In this paper we aim to understand if gender makes a difference in the path to promotion to full professor in Italian universities, drawing on data from 2013 to 2016. The new promotion system pursuant Gelmini Law (210/2010) in Italy implies to go through two steps. First, they have to obtain the national ASN system (fit-for-the-role national filter), based on merit measured via bibliometric and non-bibliometric indicators. This step does not mean to get a position, it only means to be able to apply for it at institutional level. We believe that discrimination based on gender may happen especially at institutional level as in comparison to ASN there is less transparency and more autonomy at institutional level. It is also hypothesised that discrimination based on gender may differ according to the percentage of women already at full professor rank by disciplinary field. We investigate gender inequality using a binary variable (promoted or not promoted along 2013 until 2016) controlling by scientific productivity, normalised number of available vacancies, result of national research evaluation (VQRdepartment of candidate's affiliation), age, current rank-and-file position. Multilevel logistic regression demonstrates that among those who obtained the ASN and at parity of other conditions, men have around 24% more probability to be promoted at parity of scientific production, which reveals a relevant gender discrimination. Our findings have implications on theory about inequality regimes and might serve to reflect on how to improve practices at institutional level.

This paper focuses on peer learning as a process to develop PhD students' disciplinary and scholarly skills. PhD students' experience is not usually framed in terms of peer learning, because peer learning is more often studied and applied at the undergraduate level. This contribution builds on an ethnography of a research team to show the potential of peer learning over the course of the doctorate. A socio-constructivist conceptualisation of learning, inspired by activity theory, guides the analysis. The contribution of this paper is threefold. First, it proposes an original definition of learning that highlights process and practice, and shows how to work with it. Second, it demonstrates how peer learning unfolds in the interplay between structured and emergent types of interactions. Third, it provides scholars with insights into the conditions facilitating peer learning and stimulates debate around the initiatives that institutions can put in place to support PhD students.

Drawing on literature conceptualising leadership as a discursive accomplishment, this paper defines leadership as leadership work: a process unfolding through talk, and depending on a unique dynamic among the resources that participants bring to an interaction, and the ability of the participants to creatively mobilise these resources to perform the task at hand. Leadership work can be understood through the analysis of how individuals position themselves and others in an interaction. Data from an ethnographic study of an academic research team support our arguments. The paper contributes to the literature on leadership as a process by demonstrating that positioning is not only necessary for leadership to unfold, but it also allows a more nuanced analysis of leadership work, by opening researchers' eyes to the variety of resources involved in this process.

PurposeThe study seeks to reduce the blurriness remaining around the value that HRM can bring to innovation in the specific context of start‐ups, it advocates that the early adoption of appropriate HRM practices, can act as a catalyst for innovation because they constitute a powerful means to systematically promote and facilitate employees' innovative behaviours.Design/methodology/approachIn the aim of complementing the existing quantitative work, this paper employs a multiple case study approach to explore the role of HRM in fostering employees' innovative work behaviour in four Tunisian tech companies.FindingsThe study found substantial support for the importance of establishing a work environment for learning where employees can build their innovative capacities by upgrading their knowledge and skills through both formal and informal methods. Work autonomy and freedom are found to be essential parts of this environment. Workspace design that takes into account employees' comfort and the collaborative nature of their work, also stands out as a major contributor to innovative work behaviour.Originality/valueThe adopted qualitative approach enabled a grasp of the less apparent aspects underpinning the HRM and innovation relationship in start‐ups. “Ownership of space” is revealed as a key element of the innovation-supportive work environment. By having a feeling of control on the workspace, employees can develop a sense of ownership towards the organisation which enhances their eagerness to exert innovation efforts. It also demonstrated that developing an overly creative workforce can turn into a source of stagnation which can be mitigated by cultivating “an environment for idea ownership”.

ABSTRACT. This paper aims at reviewing literature on mentoring in academia, with a focus on mentoring to enhance women's careers. A significant gender imbalance in science persists, and mentoring has been recognized as an important instrument for fostering academic women's careers and addressing such imbalance. However, often the benefits of mentoring are taken for granted. This review aims to unpack the concept of mentoring, understand which trends characterize the mentoring literature, and analyze the evidence; moreover, it aims to discover potential gaps and propose a model to guide future research. A systematic approach is undertaken: four relevant search engines, covering more disciplines, are browsed to look for empirical studies on mentoring academic women from 1990 to March 2017. The review shows that there are some problems. First, there is no agreement on the definition of mentoring. Then, often studies are poorly grounded from a theoretical and conceptual perspective. In addition to the dominating research stream, focused on the benefits for the mentee, three other streams are consolidating: impact on the mentors, the role of group mentoring, and mentoring as an instrument to change institutions. At the end, we propose a model to guide future studies built on a longitudinal perspective.