time pressures 25–7 trademarking 336 training and development, and learning networks 173–4 transformative capacity 206–7 transformative mentoring 207, 208–9 transparency 75, 86, 100 TRIGGER (Transforming Institutions by Gendering Contents and Gaining Equality in Research)

13/12/2019 15:47



Index ­413

project 9–11, 16, 82, 114, 115, 118, 147, 155, 250–51 ‘triple burden’, women 288 ‘two career problem’ 63–5, 66–7, 69–70, 71, 74 ‘two earner family’ model 42 underrepresentation of women in entrepreneurship 3–4 in science and technology (S&T) 216, 217–18, 220, 223–4, 227, 243–4, 285, 289, 331–2, 335 in (senior) academia 17, 18–19, 39–40, 45–6, 189, 194–5, 196, 250, 385, 387 UNINA, see mentoring relationships, gender perspective in (GENOVATE@UNINA case study) universities athletic programmes, United States 385–6 as ecosystem component 151–2 entrepreneurial 261, 266 and entrepreneurship 310, 323, 337–9 introduction of American system 397–8 university–industry collaboration 339 University of Agder (UiA), Balance Project, see Balance Project (University of Agder, UiA) University of Pisa, see career paths of women in academia, embedded case study approach; feminization of medical profession

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 413

US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) 349, 373 ‘vanish box’ 86, 96, 380, 390–92 Vassar College 388 venture capital funding/industry 5, 342–3 ‘venture efficacy’ 267–8 Women in Science and Technology (WIST) 391 Women in STEM and Entrepreneurship (WISE) Grant Program 341 Women Inventors Committee (WIC), see Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) Women Inventors Committee (WIC) Women Who Code 342 Women’s Business Ownership Act 339–40, 341 women’s health 109–10, 364 work experience 308, 309, 352–3 work identity 134 work–life balance 1–2, 20, 25–6, 28–9, 30, 48, 49, 63–6, 68–71, 84, 93, 96, 124, 130–31, 267, 392, 397–8 workforce representation in science and technology (S&T), women 215, 220–21 working hours 98–9, 122, 133, 134, 140, 391 world polity 220, 221–2, 236 World War II 388–9, 392 ‘Yentl syndrome’ 110

13/12/2019 15:47

M4834-LAWTON-SMITH_9781786438966_t.indd 414

13/12/2019 15:47