The curious under‐representation of women impact case leaders: Can we disengender inequality regimes?

Abstract

Universities are increasingly expected to demonstrate the wider societal impacts of academic research. Yet women management scholars were disproportionately under‐represented in leading impact cases in the UK's REF (Research Excellence Framework) 2014. An analysis of 395 REF impact cases for business and management studies with an identifiable lead author revealed that only 25 per cent were led by women, of which 54 per cent were sole authored. Based on 12 in‐depth interviews with women impact case writers, we use Acker's inequality regimes framework to understand invisible and socially constructed gendering of the UK's policy that is designed to evaluate research impact. In a knowledge‐intensive workplace dominated by men, the shape and degree of gendered bases of inequality, systemic practices, processes and controls result in sub‐optimal talent management and gendered knowledge. We call for university leaders to be proactive in addressing barriers that fail to support or recognize women's leadership of research impact.

Implications for HRD Practice and Impact in the COVID-19 Era

“…As editors, we look forward to on-going debates about the implications and impact of HRD concepts. This includes from scholars whose own research impact is underrepresented (Davies et al, 2020) and from parts of the world where few authors publish in HRDR. We also welcome theorizing HRD in contexts beyond the usual suspects such as micro and social enterprises.…”

Wirkungen in der partizipativen Gesundheitsforschung: Eine Einordnung in die Diskurse zum Forschungsimpact

“…Die [19]. Durch diese Verzerrung könnten sich zudem negative Auswirkungen auf die Karrierechancen von Frauen und Nachwuchsforscher*innen ergeben.…”

“…Um die Wirkungen einer Forschungsinstitution für das REF darzustellen, werden Wissenschaftler*innen von ihrer Universität ausgewählt. Auswertungen der REF-Fallstudien aus 2014 zeigten, dass diese – unabhängig vom Geschlechterverhältnis der Akademiker*innen in den Fakultäten – in der Regel von älteren Männern eingereicht wurden [ 19 ]. Durch diese Verzerrung könnten sich zudem negative Auswirkungen auf die Karrierechancen von Frauen und Nachwuchsforscher*innen ergeben.…”

Knowledge hustlers: Gendered micro‐politics and networking in UK universities

“…quality and quantity) of individual academics, departments and universities in the UK. In turn, such exercises impact the day‐to‐day working lives of academics, as well as their career trajectories (Willmott, 1995; Henkel, 1999; Knights and Richards, 2003; Davies et al ., 2020). There is a consistent and widespread lack of women in the upper echelons of the academy, and only around 23% of professors are female (Fletcher, 2007; Higher Education Statistics Agency, 2015).…”

“…This occurs both nationally—where 67% of men are selected vs. 51% of women—and in the case study university, where only around 30% of staff submitted were women (confidential REF submissions data from HR department of the case university). Although nationally the proportion of women submitted has increased (from 48%) in RAE 2008 (HEFCE, 2015), women continue to be under‐represented in many aspects of research and evaluation, such as in impact case studies (Davies et al ., 2020). This article contributes to current understandings of the linkages between organisational hierarchy, inequality regimes and power play, where the latter refers to informal power games such as gendered informal networks, homo‐social reproduction (Kanter, 1977) and homophily (Ibarra, 1993) in higher education.…”