Content uploaded by Giovanna Declich
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Giovanna Declich on Jan 25, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
TRIGGERING INSTITUTIONAL
CHANGE TOWARDS GENDER
EQUALITY IN SCIENCE
Final Guidelines of the TRIGGER Project
Giovanna Declich and Luciano d’Andrea
with TRIGGER partners
22
Acknowledgements
These Guidelines, drafted by Giovanna Declich and Luciano d’Andrea,
of ASDO (Italy), are the result of a collective endeavour which
benefited from the contribution of many individuals and institutions,
both TRIGGER partners, mentioned in the inside back cover, and
representatives of European consortia implementing projects aiming
at structural change toward gender equality.
A warm thank goes to those who accepted to share the reflection
leading to these guidelines, participating in seminars, making
themselves available for interviews on their own experience and
providing documents on the issues dealt with. They are Uduak
Archibong, Bradford University (United Kingdom); Silvana Badaloni,
University of Padua (Italy); Inge Bleijenbergh, Radboud University of
Nijmegen (The Netherlands); Rossella Bozzon, University of Trento
(Italy); Barbara De Micheli, G.G. Brodolini Foundation (Italy); Elena
Del Giorgio, University of Milan (Italy); Eileen Drew, Trinity College
of Dublin (Ireland); Daniela Falcinelli, University of Milan (Italy);
Daniela Ferri, B. Kessler foundation (Italy); Marco Filippozzi, B.
Kessler foundation (Italy); Maxime Forest, Science Po (France);
Nazira Karodia, University of Wolverhampton (United Kingdom);
Anne Pepin, CNRS (France); Lorenza Perini, University of Padua
(Italy); Barbara Poggio, University of Trento (Italy); Minna Salminen
Karlsson, University of Uppsala (Sweden); Maria Sangiuliano,
University of Venice (Italy).
Last but not least, a special appreciation is due to the members
of the TRIGGER International Board of Scientific Advisors, who
supported the project with their advice and suggestions. They are:
Lotte Bailyn, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute
of Technology (USA), Maria João Marcelo Curto, Laboratório
Nacional de Energia e Geologia, LNEG (Portugal); Stefan Fuchs,
Institute für Arbeitsmarkt-und Berufsforschung – IAB (Germany);
Alice Hogan, Independent Higher Education Consultant and Inaugural
Program Director of the ADVANCE Program of the National Science
Foundation - NSF (USA); Dalia Satkovskiene, Faculty of Physics,
Vilnius University (Lithuania).
The project leading to these results has received funding from the
European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7 2007-2013)
under the Grant Agreement n. 611034 and from IGRUE – Inspectorate
General for Financial Relations with the European Union, Ministry of
Economy and Finance - Italy
Legal notice
The views expressed in this publication are the sole responsibility of
the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European
Union. The Union is not liable for any use that may be made of the
information contained therein.
Trigger Teams
Department for Equal Opportunities
Michele Palma (Team leader)
Tiziana Zannini
Eugenia Gammarrota
Marino Di Nardo
Elena Falcomatà
ASDO Assembly of Women for Development
and the Struggle against Social Exclusion
Giovanna Declich (Team leader)
Marina Cacace
Luciano d’Andrea
Federico Luigi Marta
Giovanna Murari
IRS Institute for Social Research
Flavia Pesce (Team leader)
Antonio Bucci
UNIPI University of Pisa
Rita Biancheri (Team leader)
Silvia Cervia
Maria Grazia Ricci
VSCHT University of Chemistry and Technology, Prague
Anna Mittnerova (Team leader)
Katerina Grecova
Pavla Smejkalova
Kamila Zdenkova
ISAS Institute of Sociology of the Czech Academy of Science
Marcela Linkova (Team leader)
Hana Viznerova
Blanka Nyklova
Marta Vohlidalova
BBK The Birkbeck College - University of London
Helen Lawton Smith (Team leader)
Viviana Meschitti
Emma Curry
Jeanne LeRoux
Mark Panton
Colette Henry
UPD Université Paris Diderot
Anne Kupiec (Team leader)
Rachida Lemmaghti
Sophie Lhenry
Tania Lejbovicz
Marine Auguste
UPM Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
Inés Sánchez de Madariaga (Team leader)
Inés Novella Abril
Paloma Garcia Maroto
Mercedes del Río Merino
3
CONTENTS
Foreword I
Executive summary III
Introduction pag. 1
AREA 1 - Transformational agent pag. 9
1. Accessing expertise pag. 10
2. Reputation building pag. 13
3. Organisational embedment pag. 15
4. Securing staff and resources pag. 17
Transformational agent - Key issues pag. 19
AREA 2 - Activation and mobilisation pag. 21
5. Scientific recognition pag. 22
6. Political backing pag. 25
7. Creating space for engagement pag. 28
8. Mobilisation of pro-women actors pag. 31
9. Active involvement of men pag. 33
10. Implementation backing pag. 36
Activation and mobilisation - Key issues pag. 39
AREA 3 - Making an impact pag. 41
11. Self-reflexive process pag. 42
12. Gender-sensitive communication pag. 45
13. Gender-sensitive education and training pag. 48
14. Action plan tailoring process pag. 51
15. Policy integration pag. 54
16. External backing pag. 58
Making an impact - Key issues pag. 61
AREA 4 - Sustainability pag. 63
17. Inclusion of gender in monitoring systems pag. 64
18. Inclusion of gender in scientific excellence pag. 66
19. Inclusion of gender considerations in service provision pag. 68
20. Inclusion of gender in organisational standards pag. 71
21. Inclusion of gender in an organisation’s structure and mission pag. 74
Sustainability - Key issues pag. 77
Selected resources pag. 78
Appendix pag. 80
TRIGGERING INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE
TOWARDS GENDER EQUALITY IN SCIENCE
Final Guidelines of the TRIGGER Project
44
5
FOREWORD
The educational and occupational segregation of women, who traditionally work in specific sectors and in less
prestigious positions than men, is a persisting phenomenon also in science and technology. With its historical
roots, this phenomenon is closely linked to prejudices according to which women are by nature more gifted at
literary and linguistic subjects than at science and mathematics. Still today such stereotypes are difficult to
be eradicated in the societies and their educational systems, both in Europe and in the rest of the world, and
continue to be present, often in a hidden and unconscious manner, also in universities and research centres.
Among the main expressions of a gender gap starting already in childhood, particularly worth mentioning is
the low percentage of girls feeling encouraged to choose scientific studies, notwithstanding the overall better
performance of girls in all levels of education and the emergence of excellent women scientists in all fields
of knowledge. In the European universities, women represent 55% of students and almost 60% of graduates.
However, only 21% of them reach top academic positions. The number of women achieving such levels seems
to be even lower if we consider the sectors of physics, mathematics, engineering and technology, where the
total number of women graduates remains smaller compared to men. In the scientific field, therefore, we can
observe many of the exclusion and inequality aspects affecting women also in other sectors of their political,
economic and social life.
It has been almost twenty years now since the European Union first elaborated specific policies aimed at
combating such inequalities. In this scenario, over the years, the Italian Government, through the Department
for Equal Opportunities of the Italian Presidency of the Council of Ministers, has been strongly committed to
promoting significant actions to both combat gender stereotypes in education and facilitate women’s access
to and careers in science and technology, with a view to avoiding the huge waste of talents in strategic sectors
for the economic growth of our countries.
Concerning the access to scientific education, among other initiatives, the Italian Government funded
numerous projects submitted by primary and lower secondary schools allowing male and female students to
get closer to scientific subjects through an innovative experimental approach which envisaged, inter alia, the
implementation of lab activities on coding and educational robotics, interactive exercises on mathematics,
creation of digital apps, experiments in chemistry, physics, and science, and astronomical observation.
As for gender equality in scientific and technological research, after carrying out studies and experimentations
at the European level for many years, the Italian Government has also successfully implemented actions aimed
at promoting real structural changes within universities and research centres in order to remove the obstacles
preventing women from continuing and advancing their careers in science.
I
66
TRIGGER is part of this strategy. The Project, co-funded by the European Commission, has been focused on
the implementation of complex action plans tackling different aspects of gender inequalities concerning the
working environment, careers and the basis of science and technology itself. Through the Project, we have
integrated, by means of both managerial and scientific expertise and by adapting the interventions to the
geographical and institutional contexts, the three approaches that have characterized the international gender
equality policies until now, namely the empowerment of women researchers (fix the women), the change in
the organizations (fix the institutions), and the elimination of the gender stereotypes existing in research
contents and methods (fix the knowledge), in order to start long-lasting changes in five prestigious European
universities (Pisa University, Institute of Chemical Technology of Prague, Birkbeck College of the University of
London, Paris Diderot University, and Technical University of Madrid).
These guidelines are indeed the result of the hard work carried out over the last 4 years within the framework of
the TRIGGER Project. Based on a careful analysis of the implemented action plans as well as on a comparison
with other European projects, the document provides a picture of what might happen when trying to change
research institutions, of the resistance and obstacles which might be encountered and the related solutions
to be adopted to overcome them.
I wish for these guidelines to be a source of inspiration for all those who work in universities and research
centres, with a view to bravely starting concrete change to promote gender equality in science and research.
We are making huge strides, but in order to eradicate gender biases in science and remove the well-known
glass ceiling existing also in the scientific and technological sector, much remains to be done. All the relevant
stakeholders, including the single research institutions, need to play their part by designing virtuous pathways
for self-improvement and the optimisation of human capital.
Therefore, this is my encouraging message for all girls, young women, and researchers who want to become
protagonists of their own choices taking up the challenge to establish themselves in sectors that have been
inaccessible until the recent past.
Michele Palma
Director General
Department for Equal Opportunities
Italian Presidency of the Council of Ministers
II
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
III
Gender inequality in European science is an enduring problem, despite
almost twenty years of EC policies.
While being directly involved in actions geared at promoting gender
equality in its structure and programmes, the European Commission has
been also stimulating the governments of the EC member states, as well
as individual scientific institutions, scientific societies and networks,
and private organizations to adopt analogous measures at their level.
Starting from 2010, the EC launched a new strategy, further developed in
the following years throughout the 7th Framework Programme (2007-2013),
to support the practical implementation of structural change initiatives in
European research organisations. This strategy entailed the support to the
adoption of tailored gender action plans in the research institutions,
which continued in the Horizon 2020 programme (2014-2020).
The structural change strategy in practice
The emphasis given in the EC strategy to capitalising and learning
from each other favoured the accumulation of plenty of documents
concerning how to devise a gender action plan and how to design
individual initiatives (e.g., mentoring programmes, trainings for leaders
and committee members, teaching courses, communication campaigns),
plus guidelines on several issues relevant to gender equality in science
(e.g., gender aware communication, sexual harassment, hiring and
selection of human resources).
Thus, while there is a wide availability of information about how to
design and implement systemic actions and individual initiatives, what
is less developed is a common frame to interpret what actually
happens when a gender action plan is put into practice and why action
plans often don’t activate all the expected changes, even though other
unexpected changes occur.
Gender action plans and social change: focusing on the process
Institutional change towards gender equality is not a small feat.
Changing gender relationship in an organisation requires a deep
transformation of organisational practice and culture. What is at stake
is thus not only how to design and implement a set of actions, even
complex and innovative, but understanding how a process of change
can be triggered and fostered through an action plan, thus managing
the unplanned and the unexpected and pursuing institutional change,
when necessary, even by going beyond, modifying and/or abandoning
some of the planned actions. In fact, there is always a gap (even small)
between the plan as it is conceived and implemented, on one hand,
and the social process of change which is actually activated on the
other; and the success of an action plan depends largely upon how this
gap is managed in practice. These guidelines, addressed to whom is
interested in launching enduring gender equality initiatives in a scientific
institution, are meant to provide orientations and analyses to manage
what may actually happen when, in a given research organisation, a
gender action plan is launched (be it promoted by a specific project
team, the HR Department, the Rector, the Head of a department or other
internal stakeholders).
The TRIGGER project and its final guidelines
Being funded by the EC in the fourth wave of structural change projects,
besides implementing five gender action plans in as many European
universities, and promoting mutual learning initiatives inside and
outside the project consortium, the TRIGGER project devoted a particular
attention to the wider debate about how institutional change towards
gender equality can actually happen. The reflection has also involved
representatives of another eight EC-funded structural change “sister”
projects (EGERA, FESTA, GARCIA, GenderTime, GenisLab, GENOVATE,
INTEGER and STAGES, financed in the same time span of four years
and implemented between 2011 and 2017), who accepted to share their
experience in three workshops, to be interviewed and to provide further
documents to illustrate their cases.
Leveraging upon the outputs of the mutual learning and on the same
theoretical set-up of TRIGGER, an integrated elementary model of
the process of change has been developed including the four main
components listed below. These components have been conventionally
identified and operationally distinguished, being aware of the fact that
in reality often they tend to overlap.
• Transformational agent is the component of the process in which
a group of people (a team) progressively becomes a transformational
agent within its organisation, being gradually more and more able to
manage the complexity inherent in institutional change.
• Activation and mobilisation affects the ways through which a
gender action plan succeeds in mobilising and involving other actors
and individuals, achieving the consent, energy and support necessary
to trigger a process of change.
• Making an impact refers to the capacity of a gender action plan
to actually alter existing institutional arrangements, activating
a process of change, which strongly depends on factors and risks
needing a constant observation.
• Sustainability affects the ability of an action plan to activate
mechanisms allowing it to keep generating impacts after completion,
not only formally securing organisational change, but also introducing
IV
social levers of change ensuring a constant improvement of gender
equality in the long run.
For each component a set of strands of action have been singled
out, illustrated through concrete cases drawn from the experience of
TRIGGER partners and “sister projects” in order to provide information on
different aspects of the process of change, such as recurrent patterns,
drivers, barriers and implications, and to give, if not recommendations
for action, useful orientations and guidance for interpreting the
processes going, their risks and potentials.
COMPONENTS OF THE PROCESS
TRANSFORMATIONAL AGENT
To make a team become a transformational agent is a demanding
process. The risk is establishing a team which lacks, due to internal
or external factors, the competences, sources, support, and internal
authoritativeness to trigger institutional change.
The guidelines identify four strands of this process that should be
properly managed by the teams engaged with the implementation of a
gender action plan.
1. Accessing expertise. To avoid the risk of impossibility to design and
manage the action plan, promoting the access of the teams to the needed
expertise is a main aspect. Diversify expertise is necessary to cope with
complexity. Mixing scientific and managerial expertise turned out to be
an asset, even if requiring a continuous team building work.
2. Reputation building. Increasing the reputation and visibility of the
teams is necessary to overcome the hindrances deriving from the low
status that is a frequent characteristic of the teams implementing action
plans. Team members, often young people and/or temporary employees,
can be not recognised as authoritative, competent and capable enough
to attract and activate other people. In a scientific environment, having
senior researchers involved is a key priority.
3. Organisational embedment. To avoid isolation and invisibility
for the team and its actions, promote networking to really embed
the team in the organisation at various levels and involving different
stakeholders. Ownership of gender equality is to be gradually extended,
gaining visibility and becoming part of the organisation’s ordinary life,
being considered one aspect of the mandate of its leaders and officers.
4. Securing staff and resources. To prevent the risk of discontinuity
of the gender equality plan, to promote the stable access of the team
members to working conditions and resources adequate to their task is
a real necessity. Gender equality action should be based on the work
of people, be they academic or managers, with diversified skills whose
economic costs is recognized and adequately remunerated.
As for the transformational agent, besides describing the strands of the
process, some key issues related to this component are also reported
in the guidelines, namely: taking the complexity of the action plan
seriously, widening the space for gender equality issues, avoiding a
misleading view of volunteering and promoting the sense of ownership
of the action plan.
ACTIVATION AND MOBILISATION
When change is expected to influence practically all the aspects and
levels of a given organisation, as it is the case of gender equality, the
question of why and how to activate institutional stakeholders and
employees becomes crucial. What is at stake is preventing the risk
for the action plan to remain invisible or too marginal to induce actual
changes in the institution.
Six strands of the process, through which a gender action plan becomes
a tool for mobilising and coordinating actors and individuals, have been
singled out in the guidelines.
5. Scientific recognition. Promoting the scientific recognition of
the team and the action plan is a way to counter the idea that gender
inequality is not scientifically proved, or that tools to ascertain
inequalities are not methodologically correct. This is possible by
generating data and information which are able to show how gender
inequality is a scientifically grounded fact, to be addressed through a
methodologically sound action plan. Due to the features of this working
environment, for the action plan in a scientific organisation to succeed
in activating participatory processes, it is necessary to exhibit the
accuracy, scientific validity and reliability of its interpretation of gender
inequality.
6. Political backing. The fragility, instability and precariousness of
the support offered by top leaders and managers, sometimes implying
serious consequences for action plans, may occur for several reasons
and is to be addressed with different strategies. Among those, a
personal involvement of the leaders as testimonials for gender equality
in public occasions turned out to be a good way to avoid a discontinuity
in political backing.
7. Engagement space creation. To avoid the risk of people’s and
stakeholders’ withdrawal from commitment over time, engagement
V
spaces are to be created, allowing to turn passion, interest and
willingness to participate into actual participation. Engagement spaces
are to be intended both in physical and social terms. In some cases, they
may become autonomous structures (networks, associations, research
groups, virtual platforms, etc.) able to keep on developing after the end
of the funded period.
8. Mobilisation of pro-women actors. Not to waste a wealth of
opportunities for gender equality commitment, groups and structures
already concerned with gender are to be involved. Pro-gender national
and international networks, as well as internal pre-existing active
players, are resources to be activated, even if this may imply an
additional effort, as an investment to reinforce the team’s action and to
gain internal acknowledgement for gender equality.
9. Active involvement of men. Gaining the active involvement of men
is essential to debunk the belief that gender equality is only a women’s
affair. Keeping men aside turns out dangerous for gender equality plans,
due to different reasons (from hostile men’s reactions and diffidence of
women towards women-only initiatives to marginality of gender in the
policy agenda of the institution).
10. Implementation backing. To prevent that decisions on gender
equality are only formally made, it is to consider that any strategy and
policy of the organisation pass through middle managers and senior
researchers. Capturing their interest and motivations and getting their
active support is therefore an unavoidable step for the action plan to
permeate and be active in all sectors of the organisation.
Some key issues pertaining to this component are discussed in the
guidelines, including: attending to the interpretive and symbolic aspects
of the action plan; promoting targeted mobilisation strategies; finding
external support to increase internal visibility and authoritativeness;
creating autonomous mobilisation agents; balancing the fragility
of voluntary engagement through appropriate measures (such as
developing step-by-step mobilisation approaches).
MAKING AN IMPACT
The capacity of a gender action plan to actually alter existing institutional
arrangements, activating a process of change, is not to be taken for
granted. Implementation and “impact-making” are not to be confused.
Implementing actions, although essential, does not necessarily lead
to modifying existing institutional arrangements, making them more
gender-sensitive and less male-dominated. The risk for the plan is
a sort of irrelevance and waste of resources. A plenty of factors can
come into play, affecting the actual possibility for an action to produce
impacts. Some of them have been analysed through the experiences of
the TRIGGER partners and those of the other sister projects.
Six strands of the process of impact making have been analysed. Some
emerging indications are summarised here below.
11. Self-reflexive processes. In the gender equality teams and their
institutions, anticipating the consequences of one owns’ actions through
self-reflexive procedures and attitudes is a way to avoid, as much as
possible, negative unintended effects. Embedding mechanisms of this
kind in research organisations is likely to increase the impact of action
plans and even to trigger long-term processes of change. Self-evaluation
is to be considered as part of the process of change.
12. Gender-sensitive communication. Gender sensitive communi-
cation is to be adopted to avoid that gender bias in communication
may reproduce inequality patterns which the action plans to dismantle.
Changing the way people communicate in the working environment is
difficult and long, but modifying language, contents, style and symbols
used in administrative documents and institutional communication
may have multiplying effects throughout the organisation and greatly
support the action plan in its implementation and impacts.
13. Gender-sensitive education. Fostering a gender sensitive
education and training is a way to change scientific culture in the
medium-long term. Gender is often considered something irrelevant or
even a foreign body in research organisations, mainly in hard sciences.
Hence the need for the action plans to demonstrate how educating
students and young researchers on these issues is relevant for them,
the organisation and scientific research at the same time.
14. Action plan tailoring process. Not to lose relevance and the
interest of stakeholders, the plan is to be adapted to circumstances and
emerging needs of the organisation through participatory processes.
Impacts also arose from changing strategy (e.g., alliances, type
of activities, style adopted) during operation. Flexibility and open-
mindfulness are to be always adopted. Based on a constant monitoring
of reality, changes are to be introduced whenever needed.
15. Policy integration. To overcome the frequent consideration of the
action plan as a stand-alone policy or a special programme, bound to
finish with the external funding, synergies with existing relevant policies
of the organisation are needed. The plan will be as much impactful as
much it will liaise with internal reforms, institutional strategies and/or
local applications of national laws, becoming triggering devices able to
activate broader change mechanisms in the organisation.
16. External backing. Assure an external backing from such players
VI
as scientific partner organisations and networks, national or local
authorities and other relevant stakeholders, as a way to reinforce the
impact of the gender equality action on the organisation and to prevent
the risks connected with isolation, such as backlashes and irrelevance.
The key issues emerging from the analysis of the process of impact
making are as follows: careful handling the concept of impact, adopting
an open-minded and flexible approach, understanding negotiations as
the main tool for making an impact, leveraging whenever possible on
existing tools, policies and opportunities and keeping a realistic view
of impacts.
SUSTAINABILITY
Generally speaking, sustainability refers to the capacity of a project to
ensure that its outcomes continue after the end of the external funding.
As for gender equality plans, it practically means that the changes
introduced in the organisation should be, if not permanent, at least
sustainable in the long run, not disappearing with the end of the action
plan or because of a simple leadership turnover. Following the approach
of the guidelines, sustainability could be described as an output of a
process which develops all through the action plan and can be driven
(at least partially) by the team.
Five strands of the sustainability process are analysed in the guidelines,
each related to the inclusion of gender in some key organisational
processes.
17. Inclusion of gender in monitoring systems. To prevent the
risk for an organisation to deny, overlook or practically neglect gender
inequality, gender is to be part of the monitoring systems such as
databases on employees and students, observatories on human
resources, budgeting system. Various techniques and tools are available
and have been successfully experimented.
18. Inclusion of gender in scientific excellence. Gender aspects
are to be taken into account in scientific excellence, intended both as a
symbolic aspect and as a general ordering principle of the institutional
action, so as to dismantle its supposed neutrality. The biased vision of
science underlying the most part of approaches to scientific excellence
strongly affects women’s careers, research contents and methods,
peer-review evaluation processes, access to research funds, scientific
recognition and awards.
19. Inclusion of gender in service provisions. Gender considerations
are to be carefully taken into account in designing and planning
services to people studying and working in science and academia,
e.g., against sexual harassment, to support researchers’ work-life
balance and careers, to commercialise research’s product, in order to
avoid reproducing inequalities through services, which do not take into
account women’s experiences and needs.
20. Inclusion of gender in organisation’s standards. To actually
embed equality in the research institutions’ life and not to remain
marginal with respect to its dynamics, gender is to be included in
organisation’s standards such as management of human resources or
support to early career researchers.
21. Inclusion of gender in an organisation’s structure and mission.
To prevent the risk that gender inequality is only formally addressed in a
given institution, gender should be inserted in its structure and mission,
being visible in the organisation chart, in the statutes and other relevant
documents, and in its strategic planning.
As for sustainability, the emerging key issues refer to sharing the concern
about sustainability as widely as possible, planning sustainability at
the beginning of the action plan, combining sustainability and quality
assessment of the action plans, tailoring the sustainability approach to
the different actions, assuring a future responsible entity for the action
plan.
In the next two pages a scheme summarising the contents of the
guidelines.
VII
VIII
SUMMARY SCHEME
OF THE GUIDELINES
AREA
1
AREA
2
TRANSFORMATIONAL
AGENT
1. Accessing expertise
Knowledge and skills to manage
gender dynamics
2. Reputation building
Visibility and legitimacy of the teams
3. Organisational embedment
Internal networks in charge
of gender equality actions
4. Securing staff and resources
Stable staff and resources
for gender equality actions
ACTIVATION
AND MOBILISATION
5. Scientific recognition
Scientific methodologies to increase
awareness and ownership
6. Political backing
Leaders as testimonials for gender equality
7. Creating space for engagement
New groups and institutions for new challenges
8. Pro-women actors’ mobilisation
Stable staff and resources for gender equality actions
9. Men’s active involvement
Bringing men into the core of institutional change
10. Implementation backing
Support from middle managers
and senior researchers
IX
AREA
3AREA
4
MAKING
AN IMPACT
11. Self-reflexive process
Reflexive praxes in the teams and
in the management of research institutions
12. Gender-sensitive communication
The relevance of language for administrative
leaders and staff
13. Gender-sensitive education
and training
Dealing with gender in starting scientific
education and career
14. Action plan tailoring process
Tailored design and participatory planning
15. Policy integration
Support to and coordination with
institutional strategies on gender
16. External backing
Networks and alliances with external actors
SUSTAINABILITY
17. Inclusion of gender in monitoring
systems
Permanent tools to monitor gender equality
in the institution
18. Inclusion of gender in scientific
excellence
Shaping research organisations on a
gender-aware understanding of science
19. Inclusion of gender considerations
in service provision
New or extended services for emerging needs
20. Inclusion of gender in
organisational standards
Binding procedures to permanently
introduce gender equality actions
21. Inclusion of gender in the
organisational structure and mission
Permanent positions and units devoted
to gender issues and equality
1414
1
INTRODUCTION
All around the world, gender inequality in science is a long lasting problem, far from being solved. Despite some slow
improvements, women remain insufficiently represented among scientists, mainly at top levels. In the European Union1,
even if women account for 40/60% of the PhD graduates, depending on fields of study, still only 33% of researchers and
20.9% of academics in higher positions are female.
The European Union is committed to remove inequalities and to promote equality between men and women in all its
activities, including research and innovation. In its nearly 20-years policy effort, the European Commission launched, in
early 2010s, a strategy promoting structural change processes inside research institutions, geared at introducing gender
equality and gender aware management in a permanent way, through dedicated projects and gender action plans. This
strategy, started in the second part of the 7th Framework Programme for research and innovation of the EC, has been
continued and intensified in the subsequent Horizon 2020 programme.
These Guidelines try to account for this effort involving many research organisations across Europe by providing
interpretive frameworks and practical orientations to activate and sustain over time institutional change processes2 in
support of gender equality in science.
These Guidelines are based on the experience of both the TRIGGER (Transforming Institutions by Gendering contents and
Gaining Equality in Research) project and – as we will see below – other EC-funded projects pursuing the same aim.
The TRIGGER project at a glance
The main objective of TRIGGER, funded by the European Commission under the 7th Framework Programme3 and co-
funded by the Italian Government4, was to promote gender equality and gender-aware research in five European research
institutions by designing and implementing self-tailored action plans aimed to activate institutional change processes.
The TRIGGER Consortium is composed of the institutions listed in the table below.
Partner Country Acronym
Dipartimento per i diritti e le pari opportunità Italy DPO
ASDO Italy ASDO
Università di Pisa Italy UNIPI
Vysoka Skola Chemicko-technologicka v Praze Czech Republic VSCHT
Institute of Sociology of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Czech Republic ISAS CR
Birkbeck College – University of London United Kingdom BBK
Université Paris Diderot – Paris 7 France UPD
Universidad Politécnicade Madrid Spain UPM
Istituto per la ricerca sociale Italy IRS
The five self-tailored action plans addressed three different aspects of gender inequality in S&T:
• Working environment, formal/informal culture and explicit/tacit rules
• Scientific research content and methods to acknowledge its gender dimension and impact
• Scientific leadership at different levels.
1 See She Figures, 2015, https://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_gender_equality/she_figures_2015-final.pdf#view=fit&pagemode=none
2 The expressions “institutional change” and “structural change” are used alternatively in this text as synonyms.
3 The project responded to the topic: “Supporting changes in the organisation of research institutions to promote Gender Equality” (SiS.2013.2.1.1-1).
4 TRIGGER is co-funded from the Italian IGRUE (Inspectorate General for Financial relations with the European Union, Ministry for Economy and Finance).
22
As a whole, within the five action plans over one hundred different actions were implemented, not mentioned here for
space reasons (a short description of the TRIGGER action plans is included in the Appendix). To have an idea of the kind
of initiatives and measures included in the action plans, see the table in the next page.
In the action plans, special emphasis has been given to the second aspect, i.e., the gender dimension of research and
its interaction with the other two, given the growing recognition of its importance as a crucial lever for fundamental change
in S&T settings (fixing the knowledge)5. To this end, actions directly aimed at gendering research process and contents,
such as sensitising and training researchers, funding gender-sensitive research, promoting courses and teachings
including gender aspects in STEM (e.g., medicine, biology, engineering, city planning), creating multidisciplinary research
groups etc., have been complemented by other actions, less directly aimed at gendering contents, but whose impact to
this end is by now established (e.g., modifying scientific quality evaluation criteria).
Besides the action plans, TRIGGER also included the ongoing analysis, monitoring and evaluation of the process
initiated in each institution with the aim of drawing some conclusions, both to support implementation and to feed these
final project guidelines. ASDO was the partner responsible for these tasks, in direct contact with the project coordinator
and in collaboration with the partners in charge of the action plans, which conducted research and evaluation at the
action plan level. Additionally, a crucial role was devoted to discussion and exchange among the players involved in the
different structural change initiatives throughout Europe, in order to share their efforts and results.
Where these guidelines come from
The Guidelines are the output of an intense and highly productive mutual learning and exchange process involving
the TRIGGER partners throughout the project. Such a process was planned from the beginning as a support structure for
the Teams to learn from each other and to cope more effectively with the many aspects of their action plans.
This process was also enriched by a larger exchange entailing both the TRIGGER partners and representatives of
another eight EC-funded structural change projects (EGERA, FESTA, GARCIA, GenderTime, GenisLab, GENOVATE,
INTEGER and STAGES) who accepted, through a series of three annual meetings (respectively held in Rome, London, and
Madrid), to share their experience, knowledge and challenges6.
The involvement of these “sister projects” was conceived not only as a way to support the Team, but also as a means to
foster the broader debate taking place in Europe and beyond about institutional change projects to promote gender
equality in science and technology.
When, in 2010, the EC DG Research and Innovation launched a new strategy for improving gender equality by initiating and
sustaining structural change in research organisations, the motivations and objectives of this choice were clear. Indeed,
the structural change strategy aimed at reforming research institutions so as to make them more inclusive and friendly
to both women and men (the so-called fix-the-institution approach), while insuring women against having to adapt to a
male-dominated working environment and culture (the fix-the-women approach).
After seven years, a wealth of information and knowledge about the nature, functioning and impact of institutional change
projects is available. The basic idea underlying these Guidelines is precisely that of attempting to integrate the collected
information and knowledge within a common frame. The intent is not to promote a unitary model of a “Gender action
plan” (simply because a unitary model cannot exist), but to provide orientations and analyses to manage what may
actually happen when, in a given research organisation, a gender action plan is launched (be it promoted by a specific
project team, the HR Department, the Rector, the Head of a department or other internal stakeholders).
5 An idea more and more widespread is that an increasing space for gender in research, favoring the full acknowledgment of its relevance in knowledge and
deconstructing gender stereotypes in science, will also push sooner or later towards a recognition of women researchers, thus entailing directly or indirectly
a change in terms of gender equality in the research institutions. To favour the implementation of actions related to gender in research, a specific unit of
international consultants, the Advisory Unit for Gendering Research (AUGR) has been established in the TRIGGER project. The scholars Londa Schiebinger (USA)
and Ineke Klinge (NL) form part of it.
6 To favour the comparability of experiences and thus the exchange productivity, the choice was made to more directly involve the projects with a similar purpose
funded in the same period (2010-2013).
3
STRATEGIC AREA
OBJECTIVES DESCRIPTION AND SOME EXAMPLES OF ACTIONS
1. Women-friendly environment
1.1. Actions promoting
change in organisational
culture and formal/ informal
behaviours
Measures pertaining to the modification of the cultural and behavioural patterns within
the research environment, by promoting awareness-raising initiatives addressing
specific internal and external targets, promoting gender studies across university
faculties and departments, and supporting women in coping with environmental
stress factors.
1.2. Actions promoting
work-life balance
Provision of services facilitating work-life balance, by means of supporting access
to internal and external services of various kind and the promotion of customised
and flexible organisational practices.
1.3. Actions supporting early-
stage career-development
Measures specifically aimed at sustaining early-stage career-development for young
scientists, particularly addressing the barriers that women frequently meet in that early
phase. These measures include contractual arrangements supporting temporary
staff, career advice, mentoring and training for early-career researchers, provision
of funds for professional development and training officers in charge of hiring
and promotions.
2. Gender-aware Science
2.1. Actions challenging
gender stereotypes
and consequent
horizontal segregation
This is pursued, on the one hand, by addressing images and representations of women
and science, especially through the collection of data documenting the groundlessness
of stereotypes, the use of gender-sensitive language and textbooks, as well as
awareness-raising initiatives. On the other hand, particular attention is devoted to
fighting those mechanisms translating gender stereotypes into horizontal segregation,
by attaching a gender to disciplines, topics or tasks. This is done especially by
addressing training initiatives of various kinds to those responsible for career
development support and task attribution.
2.2. Actions aimed
at gendering S&T
contents and methods
Actions are aimed at questioning epistemological and theoretical assumptions,
methodologies and priorities. Research and dissemination activities are usually
undertaken in this regard, but also curricular reform of scientific disciplines to
include relevant gender studies, institutional or organisational arrangements to
increase the number of women research directors, and the dissemination of tools
to support the process of gendering the design of research and innovation or
funding devoted to gender-sensitive research.
3. Women’s leadership of science
3.1. Actions promoting
women’s leadership
in the practice of research
Measures supporting women in attaining leadership positions in the traditional academic
career, encompassing, among the others, review of criteria to assess scientific quality,
support for mobility, delivery of specific training, mentoring, provision of dedicated
funds for research, creation of reserved chairs, introduction of new institutional
bodies or regulations to redress gender imbalances.
3.2. Actions promoting
women’s leadership in the
management of research
Measures supporting women in attaining leadership positions in research management,
including tools such as direct support to access boards and committees,
introduction of quota systems, creation of candidate’ databases, lobbying.
3.3. Actions promoting
women’s leadership in
scientific communication
The third leadership field addressed concerns scientific communication, grouping the
tools aimed at strengthening women’s visibility and role in the communication
flow among scientists and to the general public.
3.4. Actions promoting
women’s leadership in
innovation processes
and science-society
relationships
The fourth objective deals with leadership roles in managing the relationships between
science and technology, on the one hand, and social, political and economic actors, on
the other, with a specific focus on the management of the issues involved with
technological innovation.
44
Plans and processes
In pursuing this idea, a specific approach has been chosen, based on the elementary distinction between plans and
processes.The many gender action plans carried out so far in Europe allowed us to accumulate a large stock of practical
knowledge7. As one representative of a “sister project” said while participating in a mutual learning meeting, we know
practically everything about what to do to design and implement a gender action plan. However, because of different
factors – starting from the lack of real commitment to tackle gender inequality – action plans very rarely activate all the
expected changes, even though other unexpected changes often occur.
Thus, the problem moves from how to design gender-oriented actions to how to implement them and produce tangible
impact on the organization.
In fact, almost all those who are involved with gender equality plans find that correctly designing and managing the plans
is not enough. There is always a gap (even small) between the plan as it is conceived and implemented, on one hand,
and the social process of change which is actually activated on the other. This gap can be produced by a myriad of
factors, including, e.g., leadership turnover, unexpected resistance, lack of support (such as by leaders, internal offices
or women researchers themselves), conflicting interests, psychological dynamics, lack of resources, time constraints,
lack of passion and personal commitment, difficulties in getting different stakeholders to cooperate with each other,
cultural obstacles, organisational conflicts, or change in national policies.
Moreover, the combination of these factors may produce a theoretically infinite number of situations which can
rarely be anticipated while designing a gender action plan, even though some recurrent patterns and dynamics can
be observed both in the way in which the process of change develops and in the way in which the gap between the plan
and the process of change is managed.
Thus, it may happen that, to induce change in an organisation, the plan has to be altered, the actions modified or some
approach abandoned. Consequently, rather than being more or less linear in their development, gender action plans come
to be characterised by drawbacks, changes of directions, and sometimes restarts, making each of them a “special case”.
The effort made through these Guidelines has been precisely that of addressing the process of change leveraging upon the
experience of the TRIGGER partners and the “sister projects”, in order to better understand how it can be practically managed.
Therefore, the key question underlying them is not how an action plan should be done but how a process of change can
be triggered and fostered through an action plan, thus managing the unplanned and the unexpected and pursuing
institutional change, when necessary, even by going beyond, modifying and/or abandoning some of the planned actions.
The double meaning of institutional change
To effectively address institutional change as a social process, the Guidelines adopt a broad concept of institution.
In general, institutional change is mainly used to refer to the idea of the rules of the game of a given organisation
(existing procedures, guidelines, protocols, formal or informal regulations or organisational charts). However, changing
an organisation cannot only mean a change in the rules, but also and mainly a change affecting the actors involved8.
To attain this level – the level of the actors – another concept of institution is needed, one that belongs to the sociological
tradition. In this disciplinary domain, the concept of institution refers to the relational, cognitive, emotional and
behavioural patterns that largely contribute to the reproduction of social life, so that they tend to be taken for granted
and shared by the majority of people9. In this deeper and extended meaning, the concept of institutional change relates,
not only to the rules of the organisation, but also to the life of people and groups, thus affecting such things as ideas,
beliefs, values, worldviews, interests, personal and collective orientations, social meanings, and emotions.
7 In the selected resources annexed to these guidelines some examples of handbooks, guidelines, and like drafted in the framework of the “sister projects”
participating in the mutual learning path are reported. An effort to capitalise on the existing knowledge has been made by the EIGE through the Gender Equality
in Academia and Research - GEAR tool. Making a Gender Equality Plan http://eige.europa.eu/gender-mainstreaming/toolkits/gear
8 As regards the distinction between changes in the institution and changes in the organisation, see Coriat B., Weinstein O. (2002), Organizations,
firms and institutions in the generation of innovation Research Policy 31, 273–290.
9 In this regard, see : Berger, P. L., Luckmann T. (1966)
The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge
, Garden City, NY, Anchor Books;
North, D.C. (1990)
Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance
, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; Nadel S.F. (1951)
The Foundations of
Social Anthropology
, The Free Press, Glencoe.
5
The Guidelines adopt both concepts of institution since, in the case of a complex, persistent and deeply rooted
phenomenon like gender inequality, institutional change quite inevitably affects both the rules and the social patterns
underlying them. More specifically, what usually emerges is that:
• Changing social patterns is necessary to sustain organisational change
• Organisational change is necessary to trigger a change in the social patterns and to keep on modifying them over
time, so as to make them fully embedded in the life of the organisation.
A multilayer view of change
Precisely to prevent a conflation between the two concepts of institution, a multilayer view of change was adopted from
the beginning in developing the TRIGGER project and setting up the mutual learning process. Such a view is based on
the recognition that institutional change, just because it concerns both the rules of the game and the actors involved,
includes many aspects which are not immediately tangible, but which largely influence the possibility of change to occur.
Thus, very roughly, affecting the actors prevalently means activating interpretive and symbolic change.
• Interpretive change pertains to the way and the intensity with which gender inequality issues are perceived, in
terms of size, importance, causes and effects, for example. This kind of change is strongly linked to the capacity of an
action plan to raise people’s awareness of gender inequality, to produce reliable information on the issue, to provide
strong arguments in support of gender equality, or to arouse people’s interests and emotions on gender.
• Symbolic change pertains to the reference to gender issues in aspects such as language, communication, images,
organisation of space and time, and in general in anything that can construct and transfer shared cultural meanings.
At stake with symbolic change are issues like the visibility of women researchers, the self-esteem of women as
scientists, the social representation of women and men in science, the shaping of organisational culture and the
image of science.
Similarly, changing the rules of the game mainly means triggering normative and operational changes.
• Normative change pertains to the arrangements formally or informally adopted within the organisation and their
explicit or implicit impacts on gender-related issues. Normative change, in addition to formal decisions, also includes
change in habits and informal procedures as well as the creation of new entities and functions (e.g., networks,
officers, groups, organisational units), regardless their legal status.
• Operational change pertains to the mechanisms (of any nature, such as administrative, political, technical,
organisational, or bureaucratic) allowing a change to occur and to produce actual modifications. This kind of change
is often overlooked although its importance is evident to all who work in complex organisations. Actually, a change in
the rules of the game does not occur when a decision is taken or a position for a new officer is established (normative
change), but when the decision is implemented and continues to be implemented over time, or when the new officer
is provided with all the resources, powers and means to perform her/his tasks and duties (operational change). It is
to be noticed that it is sometimes easier to attain normative change rather than operational change, since a lot of
resistance and hindrances are found at an operational and not at a normative level.
An experiential approach
Since the Guidelines are focused on the process of change rather than on the action plans, they do not adopt a
prescriptive approach. Indeed, we did not feel capable of providing precise directions or recommendations, as the
social processes involved with institutional change are intrinsically complex, and they entail such a large share of
unplanned and unexpected aspects.
Rather, the Guidelines adopt an experiential approach, i.e., an approach intended to provide information and
orientations useful in promoting and capturing different aspects of the process of change, singling out their recurrent
patterns, drivers, barriers and implications as they emerge in the practical experience of the teams who carried out the
gender action plans.
66
This is the reason – as we will see below – why each aspect dealt with in the Guidelines is always supported by two,
three or even more cases, drawn from different national and organisational contexts. The presentation of these cases is
aimed at showing not so much the actions carried out as the dynamics of change these actions activated, including the
obstacles and constraints encountered and the final results they produced, be they expected or not.
Modelling the process of change
In accordance with the overall approach sketched above, the structure of the Guidelines also reflects a focus on the
process rather than on actions.
In fact, the Guidelines are not organised in thematic areas or objectives (for example, collecting gendered data,
providing mentoring and training, changing hiring and promoting procedures, supporting work-life balance, etc.).
Rather, they are structured on the basis of an elementary model of the institutional change process, large and open
enough to integrate information and cases from different contexts, action plans and projects.
Such a model was developed not only in the light of the results that action plans can achieve, but also the risks which
may affect them. This choice was made in consideration that it is also possible for an action plan to produce some
immediate results without generating any institutional impact (i.e., any permanent or long-term cumulative changes)10
because of the influence of risk factors making change more difficult to take root.
Operationally, and conventionally, the model includes four different components of the change process, which
develop and interact with each other throughout the implementation of a gender equality action plan. These components
constitute the backbone of the Guidelines.
Transformational agent. This component concerns the process by which a group of people (a team)
progressively becomes a transformational agent within its organisation, i.e., an actor able to access the many
skills, capacities, resources and knowledge which are needed to manage the complexity inherent in institutional
change. The risk here is establishing a team which lacks, due to internal or external factors, the competences
and internal authoritativeness to trigger institutional change.
Activation and mobilisation. This component concerns the process by which the gender action plan succeeds
in mobilising and involving other actors and individuals, achieving the consent, energy and support necessary
to trigger a process of change. The major risk here is that the action plan remains invisible or in any event
too marginal to induce changes in the organisation (both in terms of rules of the game and dominant social
patterns).
Making an impact. This component concerns the capacity of a gender action plan to actually alter existing
institutional arrangements, activating a process of change. Since no deterministic relationship can be
established between an action and its impact, the main issue here involves observing the factors and risks
which make it more or less probable that an action generates permanent or long-term modifications in the life
of the organisation. Action plans, indeed, can potentially catalyse change which can be long lasting or able at
least partially to disrupt the status quo.
Sustainability. This component concerns the capacity of an action plan to activate mechanisms allowing it
to keep generating impacts after completion. As mentioned before, such mechanisms cannot be only those
formally securing organisational change (such as new norms, structures, procedures, etc.), but also those
introducing, so to speak, social levers of change ensuring a constant improvement of gender equality in the
long run.
10 As regards the distinction between results and impacts, see: European Commission (2015)
Horizon 2020 indicators. Assessing the results and impacts of
Horizon
,
Directorate General for Research and Innovation, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
7
A specific section of the Guidelines is devoted to each component including an introduction and a number of chapters
(ranging from four and six), each highlighting a specific strand of action characterising the component, and a summary
of the key points about obstacles, risks and practical orientations.
Each chapter, in turn, includes two paragraphs. In the first, the contents and features of a strand of action is presented.
Then, in the second, a series of cases are presented, highlighting the process and providing examples about how it can
be managed11.
For confidentiality reasons, the cases are all presented preserving the anonymity of the teams and the other actors
involved. Only in some cases, presented in specific boxes, is the information fully disclosed in accordance with the teams’
consent.
11 As any theoretical model, also the elementary model of the process of change is necessarily conventional. For this reason, the use of the cases
to illustrate a strand and a component of the process may turn out arbitrary. However, both the model and the placement of each case have been
discussed with the teams involved in the action plans.
88
9
TRANSFORMATIONAL AGENT
AREA 1
This simple consideration makes it possible to identify the first component of the process of institutional change
in what we may refer to as the “establishment of the transformational agent”.
The notion of “transformational agent” refers here to a group of people, even small, but endowed with, or capable of
catalysing the skills, capacities, qualities and motivations necessary to promote institutional change by mobilising
other individuals, stakeholders and leaders.
Being a team is therefore different from being a transformational agent. As the cases of the teams that cooperated
in developing these Guidelines clearly show, all of them initially met, to varying degrees, serious difficulties in
“activating the process”, which did not simply mean implementing the planned actions. To activate an internal change
process on gender arrangements, indeed, the teams needed to be able to access all relevant information, knowledge
and expertise, as well as human and financial resources; they needed to be situated in the right institutional position;
and they needed to progressively become authoritative enough to attract people’s and leaders’ interest towards
gender issues, involving the concerned organisational units or making the action plan visible and recognisable.
Thus, we can define the establishment of the transformational agent as a process by which a team becomes a
transformational agent while implementing the action plan over time; a process with its own steps, constraints,
timing and obstacles.
The aim of this first section is precisely that of better understanding this process.
The information gathered through mutual learning allows us to distinguish at least four strands within this
component:
• Accessing expertise
• Reputation building
• Organisational embedment
• Securing staff and resources.
Institutional change always implies the commitment of many actors.
This is even more true when an issue so complex, so socially rooted
and with so many implications as gender equality.
9
1010
Knowledge and skills to manage gender dynamics
1. ACCESSING EXPERTISE
THE ISSUE
The first move that teams usually make is to acquire or access the
capacities and skills necessary to start the action plan.
In fact, it usually becomes very soon clear that standard management
or communication skills are not sufficient to design and implement
a gender action plan.
Gender inequality is in fact a multifaceted phenomenon, reproducing
itself in many ways, through mechanisms that are often hidden, subtle
and difficult to detect. Moreover, the interest and motivation of people,
leaders and even women on gender equality issues cannot be taken for
granted, the presence of gender inequality in the organisation is often
a controversial issue, and the activation of a gender action plan is not
necessarily welcome by everyone.
All this makes it soon necessary to mobilise different kinds of expertise,
revolving more or less around gender equality issues, including aspects
such as capacities to identify inequality dynamics, negotiations skills,
or data management skills.
Hence the need for a team to access the capacities and skills they need,
especially by involving the experts and groups able to provide them.
What is at stake in this process is the actual possibility for the team to
design and manage a gender action plan in the organisation.
THE PROCESS
The most rapid way to address this need is to create stable cooperation
with the units and officials already involved in the concerned issues,
such as the Gender Equality Unit, the Human Resources Department, or
the leaders in charge of gender issues. This also increases the visibility
of the action plan within the organisation. However, many variables may
come into play while pursuing such a strategy. The cases presented
below provides some insight in this regard.
• Case 1 shows the importance for a team to address the problem
of securing the relevant expertise from the very beginning by
establishing cooperation agreements with internal key
actors. The case is also meaningful since it highlights how a change
in the leadership or other similar policy changes may jeopardise the
agreement or make it more difficult to sustain it over time.
• In Case 2, a similar strategy was successfully adopted. The case
is interesting in that it highlights the problem of coordination and
synchronisation among the actors involved. In fact, the different units
providing gender expertise in the organisation do not necessarily
share the same agenda and views about gender equality issues,
so that cooperating with them may become a time-consuming
activity for the team.
• Case 3, in turn, shows that organisation procedures and
rhythms are not necessarily the same as the team’s, with the
consequence that, to keep cooperation effective, the team has to
modify its plan, reduce its expectations and, sometimes, slow down
its activities.
Another source of expertise for a Team can be found by establishing
forms of cooperation and exchange with other teams working on
gender equality in different institutions. This is typically the situation
of partners in EC-funded institutional change projects.
The case presented in the box shows another possible solution,
i.e., backing the team from the beginning with an expert team on
gender provided by an external institution. Such a solution proven to
be effective, even though it usually requires the teams involved to have
the capacity to communicate and openly share data and information.
GENDER EXPERTS, SCIENTISTS
AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS
Four out of five core teams of the TRIGGER action plans combine
managerial and organizational competences in the field of gender equality
and gender-related research profiles. In the Czech Republic, instead, this result
was achieved through the close collaboration of two different institutions
(VSCHT, a technical university and ISAS, a sociological research
institute). This composition of the teams facilitates the in-house
design, as well as the implementation, of an integrated set of
actions, encompassing social research, training, advocacy,
networking and public communication.
AREA 1
11
The Cases
Knowledge and skills to manage gender dynamics
1. ACCESSING EXPERTISE
CASE 1 → PLANNING THE INVOLVEMENT OF EXPERTS FROM THE
BEGINNING
The starting point
In one institution, an extended team was created before the start of the
project, already including representatives of the scientific staff in the
different schools involved and the Gender Unit of the University. This choice
was due to the characteristics of the institution, a technical university, where
there was the need to create a link among different research lines, schools
and departments (where gender contents and expertise were present to
different extents), and the management team of the University.
On the one hand, it was necessary to take advantage of the knowledge of
the university structure and procedures which was held by the Gender Unit,
which was part of the rectorate.
On the other, scientific knowledge of gender contents and methods of the
technical disciplines represented in the university were held by the senior
and junior researchers that were part of the team.
The dynamics
In the first part of the project, cooperation was very effective, thanks also
to the prestige of the team coordinator and the reciprocal support among
the team members, not limited to common work on gender equality. This
enabled the differences in perspectives, background and language between
scientists and administrative or managerial staff to be overcome. A change
in the management of the institution modified this scenario. The new rector
and his staff set different priorities and had different ideas about gender
equality, mainly affecting the work of administrative and managerial staff.
Gender was subsumed under more generic headings, together with other
equality issues, without increasing the number of employees devoted to
equality. As a consequence, friction among team members occurred, which
at times hindered fruitful cooperation. With time, informal arrangements
were found by the team to adapt to the new circumstances, which allowed
internal difficulties to be overcome and to move forward with the project’s
actions.
Some results
The mixed composition of the team made it possible to design and
implement actions of different kinds, addressing various audiences
(students, researchers, technical personnel, etc.), both based in the schools
and at university level, always maintaining relations with top leaders and
external actors (e.g., local authorities, representatives of other universities,
professional associations etc.). Some changes were introduced with respect
to the initial plans to adapt to internal dynamics.
CASE 2 → FINETUNING THE AGENDAS
The starting point
In the experience of one of the structural change projects, the cooperation
between scientists, gender experts and gender officers at each partner
institution was actively sought, supported by the project coordinator,
through the implementation of initial gender audits. The partners were
heterogeneous from the institutional, organisational and geographical
points of view, so that cooperation was shaped in different ways according
to local situations. For example, only the biggest organisations had equality
committees or other institutional bodies in charge of gender equality, and
gender expertise was not always present. In other cases, gender equality
competence and sensitiveness was only held by individual researchers or
team members, some of them hired specifically for the project.
An effort was made to find synergies in implementing the gender audits
through activities in which each actor could find a specific role and benefit.
The audits allowed the team to make contact with persons who were
subsequently involved in further project activities, either becoming members
of the team, or participating in working groups for specific activities.
The dynamics
The initial endorsement of the top management of the institutions was a
factor which facilitated the participation of different kinds of personnel, both
scientific and administrative, in the project teams. Another strong plus for
being involved was the availability of funds to implement an organisational
diagnosis of the institution, which could be useful for different purposes.
On the other hand, there were aspects which appeared problematic for
activating internal cooperation, such as the existence of different equality
agendas between project teams and equality bodies, where existing. Another
situation which was quite common and had to be managed was the relative
isolation of gender equality bodies, worsened by the stigma of women-only
bodies and initiatives.
Some results
The initial effort of implementing gender audits allowed the teams to involve
the most influential representatives of their institutions and to make them
aware of project objectives and activities, establishing good relationships.
11
1212
The Cases
CASE 3 → ADAPTING TO THE RHYTHMS OF THE ORGANISATION
The starting point
The project focused its efforts on researchers on fix-term contracts. However,
the necessary data on research group composition were not centralized and
not organised by gender.
The dynamics
The team had to request the needed information department by department,
through long work sessions with the staff responsible at department level.
Each time they had to explain how important it was for the project, playing
on personal trust and contacts, avoiding forcing too much with requests and
keeping good relationships also beyond the needs of the project.
The project had an innovative approach, which entailed time-consuming and
complex data collection, sometimes requiring the re-processing of collected
data or accessing data considered confidential. During implementation, the
team needed to reduce somewhat the details of data collection and to
partially adapt their timing to the schedules of the staff involved.
On the other hand, the project was well known at the University among
researchers, and the involvement of some representatives of the top
management made it possible to reach all the relevant people to collect
data and start actions. The cooperation with the committee in charge of
equality – which was built during operations – as well as the fact that the
team leader was the rector’s delegate for gender equality (later appointed
pro-vice rector for gender equality) further supported the data collection
process. Finally, the central administration expressed interest in the results
of the work done (e.g., processing of new data), which made cooperation
with different people in the organisation easier.
Some results
The initial contacts established with the administrative staff for the aim
of data collection helped to spread the word about the project and to gain
consensus. The effort to maintain good relationships with the administration,
and the feedback provided on the results of the analysis produced the further
benefit of convincing some of them to partially revise their procedures.
12
13
The Cases
Visibility and legitimacy of the teams
2. REPUTATION BUILDING
THE ISSUE
As can be expected, scientific reputation is a major source of authority
in scientific institutions, on which internal hierarchies and social status
depend. Thus, it is not without consequence that gender equality plans
are often carried out by teams partially or even totally made up of
people such as early-career researchers, temporary staff members and
administrative personnel; i.e., people who are not recognised as
scientifically prepared or institutionally legitimate to lead some
or many of the activities connected with the implementation of an action
plan, such as collecting and interpreting statistical data, participating
in high-level committees, negotiating with the top management and
drafting reports and documents of a scientific or strategic nature.
To become a transformational agent, therefore, the team often has to
address the problem of increasing its own reputation and visibility
within the organisation, so as to balance the low social status of one or
more of their members and make it possible for the action plan to be
smoothly and effectively conducted. There is the risk of establishing a
team which is not recognised as authoritative, competent and capable
enough to attract and activate other actors and individuals.
THE PROCESS
The reputation-building process mainly develops by establishing a
coalition between the team and other authoritative actors. This process
is practically implemented in different ways. In some cases, teams are
enlarged with the involvement of highly-reputed scientific members of
the organisation. In others, strong linkages are created with relevant
organisational units (for example, the Human Resources Department,
the Gender Unit, etc.), compensating for the lack of scientific reputation
with institutional recognition.
Another important component of the reputation-building process is the
visibility of the Team in the internal and sometimes external arena. In
this case, the process may be promoted by organising public initiatives
or scientific conferences, for example, allowing the visibility of the team
members to grow, or getting visible support by the leadership in public
occasions.
The team’s lack of reputation may have, as a primary consequence,
the marginalisation of the action plan and of gender equality issues
in general. In some cases, the low status of the team can indeed be
interpreted as the practical demonstration of the low priority of gender
equality in the organisation.
The cases presented below highlight the complexity and uncertainty of
this process.
• Case 1 describes an attempt made under a project involving different
research institutions to promote explicitly the role and visibility of
PhD students and temporary employees in charge of implementing
the action plans. This choice had some relevant impacts, even though
it generated strong resistance among senior researchers, especially
when one junior researcher was appointed project coordinator in one
of the universities concerned.
• Case 2 highlights the many variables which may come into
play in increasing or decreasing the team’s reputation within the
organisation. In this case, even the general public debate about
gender theories had an influence, together with other events and
processes (such as leadership turnover, a structural reform of the
organisation and a shortage of funds), in modifying the way in
which gender equality issues and the teams promoting them can be
perceived and socially recognised.
AREA 1
1414
The Cases
CASE 1 → FOCUSING ON YOUNG PEOPLE
The starting point
In an EC funded project focusing on early-career and temporary researchers,
the project teams were mainly composed of young researchers with fixed-
term contracts. The results of the initial research, creating the knowledge
base for the project’s action plans, showed that temporary employees
tended to disappear after the expiration of their contracts. Consistently with
the philosophy behind the project, the choice was made to make the work of
these categories of personnel visible, so that coordinators and WP leaders
were not the only ones to present the project, to speak in public situations
or to publish articles about it.
Another important consequence of the project approach was to entrust a
non-tenured researcher who played a decisive role in the process of design,
application and financing of the project with the role of project manager
at her University (the one coordinating the European consortium) and her
subsequent appointment as scientific coordinator, once the previous
incumbent had taken the role of pro-vice rector. The aim was to have her
past and present merit acknowledged. This opened a formal problem,
since in the country where she is based (as opposed to what is stated in
the European Commission legislation) researchers who are not permanent
employees cannot be formally in charge of European projects as scientific
coordinators.
The dynamics
The initial decision to give visibility to researchers on fixed-term contracts
was a sort of trademark of the European project. It was put into practice
whenever possible by all project partners in their action plans. Their
sensitivity to this aspect facilitated the implementation of this practice.
A different reaction of some senior researchers of the department where the
project was based was triggered by the appointment of a non-permanent
employee as project scientific coordinator. This practice was seen as a
bit too much by many executives of the administration, who alleged its
supposed inconsistency with national and European law, and opposed by
some professors. So, opposition was strong and negotiations were long.
Meanwhile, the team discovered that non-tenured researchers were project
scientific coordinators at some other departments of the same university.
The change was anyway slow, and the procedures during the transition
intricate.
Some results
During the project period, young people often told the project coordinator
that they had been recognised at conferences, something important to build
their own network. The practice of entrusting a non-tenured researcher as EC
project manager sets an interesting precedent for the recognition of a very
frequent phenomenon, namely the importance of unstructured researchers
in drafting and applying for funded research projects.
CASE 2 → STRUGGLING FOR VISIBILITY IN A COMPLEX
ENVIRONMENT
The starting point
At one university, with a long track record in commitment to gender equality,
a Gender Equality Office was created and a gender policy has been in place
since 2010. The start of the institutional change project raised the level
of expectations around the possibility of implementing a wider range of
actions, not only at University level, but also in a larger network of local
universities.
During the project lifespan, the Gender Equality Office had the opportunity
to promote new actions, while others were extended to the network of
universities. This brought an increase in the visibility and reputation of the
Gender Equality Office, despite its limited staff (only three people, two of
whom employed through temporary contracts, thanks to project funds). No
additional personnel were hired to handle the new commitments, despite the
reiterated requests of the project team, due to the contingent situation of
the national reform of universities and the shortage of funds.
The dynamics
Some external factors came into play during the project. At the national
level, on the one hand, new laws on equality entered into force, also
affecting public universities, so that gender equality was included in the
public agenda. On the other hand, the on-going national reform of the higher
education was imposing huge restructuration processes on universities, with
the subsequent reallocation of personnel and budget. In this framework,
the external political debate on gender theories, often questioned as non-
scientific and strongly ideological, started to have an influence on the status
of the staff in charge of gender equality issues.
In the organisation, different and sometimes opposed positions emerged
towards the need to strengthen the gender equality office. The newly elected
president was initially less supportive towards the gender equality policy
within the institution and less inclined to enhance efforts in this direction.
Other top leaders, instead, members of the project think tank, expressed
their endorsement.
Some results
The extension of the project’s actions to a larger network of local universities,
as well as the intensification of public initiatives on gender equality, had an
important impact on the working conditions of the project’s team members.
If on the one hand this situation was very challenging for them, it made the
action of the university on gender equality more visible and highlighted the
project’s results. Furthermore, it reinforced the support of the leaders of the
university for the team.
2. REPUTATION BUILDING
14
15
The Cases
Internal networks in charge of gender equality actions
3. ORGANISATIONAL EMBEDMENT
THE ISSUE
A third strand pertaining to the creation of a transformational agent
refers to its capacity to be actually embedded in the organisation.
Indeed, there is always the risk that a team becomes confined to
specific sectors of the organisation (for example, some departments,
some specific professional groups, etc.) and for the action plan to
be known just within a restricted circle of promoters (be they gender
equality officers or experts in gender studies).
How the team and the action plan may become deeply integrated in the
organisation depends on many factors, related to the very features of
the action plan and the organisation, but also on the dominant issues
challenging the organisation in a given moment. Embedding the team
inevitably implies networking activities, allowing the team to act
in different parts of the organisation simultaneously. The main risk
connected to the lack of organisational embedment is that the team
remains isolated and unable to establish bridges with and among key
stakeholders and organisational units.
THE PROCESS
The concepts of network and networking are broad enough to include
situations which are largely different from each other. Two examples are
provided in the cases presented below.
• Case 1 presents a network involving female academic staff,
from PhD students to associate professors established within
the university, to promote women to top leadership and academic
positions. Almost immediately, some problems arose in the
relations between this network and an already existing
network of women full professors. The case is interesting
since it shows that the organisational embedment of the team may
sometimes be hindered by other actors or initiatives similarly aimed
at promoting gender equality in science. However, it also highlights
that, once effective forms of cooperation are established, the
connection with pro-women actors may have multiplying effects on
the process of change.
• Case 2 is different. In this case, an institutionally-recognised
network of referents to support the action plan was created, so
as to promote the implementation of gender equality actions in all
relevant areas of the organisation. This network undoubtedly played
a key role, even though its establishment had some significant
repercussions of an organisational and especially of a political
nature, which the team had to address by developing specific
strategies.
AREA 1
1616
The Cases
3. ORGANISATIONAL EMBEDMENT
CASE 1 → PROMOTING SYNERGIES AMONG NETWORKS
The starting point
As part of the project in one of the universities involved, a network of female
academic staff, from PhD students to associate professors, was created in
the first project year. The main aim of the network was to contribute to the
advancement of academic women to higher positions by facilitating meetings
in which they could share experiences and work together on their personal
and professional development, while possibly also standing up together for
issues related to women in the institution. This network complemented the
existing university network of female full professors.
The dynamics
The positions of chair, treasurer and secretary of the network were initially
all taken by PhD students. Since this network visibly represented the younger
generation, this increased the legitimacy of the network and increased,
although progressively, the acceptance of the network by the existing
network of female full professors. The network became very active during
the first project period. During the four-year project lifespan, it organised a
series of eleven successful meetings (both lunch meetings and lectures)
and a conference and became institutionally supported by the university
with an annual budget. Besides this, the members of the network were also
involved in other project activities held in their respective departments.
Along project duration, at least two major difficulties arose, progressively
overcome.
The first was the latent conflict with the existing network of female full
professors at the University, which was already an interlocutor for the top
leadership of the university and had some reluctance to accept the inception
of a new initiative. This required a supplementary effort of negotiation by
the project’s team leader, whose role was very important in facilitating the
dialogue and identifying common objectives and cooperation strategies.
The second was caused by the intense voluntary work that the network
occasionally required, which was particularly borne by the core group,
whose involvement was less formally defined in the project. This factor led
to some tension and to one case of burn-out. Extension of the core group and
turnover were required to restore the situation.
Some results
After three years of existence, the network was recognised as a conversation
partner in setting university equality policies. Its members reported that
their visibility had increased thanks to their work in it. Together with the full
professors’ network, it has a critical mass that supports the development
of gender equality policies. In return, the university board provides financial
and administrative resources to support the networks.
CASE 2 → THE PROS AND CONS OF INSTITUTIONAL NETWORKS
The starting point
Once the university was informed of the project’s funding, one of the initial
activities – which became a main aspect of its structure – was the creation
of an internal gender equality network of referents, including scientific
and administrative personnel as representative of all the departments and
services. This network was intended to be the backbone of the project, and
more in general of the university’s gender policy, since its members provide
information on the actual needs of the departments they are working in,
share information on the project and link with the top and middle leadership.
The dynamics
The impulse to launch this new network was given from the former president
of the University, a nationally renowned supporter of gender equality in
higher education. The project team was in charge of collecting spontaneous
candidatures from each service and department of the university, to be
subsequently ratified by the University’s Local Council. The network meets
in plenary twice a year, but is constantly in touch with the project core team
to organise activities (trainings, seminars, campaigns, etc.).
The project team ‘s initial idea was to use the referents to spread the gender
policy throughout the organisation. During operations, it was seen that these
people, due to their position in the university (some of them were members
of elective bodies and/or were influential professors), could also have a
more political role in enhancing internal support for the project and gender
equality activities. However, this political role has sometimes resulted in
opposition towards some project initiatives and their subsequent slowdown
or rescheduling.
Another problem which occurred after the initial enthusiasm, was a certain
stagnation and passivity in the participation of the referents in the meetings,
more frequent among administrative staff. To overcome the passivity and
prevent defections, the team tried to assign a specific role to each one in
the drafting of the new gender plan of the university.
Some results
Once activated in an effective way, the network started to constitute real
support for the project. As regards the activities, the referents are in some
cases co-organisers, and are able to convene researchers into project
activities, extending the reach of the core team, mainly composed of gender
officers. They have been involved in preparing the institution’s triennial
gender action plan, which encompasses the continuation of some project
activities. Besides this, network members are also active in organising
new actions related to topics close to those of the project (e.g., forms
of discrimination other than gender). As for internal policy, they actually
helped the core team to gain support from the top management, actively
contributing to their legitimization and institutionalization and extending the
scope of the gender policy throughout the university.
16
17
The Cases
Stable staff and resources for gender equality actions
4. SECURING STAFF AND RESOURCES
THE ISSUE
There is at least another process which is involved in the evolution of a
team into a transformational agent, and it concerns the achievement of
adequate stability and resources both for team members and for actions
to be implemented, making the best use of, and integrating the project
budget.
This may imply different aspects, including: job stabilisation for team
members in charge of the action plan, so as to ensure they have
appropriate working conditions; securing adequate levels of funding
and adequate funding procedures; making all the resources available
when they are needed; reducing the amount of voluntary action in the
daily functioning of the team.
All in all, securing staff and resources means preventing the risk of
starting something which cannot be completed, or diverting energy and
time of team members from the main objective of implementing the
action plan and involving other actors in it.
THE PROCESS
Two cases have been selected on this topic from the experience of
TRIGGER partners and sister projects.
• Case 1 is an example of how important it is to provide the team
with adequate resources to promote and manage the gender equality
initiatives encompassed in the project, the implementation of which
requires full-time engagement, so that people are actually able to
work in proper conditions.
• A similar message can be drawn from Case 2, where the need to
provide the team with a full-time coordinator clearly emerged, so as
to ensure continuity for the activities.
Finally, in the box below, a report of a TRIGGER partner highlights the
fact that providing stable working conditions for team members may
also have direct positive impacts on the action plan.
STABLE GENDER OFFICERS
During the first year of the TRIGGER project, the Paris Diderot
University decided to open a permanent position for its gender equality
office. The coordinator of the French TRIGGER team, having worked on a
temporary basis in the office for four years, passed the selection and was hired
at the beginning of the second year of the project. This position also allowed
her to successfully put forward her candidature in some elective
bodies of the university, thus increasing her opportunities to
introduce gender issues to different audiences.
AREA 1
1818
The Cases
4. SECURING STAFF AND RESOURCES
CASE 1 → SUCCESSFUL COFINANCING STRATEGIES
The starting point
The structural change projects were co-funded by the EC and partner
institutions were required to finance the remaining 30%. When recruiting
new partners, the coordinator of a structural change project needed to make
it clear to potential partner organisations that this was not unreasonable, as
gender equality work has a cost and cannot be done, for example, by female
researchers without compensation, as is often the case. That is, the project
would only be a kick start, and in the long run the institutions would have to
pay for gender equality work anyway. It was necessary to point out that the
project’s funds should stimulate and not replace institutional commitment
to gender equality.
The dynamics
In the submission phase, creating an intentional consortium with partners
able to commit their institutions, which were not always very interested in
a gender equality policy, to co-fund the project was not easy. On the other
hand, the ones who achieved this result had, in the written commitment to
co-fund, a countermeasure in cases of possible disengagement, for example
due to a change of institutional leadership during the project’s life.
Once they had decided to participate in the project, indeed, several of the
partners managed to get additional funds from their institutions, to start new
initiatives (quite various since their starting points were heterogeneous).
These funds were sometimes designed to last beyond the end of the project.
Some results
Despite their different initial conditions, the project partners were
successfully involved in project actions. Most of them, after the end of the
project, succeeded in continuing some elements of gender policy in their
organization over and above European funding.
CASE 2 → ENSURING A FULLTIME COORDINATOR
The starting point
One project partner in an EC-funded structural change project had devised
a rich and articulated action plan, which was implemented under the
responsibility of a differentiated group of people (both located in research
departments and in the central services of the institution), all of them
working on a part-time basis. The project coordinator had a role atthe
rector´s office, supporting European project design and management.
The dynamics
The position of the project coordinator helped her reach out to different
kinds of people and the top leadership of the institution, giving the gender
action plan a certain visibility. However, in a period of intense change of
national higher education laws, her institutional responsibilities made it
difficult for her to keep up with all the deadlines and project actions. As a
consequence, some actions had to be delayed due to the work overload of
both the coordinator and other persons (who were working part-time). At the
end of the project’s first year, the decision was made, also on the advice of
the external evaluators, to appoint a project manager to give continuity to
the project’s action.
Some results
The additional investment in human resources expressly devoted to the
gender action plan has allowed the team to implement a comprehensive
action plan and to start a path towards consolidating its results after the
conclusion of the project.
18
19
Key issues
TRANSFORMATIONAL AGENT
Turning a team into a transformational agent is undoubtedly a process
which requires time, attention, and specific efforts. Four main strands
fostering this shift have been highlighted, i.e.:
• Accessing expertise (the team acquiring or accessing the
capacities and skills necessary to start the action plan)
• Reputation building (the team increasing their reputation and
visibility within the organisation)
• Organisational embedment (the team taking root in different
parts of the organisation through networking)
• Securing staff and resources (the team and team members
accessing adequate working conditions and resources to carry out
the gender action plan).
Probably, other aspects should be also considered.
Even though it is impossible to provide specific recommendations
and guidance on how to drive such a process, some key issues can
be highlighted on the basis of the cases which were presented and,
broadly speaking, of the mutual learning activity carried out throughout
the TRIGGER project.
Taking the complexity of the action plan seriously. All the cases
presented and aspects highlighted converge to show how many variables
come into play in the implementation of an action plan. Working on
gender issues is not like working on any other organisational aspects
of an institution. Gender inequality is a widespread, persistent, and
deep social process, crosscutting cultures and societies, and it cannot
be addressed through simple policy measures or communication
initiatives. Hence the need for a team to develop over time, through
experience, learning activities and the involvement of other sources
of expertise, into a true agent of transformation able to cope with the
complexity inherently present in a gender action plan and in the specific
environment it is addressing.
Widening the space for gender equality issues. The “space”
available for promoting gender equality in research institutions is
usually small, the awareness and interest of leaders – whose support
is essential to attain long lasting impacts – is often limited or
discontinuous; gender equality is not perceived as a priority or even as an
issue by many researchers, including many women; the size and impact
of gender inequality is often a controversial issue; in a context where
competition among researchers, research institutions and universities
is rapidly increasing, time and interest to address inequality is normally
low and gets easily saturated. Thus, increasing the reputation and
visibility of the team, activating networks able to reach out to different
parts of the organisation, or enhancing the capacity of the team to deal
with gender dynamics can be considered as requirements for widening
such a space, so as to make gender equality a viable perspective for
change.
The misleading view of volunteering. Addressing institutional
gender issues is often seen as outside a normal academic portfolio,
and is instead taken up as volunteer service. Failure to understand the
impact of structural barriers to women on institutional productivity and
effectiveness, and leaving design and management of gender action
plans to a small group dedicated to the “good cause” of gender equality
undermines the likelihood that a gender action plan will advance the
status of the women and of the institution. This approach underestimates
the costs of gender equality actions, especially as concerns the costs of
human resources. Instead, the team should be a team of professionals
with complementary skills who devote time and energy to the plan on a
full-time or part-time basis, and are adequately compensated for this.
The involvement of people and actors on a voluntary basis is obviously
necessary, but providing adequate status and compensation for the
team most directly in charge of implementation is essential.
The sense of ownership of the action plan. Another aspect for which
a transformational agent is needed concerns the “sense of ownership”
of the gender action plan. Often funded or promoted by the EC or external
actors, action plans are not always perceived by leaders, central offices
and personnel as part of the activities, priorities and objectives of the
institution. This often makes it difficult for them to get involved or to stay
involved over time, because of the lack of a sense of ownership about
the action plan. Hence the need for the team to become visible, to gain
internal reputation, to be structurally embedded in the organisational
charter, and to get additional resources from the organisation itself,
so as to promote this sense of ownership and to make the action plan
a part of the ordinary life and the strategic priorities of the institution.
AREA 1
2020
ACTIVATION AND MOBILISATION
AREA 2
Changes limited in scope and application, or with little implications for employees or external parties, are not likely
to need a great deal of mobilisation and support. But when change is expected to influence practically all the aspects
and levels of a given organisation, the question of why and how to activate institutional stakeholders and employees
becomes crucial.
This is obviously the case for gender equality issues. Changing the state of things in this domain is simply
impossible if change is promoted or sustained by few and ignored by many (or even opposed by some). It is not simply
a question of consensus-building; rather, it is a question of providing the change with the necessary social energy
and human resources, addressing resistance and organisational stickiness.
In this perspective, action plans can also be viewed as a device for mobilising and coordinating actors and
individuals – each one with their own interests, expectations and views – and driving them towards negotiated
objectives of gender equality.
Limited mobilisation of actors exposes an action plan to the risk of marginality and irrelevance, with respect to
both organisational strategies and the professional and personal life of researchers and employees.
This section deals with this process, which is vital for the success of an action plan. On the basis of the experiences
discussed in the framework of mutual learning, six strands of such a component have been identified:
• Scientific recognition
• Political backing
• Engagement space creation
• Mobilisation of pro-women actors
• Active involvement of men
• Implementation backing.
The second component of the process of change, as it is
conventionally modelled in these Guidelines, is the activation and
mobilisation of internal and external stakeholders and individuals.
21
22
PARTICIPATORY GENDER AUDIT
In Genis Lab, as a first step in all the partner organisations
implementing action plans, a participatory gender audit (PGA),
involving many different people at all levels, was organised, following
the methodology set up by the ILO. The PGA, i.e., an action-research
methodology that helps to ‘map’ an organisation from a gender equality
perspective, combines the objective observation of facts and data with a more in-
depth and qualitative reflection on individual and collective rules, behaviours, and
beliefs, as well as their impact on gender equality. The involvement of leaders
and stakeholders in the PGA actually led to people being mobilised
around gender equality, or at least it paved the way for a smooth
implementation of the actions encompassed in the gender
action plans set out in the second part of the project’s life.
See: http://www.genislab-fp7.eu/index.php/guidelines
Scientific methodologies to increase awareness and ownership
5. SCIENTIFIC RECOGNITION
THE ISSUE
In scientific domains it is particularly important to counter the idea
that the presence of gender inequality is not scientifically proved, or
that approaches and tools adopted to ascertain inequalities are not
methodologically correct.
This situation is not infrequent. Scientists are prone to think that
personal merit is the primary parameter around which science revolves.
Even though such an inclination is usually mitigated by personal
experience and more realistic considerations, it can be difficult for
many of them (including women) to recognise that relevant aspects and
mechanisms of their own research organisation are strongly influenced
by gender bias and stereotypes.
Hence the need for an action plan to get scientific recognition by
generating data and information which are able to make gender inequality
a scientifically grounded fact, as well as by adopting a language which
can be shared by the community of scientists, and developing actions
which are methodologically sound and substantively convincing.
This issue is necessarily connected to that of the reputation of the
team, discussed in the previous section. Providing gender issues and
the action plan with a recognised scientific basis is relatively easy for
a team made up of people with a good scientific reputation. However, it
may also happen that reluctance to recognise gender bias in one’s own
scientific organisation is so widespread and strong as to endanger the
reputation of those who maintain that it exists.
THE PROCESS
Different approaches may be applied to ensure solid and visible scientific
grounds to an action plan. Some examples have been provided during
the mutual learning process.
• Case 1 presents a successful attempt made by a team to introduce
an advanced technique – the Gender Budgeting Method – aimed
at measuring gender inequality in all sectors and levels of the
organisation. This method also takes into account aspects which
are usually neglected or overlooked. Despite the many technical and
organisational problems inevitably met in testing such a technique,
its application proved extremely useful in putting the question of
gender inequality in the agenda of the organisation.
• Case 2 presents a similar initiative to analyse gender inequality
mechanisms by applying a combination of different methods,
including the collection of statistical data, the implementation of a
survey and the organisation of various focus groups. The case shows
how the implementation of serious analyses contributes in arousing
interest in gender equality within the organisation but, at the same
time, how important leadership support is in making these analyses
possible.
• In Case 3, an example is provided of an action plan in which, from the
beginning, an effort was made to account for the condition of women
in the organisation through a research initiative. This initiative was
also conducted with a view to embed permanently in the organisation
the practice of producing a report on gender equality on a regular
basis, to make the organisation more transparent. The example
shows how this effort may be jeopardized by different factors
(including the weakening of internal political support), despite the
positive outputs it may produce.
Finally, in the box, the case of the GenisLab project is briefly recalled,
where a specific methodology – the Participatory Gender Audit – has
been successfully applied, with the effect of raising awareness of and
participation levels in gender issues in all the concerned organisations.
AREA 2
23
The Cases
5. SCIENTIFIC RECOGNITION
CASE 1 → TESTING NEW METHODS
The starting point
One of the first FP7 projects adopted the technique of gender budgeting (GB,
an application of gender mainstreaming in the budgetary process), whose
full implementation was achieved at the end of the project in some of the
institutions involved. The main purpose of GB is specifically to contrast
opaqueness in decision-making processes, which was considered to be
the first problem faced by research institutions in the implementation of
institutional change for gender equality. The gender budget analysis, in
the case of this project, also involved the measurement of space and time
availability for women and men researchers in the institutions concerned.
The dynamics
Data collection for gender budgeting was something new and challenging.
Difficulties arose in retrieving, processing, and in some cases harmonising
the data collected by the different European partners, operations which
took longer than foreseen, especially in cases where data were sorted
according to different criteria. Some data (e.g., about the gender pay gap)
were impossible to gather and analyse in the given timeframe. This made it
difficult to use all the data collected to design the action plan, since some
information was only available at the end of the project.
Some results
The provision of detailed data succeeded in overcoming the frequent
objection: “This problem doesn’t concern our organisation”. Where
gender budgeting was completed, gender inequalities in the availability of
resources for women and men scientists were documented in detail, making
it impossible to deny or overlook them.
CASE 2 → ANALYSING INEQUALITY MECHANISMS
The starting point
A first phase of intensive data collection, followed by a set of presentation
and dissemination activities, was also performed by a technical university
in the framework of a European project. First, a survey was implemented
in the first year and comprised: 1) an analysis of sex-disaggregated
statistics on human resources, and; 2) quantitative and qualitative research
(questionnaire survey and focus groups) on the situation of university staff
in terms of needs, opportunities and barriers for the professional and
career development of women and men both in research and teaching as
well as administrative positions. These reports and research findings were
presented to and discussed with top management and key stakeholders.
Some results (from a statistical survey) were published in the national
language in a poster and on the project website, and widely disseminated.
The dynamics
While the collection of statistics was relatively smooth, more difficulties
emerged in the survey on needs, opportunities and barriers. Concerns about
anonymity and the possibility of being recognised were manifested by some
interviewees, as well as the fear that non-anonymized survey input would be
provided to top management. Despite this, particularly interesting data have
been collected, also because of the willingness of people (both women and
men) to express their opinions about some crucial aspects of their working
environment.
The leaders of the faculties did not give their support to the implementation
of the survey, as was expected. This was only partially compensated by the
support given by the former vice-rector. In particular, the female bursar
disapproved of publication, for fear that it would disclose cases in which the
Labour Code was being violated, namely when exceeding the working hours.
The argument was also that persons participating in the survey were people
who were not important researchers or leaders of research teams and that
the conclusions of the survey did not reflect reality.
Nevertheless the project coordinator later enforced the publishing of this and
other reports on the national version of the intranet project websites, so the
reports are accessible to the university staff. Furthermore, some resistance
was noticed when the results of the survey results were presented at the
Academic Senate. According to the team, the results of the survey were
not well received by some of the top leaders, especially as regards those
related to overtime. Some conclusions of the report were challenged by the
top management.
Some results
The project team highlighted a positive impact of the statistical surveys,
which allowed light to be shed on the actual situation within the institution
and consequently for more effective HR strategies to be developed. In the
final part of the project, the team used an update of the statistics and the
report to re-launch the mentoring program, which had been discontinued. It
appears that the use of sex-disaggregated statistics in the institution is now
widespread. The project team leader has received requests from different
people to get the data (for instance from the director, who used them during
an interview with the media), while the bursar asked the team to provide a
financial estimate for continuing data collection in the future.
Scientific methodologies to increase awareness and ownership
2424
CASE 3 → THE PATH TOWARDS TRANSPARENCY ABOUT GENDER
ISSUES
The starting point
Much of the work undertaken in the first year of the gender action plan
focused on research into the situation of women in the institution. The
research report made a substantial contribution to promoting gender in the
institution and beyond, through the accurate description of the situation of
women and men at the university as a whole and at the different schools.
It provided statistical indicators that enabled comparisons to be made with
other national and international studies of women in research and innovation,
such as the reports regularly produced by the European Commission (She
Figures), and the one produced biannually by the national government. On
the occasion of the presentation, to give a clear picture of the ongoing trends,
the team launched an exhibition integrated by panels in which the results of
the report were shown didactically with the use of graphics. This exhibition
was inaugurated in the main building of the university and then circulated
in different schools. The report was written in English, so as to maintain an
international level, and subsequently translated into the national language.
The dynamics
No particular problem emerged during data collection, thanks to the powerful
effect of the endorsement of the top management and the cooperation of
the statistical and administrative offices in charge of data collection (it
happened that where the people in charge felt gratified by the valorisation of
their role, they worked more than requested). Positive effects were produced
by the novelty of the data, showing for instance a strong and rapid increase
in numbers of women students also in some technical areas. There was an
increase in interest in data and graphs that clearly illustrated this kind of
phenomena, which can be used for multiple purposes. A partial change of
scenario, in the last part of the project emerged after the change of rector,
with the election of a management team less interested in gender equality
policy. The statistical data published for the new edition of the statistical
report were less detailed and less attention was given to their publication.
Some results
Taking seriously the report, the former rector of the university decided to
launch a gender action plan of the institution. The collection of the data
was useful not only in convincing the rector, but also in reaching people
who otherwise would not be informed about the project. Different people in
the various schools started to use the collected data for different purposes.
Now the methodology to produce and illustrate data is available for further
editions.
The Cases
25
INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN
“HE FOR SHE”
The EGERA project at Sciences Po (Paris) successfully engaged the
President of the institution in the international campaign “HEforSHE”, thus
enhancing his involvement in the project, and, more in general, committing the
institution to gender equality in a stronger manner. After the initial decision, he was
invited to be one of the university champions of impact, making Sciences Po one
of 10 universities around the world committed to taking bold, game-changing
action to achieve gender equality within and beyond their institutions.
See: http://www.heforshe.org/en/impact
http://www.heforshe.org/-/media/heforshe/files/impactchampion/
heforshe_impactprogramme_university.pdf
Leaders as testimonials for gender equality
6. POLITICAL BACKING
THE ISSUE
The involvement of leaders and managers in gender action plans is one
of the most debated issues.
The key question does not concern whether political backing is
necessary to pursue the objective of gender equality, as this would be
quite obvious. Rather, attention is mainly focused on the process of
involvement and, in particular, how to trigger it and, especially, how to
make it stable over time.
In fact, most of the teams who participated in the mutual learning
exercises, organised under TRIGGER, experienced the fragility,
instability and precariousness of the political backing offered by
the leaders, sometimes implying serious consequences for their action
plan.
This phenomenon can be produced by many factors. One of the most
recurrent factors is leadership turnover, which can alternatively result
either in an unexpected disengagement of the management or in an
equally unexpected increase in the leaders’ involvement. However, other
factors may contribute to this instability, such as shortage of funds,
changes in the overall priorities of the organisation, changes in national
regulations, modifications in the self-promotion strategies of specific
leaders, tensions between the team and some managers, conflicts
between organisational units or simply the unstable and inconsistent
behaviours of the leaders concerned.
THE PROCESS
In this general framework, it is not surprising that all the teams try
to develop their own strategies, geared to activating and stabilising
support from the leadership. In the following cases, three different
situations are presented.
• Case 1 highlights the risks connected to leadership commitment
when it is largely formal. In this case, the situation only improved
when it became necessary for the institution to make a stronger
commitment to gender issues so as not to lose additional funds and
to protect the public image of the organisation.
• In the Case 2, what clearly emerged is the need to develop complex
strategies to involve leaders, even though this may require extra-
work from the team. The keystone of such strategies was to make the
commitment of leaders publicly visible, through public conferences,
mass media and other means, so as to make their disengagement
less likely to occur.
• Case 3 describes an overall approach which frames the involvement
of leaders as part of a broader strategy to promote the institution’s
public accountability by embedding gender equality in the current
practices of the organisation. As the case shows, when leadership
involvement is concerned, the relationships between effort and
result is particularly uncertain, but, once the link is established,
unexpected effects may arise.
In the box, an example is provided of an advanced strategy of leadership
commitment on gender issues based on the launch of an international
campaign.
AREA 2
2626
The Cases
6. POLITICAL BACKING
CASE 1 → WHEN FORMAL SUPPORT IS NOT ENOUGH
The starting point
In the initial phase of the project, a board encompassing deans and other
university leaders was created to back the implementation of the gender action
plan. Despite this arrangement, the actual support for the team was low.
The dynamics
The situation was initially very difficult. Not much help was provided by
the leadership to manage problems and to implement actions (e.g., in
overcoming the objections of the ethical committee for internal research
work, or in convening early career researchers in the project initiatives). At
the faculty where the project team was based, after personal conflicts, one
of the main leaders resigned from the internal board.
The situation around the project started to change mid-term, when
national-level pressure for gender equality in research institutions started
to be strongly felt. The institutional reaction was serious, and included a
willingness to publicly communicate renewed efforts toward institutional
gender equality policy. The attitude of the majority of the leadership changed
and there was increased interest in project activities and instruments.
Leveraging on this, the project team took advantage of the occasion to
publish a series of video-interviews with institutional leaders, who accepted
to share their views on gender equality in higher education, its challenges
and achievements. The first to be interviewed was the Rector of the
university, thus giving the idea that gender equality could not be classified
as a minor issue. Some senior leaders, however, continued to show lack of
interest towards the project.
Some results
The status of the project team has risen in the institution, and the project
has been recognised as one of the internal stakeholders for equality issues.
CASE 2 → DEVELOPING COMPLEX STRATEGIES FOR LEADERS’
INVOLVEMENT
The starting point
Working in a very well-known university for equality management, the
staff of the equality office always succeeded in keeping high the visibility
of the institution’s commitment to gender issues, promoting several public
campaigns and initiatives at national level. Their effort was enhanced by
participation in a European project. Once the project started, however,
a change in the leadership and other surrounding circumstances made it
difficult to increase, or even just preserve, the institutional commitment to
gender issues.
The dynamics
Team members soon realised that directly negotiating the measures they
intended to implement with the president had no effect and, in some cases,
was simply impossible. The attempt was therefore made, also on the
advice of some pro-gender members of the president’s team, to leverage
public visibility to attract more substantial attention and support from the
president. The importance of her presence in national and international
events planned in the framework of the European project was thus strongly
emphasised, as well as her participation in public conferences, the release
of interviews on the mass media, and so on. They consequently decided to
intensify their endeavours on communication and visibility, actively looking
for possible events and interviews to release. This entailed additional work
to prepare documents, short briefings and supporting actions to make it
possible for the president to be well-prepared and updated. The need
emerged to be patient and flexible, not insisting too much in some cases,
while trying to indirectly transmit articulated messages on gender equality
at every opportunity.
Some results
The strategy of personally involving and committing the leadership through
external visibility turned out to be effective. Team members report that they
observed increased knowledge of the issues in focus, as well as progressive
recognition and acceptance of “hot” issues, like the occurrence of sexual
harassment in the institution. All this effort resulted in stronger leadership
ownership of the gender equality policy of the institution, with subsequent
general improvement in the climate for gender equality action at all
organisational levels.
27
The Cases
CASE 3 → CONNECTING LEADERSHIP INVOLVEMENT AND
PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY
The starting point
Under a gender equality project, the issue of the leaders’ involvement was
from the beginning understood as a part of a larger political process aimed
at building the institution’s public accountability on gender equality. In such
a perspective, gender equality and gender awareness are perceived as fully
incorporated in the everyday practices and strategies of the organization,
thus involving a general mobilisation of internal stakeholders, starting from
the leadership. This approach was particularly successful at one partner
organisation.
The dynamics
The launch of the action plan was smooth, also thanks to the initial
endorsement of the top levels of the organisation. Internal attention to
gender equality increased on the occasion of new activities on gender in
research content and the appointment of a gender equality officer.
Despite a generally good situation, the pace of change was somewhat slow,
and toward the end of the first year, a reduction in project visibility was
observed.
Team members thus decided to re-launch it, this time specifically addressing
the top leadership. The situation they tried to reverse was not so much a
lack of commitment, but a sort of missing link with the institutional agenda
of the institution, moving from a side-lined position to a core one. Internal
negotiations were conducted to significantly involve the most important
leader of the university in a public initiative addressed to corporate leaders
and other prominent public personalities, geared at promoting gender
equality in their organisations, making it an integral part of their strategy.
Some results
The public commitment of the institution generated huge visibility in the
media (both newspapers and social media), with the subsequent further
involvement of the top leadership in the process of progressive centralization
of gender equality in the institutional strategy. Thanks to the public attention
on these issues, an unprecedented mobilisation of students was observed.
Their claim for deeper commitment against inequalities in all the aspects of
university life represented a further push factor for change.
2828
AN INTERNAL COMMITTEE
TO TAKE ACTION
Inspired by the Strategies and Tactics for Recruiting
to Improve Diversity and Excellence (STRIDE) Committee,
initially created at the University of Michigan (USA) through the
NSF-ADVANCE Program, the CNRS created – in the framework of INTEGER
– a Committee for Gender Equality and Research Excellence. The purpose
was to review the procedures and practices for the evaluation, recruitment and
promotion of researchers at CNRS. It was composed of the chairs of all CNRS’
standing peer-review evaluation panels, deputy scientific directors,
HR senior officers, senior women researchers and gender experts.
At the end of the project, an increased gender balance was
observed in scientific awards, as well as in recruitment
and promotions.
See: http://www.integer-tools-for-action.eu/en/
resource/lessons-learned
New groups and institutions for new challenges
7. CREATING SPACE FOR ENGAGEMENT
THE ISSUE
Raising awareness and participation on gender issues is of paramount
importance for the success of a gender action plan. However, equally
important is channelling participation towards common objectives
through a system of actions, so as to prevent the disengagement of the
committed people over time.
Usually action plans match this need by creating engagement spaces,
to be intended both in physical and social terms, allowing people to
turn their passion, interest and willingness to participate into actual
participation. In some cases, these spaces may become autonomous
structures (networks, associations, research groups, virtual platforms,
etc.) able to keep on developing after the end of the funded period.
Finding the right engagement solutions is not always simple. To bring
people together and push them to work together on a voluntary basis,
thus creating any kind of new group, a wide range of variables are to be
taken into consideration, such as uneven levels of engagement, time
availability, logistic, technical and organisational aspects, leadership
dynamics, availability of resources, visibility of the new group, and the
negotiation progress of a shared view of the problems to be addressed
and the activities to be done.
Therefore, while the creation of a new group is often the best or the only
solution for turning participation into action, it is also important
to be aware that creating a new group and keeping it active generally
requires, at least initially, a significant investment by the team in terms
of energy and time.
THE PROCESS
Three cases are presented below, each one exemplifying a specific
approach.
• Case 1 pertains to the establishment of multidisciplinary
teams of researchers interested in being professionally engaged
with gendered science. This process started with the organisation
of training activities and workshops. The process then developed,
even though some organisational problems were met. The case in
particular highlights the important role played by the EC in providing
strong political and institutional backing for the introduction of
gender in research contents.
• Case 2 concerns an ambitious attempt to create participatory
groups on gender issues at faculty level, so as to allow those who
were interested in getting involved to actually participate in action
plan development. The case interestingly shows the institutional
dynamics which the creation of new groups may generate (for
example, conflicts between different organisational units) and the
variable impacts this kind of solution may have on different targets
(for example, the uneven participation level of female employees,
male employees and male/female students).
• In case 3, another example of the establishment of a research
team on gendered science is provided. The case confirms the
importance of creating new groups for conveying participation, but it
also illustrates how it is problematic, for people already intensively
engaged in research, teaching, and other academic commitments,
to find the time and energy necessary to actually participate in new
initiatives on a regular basis.
Here, a successful experience from one of the first EC-funded structural
change projects is briefly described.
AREA 2
29
New groups and institutions for new challenges
The Cases
7. CREATING SPACE FOR ENGAGEMENT
CASE 1 → MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAMS ON GENDERED
RESEARCH IN STEMS
The starting point
In a university with a long record of activity of gender equality actions
and some interesting experiences of gender in research and teaching, the
EC funded project was the occasion to launch more systematically some
strands of gendered research in STEM. To liaise with the researchers
and professors of STEM disciplines in the two scientific areas targeted
by the project, the choice was made to create multidisciplinary teams
including social scientists with gender competences and researchers from
different scientific areas. These teams received small grants to advance
multidisciplinary research considering sex and gender aspects in various
fields (e.g., autism, traffic flows, public buildings).
The dynamics
At the very beginning, the problem was to convince people to engage in this
new approach, above all in the medical departments. The team thus spent
the first few months of the project identifying at least one professor in each
department who would be interested in actively participating from the initial
phases, dedicated to gender-based training through an expressly dedicated
course. Some targeted actions were planned that would raise interest in
the proposed project. In particular, a seminar and a national conference
were held, where the importance of gender in research in Horizon 2020
was explained and discussed. These activities were quite effective, as was
the training course addressing PhD students, researchers and professors,
organised as an interactive workshop during which all participants had
the opportunity to contribute. The ideas expressed during the interactive
session were the basis for testing innovative procedures and tools. The
multidisciplinary research has since then progressed and is currently
ongoing.
Some results
The strategy adopted for gendering research contents within the European
framework proved to be highly effective and useful in the medium-term too.
The team has extended its scope to other scientific areas and interested
individuals.
CASE 2 → PARTICIPATORY GROUPS AT FACULTY LEVEL
The starting point
The launch of the European project was supported from the very beginning by
the top management of the university. The process envisaged in the project
entailed the creation of permanent groups in all the faculties concerned.
Each group was composed of people at different career levels – from the
dean to the PhD student, with the aim also of creating a stronger link
between research and teaching – and was responsible for identifying the
issues at stake for gender equality in their working environment. The core
team was very clear about the need to convene motivated people. The work
started in one faculty, which was used as a test case, and was subsequently
extended to other three, thus involving four out of five university faculties.
Core team members were constantly in touch with the groups, due also to
the fact that the faculties involved were all represented in the core team, and
they continued to stay in touch throughout the implementation, to report on
their progress. Only at one faculty, which joined later, the staff decided not
to continue to cooperate with the project, not accepting to be in a somewhat
collateral position. Once established, the groups set a programme of
actions to be implemented in a given time frame (whose length was decided
based on the complexity of the activities and the specificity of the faculty
involved). The idea was to link with some strategic issues at each faculty.
In one faculty, three cycles of actions were implemented, while in another
just one.
The dynamics
The constitution of the groups was not a problem, thanks also to strong
leadership endorsement. In one faculty there were men sceptical about
gender equality, one of them publicly critical. During a participatory meeting,
where the discussion was open and informal, his position was analysed
and, after further dialogue with the project team coordinator, his attitude
changed, leading him to cooperate with further project initiatives.
One problem was the low number of men and students involved. As for
men, the team tried to involve the deans (all men), and organised a panel
of men during international women’s day. Concerning the students, the
team organised targeted focus groups to talk about gender equality, and a
campaign on the social media, thus improving the situation.
Some results
The vertical commitment of the groups made it possible to be effective
in launching and implementing new actions. The groups generated
interest in senior researchers and subsequently pressure on the university
management, allowing for decisions to be made on measures to be adopted
(e.g., improving the policy of maternal leaves for young researchers).
3030
The Cases
CASE 3 → A TEAM FOR PROMOTING GENDER IN RESEARCH
CONTENTS
The starting point
In a technical university involved in an EC-funded project, the team tried
to address the challenge of inserting sex and gender aspects in research
methodologies and contents through different actions. The first step was to
create an internal team made up of one assistant professor and one research
fellow, i.e., two researchers interested in the issue. The core team saw that
these researchers were in a better position to have access to students and
colleagues, as well as specific resources. They received training and started
to collect recent literature on gender in research in their scientific fields and
sub-fields, with the idea of becoming focal points for these subjects both in
the framework of the project and more in general within their departments,
which they actually did. Being involved in teaching, they have been able to
transmit their approach to students and to orient their research work, which
is bound to last from the undergraduate course up to the PhD and longer,
and to keep them liaised throughout the project activities and after they end.
The dynamics
Albeit interest towards the issues dealt with was never questioned, the
persons in charge of gender in research, especially in some periods of the
year, are overloaded with work, being involved with teaching, supervising
students’ theses, and other academic commitments. Furthermore, less
interest, resulting in weaker support than expected, was manifested by other
women professors in involving their students, so that the team often has to
address the students directly. The mutual exchange with the project’s core
team was helpful for rearranging actions and making them more in line with
the target interests (e.g., creating a research contest).
Some results
The group succeeded in starting and implementing innovative activities
on gender in research, thanks to the resources provided by the European
project and the interest aroused in the top management by some of the new
methodologies adopted to raise the interest of students.
31
Involving groups and structures already concerned with gender
8. MOBILISATION OF PROWOMEN ACTORS
THE ISSUE
For a team in charge of an action plan, in addition to the mobilisation
and activation of new actors on gender equality, another issue which is
equally important is the mobilisation and activation of existing actors,
i.e., the actors who are already engaged in gender equality in science.
This aspect undoubtedly concerns the existing actors within the
organisation, such as equality officers or committees, women’s
associations or networks.
In some cases, pro-women actors who are external to the
organisation are usefully involved. These connections may help the
team in different ways: linking the action plan with a larger public
arena, as well as broader scientific and information circuits; increasing
the external visibility of the action plan, which also has internal effects;
attaining external resources, knowledge and information; learning from
other expert actors; finding additional institutional support; involving
external experts in the action plan; promoting long-term sustainability.
THE PROCESS
Strategies for involving internal or external actors that are already
committed to gender equality may vary according to the type of actor
and the nature of the cooperation established with them. Opportunities,
risks and obstacles tend to vary accordingly.
• In Case 1, a connection was established between the team and a
new-born institutional entity, i.e., a national conference of the
units in charge of equality issues within public universities: the
intention was to establish a specific section on gendered science
within the new body. A process was set in motion in this direction,
even if slower than expected, due also to resistance on the issue
from some members of the conference.
• Case 2 reports a strategy pursued by a gender equality team in a
university to create a national network of gender equality bodies
in higher education institutions well before applying for and
implementing a funded project. While representing a certain effort
for the project team, once the project started, this turned out to be
an advantageous investment for the success of its action plan.
Finally, in the box below, a successful example is provided of the fruitful
interaction established by a team with many national and international
organisations and networks addressing gender equality and women
studies.
NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL
NETWORK OF WOMEN IN SCIENCE
AND UNIVERSITY
The TRIGGER partner UPM implemented the first gender action plan in a
technical university in Spain. To enhance its efforts within the institution, the team
carries out intensive networking activities on gender-related issues, both at national
and international level, including participation within Plataforma Universitaria de Estudios
Feministas y de Género (University Platform of Feminist and Gender Studies), Global Network
of UNESCO Chairs on Gender, AMIT Asociación Mujeres Investigadoras y Tecnólogas (the Spanish
Association of Women Researchers), Red RUIGEU (the network of all the equality units of Spanish
universities); Grupo de Trabajo GENDER4UP (a working group within Asociación UP4, including
the four technical universities in Spain), Asociación de Mujeres Arquitectas de España
(Association of Women Architects of Spain) (in process of being set up), Fundación
Mujeres X África (Women for Africa Foundation), EWORA – European Women
Rectors Association, and finally a network uniting the Spanish projects
addressing gender in science funded by the European Commission,
which was created by the Spanish Secretary of State for Research.
See: http://www.idi.mineco.gob.es/stfls/MICINN/Ministerio/
FICHEROS/UMYC/TRIGGER_UPM.pdf
The Cases AREA 2
3232
The Cases
8. MOBILISATION OF PROWOMEN ACTORS
CASE 1 → AN INSTITUTIONAL NETWORK ON EQUALITY IN
SCIENCE
The starting point
The project’s original plan aimed to support the institutionalization of
a national association of women scientists, which would act as a lobby
promoting gender equality in science and gender studies at the Ministry
of Education, University and Research. A National Conference of Equality
Bodies of National Universities was created in the year leading up to the
project – thanks to the networking activities carried out at national level by
one of the universities involved. The project team thus decided to support the
new association and to establish an internal section dedicated to promoting
a gender-aware research approach.
The dynamics
During the first year of the project, networking activities within the National
Conference allowed the team to actively involve its members and to have
them participate in a training session on gendered science held during the
project’s first year. Four seats were offered to conference members, of which
they made full use. Despite this, some doubts arose among the constituency
of the conference about the advisability of creating a dedicated section to
gender in research, since some members of the board were not in favour of
increasing institutional complexity. The project team leader insisted – in
plenary meetings and individual conversations – on the advantages that the
approach could yield in terms of visibility and authoritativeness. Six months
later, the first thematic section was institutionalised during the annual
General Assembly of the conference. After this, the project team supported
the conference in launching communication activities and a membership
campaign. The response has been slow, since the activity of the conference
is on a voluntary basis and its board is often overwhelmed with other
professional and institutional commitments.
Some results
Two initiatives on gender in research organised by the Conference of Equality
Bodies were held in the following two years and there has been interest
beyond the members at national level (e.g., in the National health institute
and in the regional authority of the region were the project is located). The
visibility of the project in the university, as well as at local and national
level, has thus increased.
CASE 2 → EXTENDING THE IMPACT OF THE GENDER EQUALITY
PLAN THROUGH NATIONAL NETWORKS
The starting point
In the years preceding the beginning of the project, one of the partners
in an FP7-funded project promoted a national coordinating association
of university gender equality officers, to share experiences and support
common actions at national level. Being one of the main promoters, the
initial commitment of the project team members was strong, especially in
drafting the statute of the new association.
The dynamics
The cooperation with the national association developed throughout the
implementation of the gender equality plan, thanks also to the constant
commitment of the team, with benefits for both the GEP and the association.
In particular, many gender equality officers nationwide have had the
opportunity to know about and use the statistical data collected under the
action plan, through a meeting organised by the association where they were
presented. In turn, the team was supported by the association in organising
an international conference as well as in lobbying for gender equality
measures (e.g., against sexual harassment) with the Ministry of Higher
Education, which now officially recognises the association as an interlocutor
on gender equality issues. The project team members have also been invited
to join some working groups at national level as representatives of both their
institution and the association of equality officers.
Some results
Thanks to this partnership, some of the actions included in the GEP are
also reported to have been replicated in other institutions. Moreover,
the collaboration with the gender equality officers and their association
allowed the team to count on additional connections and to increase their
authoritativeness. All that turned out to be useful to implement the GEP.
33
The Cases
Bringing men into the core of institutional change
9. ACTIVE INVOLVEMENT OF MEN
THE ISSUE
There is a sort of implicit and widespread assumption that gender
equality is mainly a women’s affair. Maintaining this position is not only
“politically incorrect” but it’s also theoretically and practically wrong.
Despite that, when an action plan is conceived and developed, men
tend, quite systematically, to remain out of the picture, unless they
perform a leadership role, so that their overall disengagement is almost
taken for granted (if not silently justified) by both women and men.
This is particularly dangerous for different reasons.
In the first place, without the meaningful involvement of men,
institutional change is much more difficult to attain and much slower.
Targeting women as the main beneficiaries of the gender action plan
and the main actors to mobilise is a dangerous choice. Women – and
particularly women scientists – do not usually like to get involved in
women-only initiatives, which can stigmatize women. On the other
hand, women-only initiatives may fuel further men’s disengagement or
even men’s hostile reactions towards the gender action plan. Finally,
not connecting gender issues with the strategic challenges of the
organisation as a whole, including both men and women, inevitably
leads to the marginalisation of gender inequality in the policy agenda
of the organisation.
THE PROCESS
Mobilising men is thus necessary but, in the context described above,
the objective can be difficult to fully achieve. Different strategies have
been developed to address the participation gap of male employees and
researchers in gender action plans. Some examples are given in the
cases presented below.
• In Case 1, the main strategy involved planning from the beginning
a balanced participation of women and men in the different initiatives
of the project on gender equality. In this perspective, even though
the team was initially made up of women, a big effort was made
to enlarge team composition. Results have been promising, but in
some cases the attempt to encourage the participation of men led
to a slow down of planned activities or additional problems in their
implementation.
• Case 2 shows another strategy, aimed at ensuring gender balance
in any public initiative conducted under the action plan, so as
to also allow for the possible critical positions of men to emerge
in the public debate. This objective was achieved in the case of a
discussion launched under the action plan on gendered science,
leading to an increase in the visibility of this issue within the
organisation.
• In Case 3, the approach was to develop initiatives of general interest
that were open to both females and males but designed from a
gender perspective. The underlying logic was not to exclude men
but to exclude the male-dominated culture on which these initiatives
are usually based.
The box below briefly presents another important strategy to get men
involved, i.e., that of making them testimonials of gender equality and
putting them at the forefront of the debate of gender equality as gender
experts.
MEN TESTIMONIALS
AND GENDER EQUALITY EXPERTS
At the Prague Institute of Chemical Technology (VSCHT), a strongly
male-dominated institution in top positions, a constant effort to invite
men testimonials to discuss institutional challenges related to gender
equality was made by the team of the TRIGGER project. Among others, Curt Rice,
Rector of the Oslo and Akershus University College (NO), Manfred Horvath, Honorary
Professor of the Vienna University of Technology (AU), and Gary Loke, Deputy Chief
Executive and Head of Policy and External Relations for Equality Challenge Unit (UK)
were invited. The participation of men researchers and middle managers was
active and the initiatives successful. See:
http://triggerproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Newsletter-3-_def.pdf
http://triggerproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Newsletter-4_def.pdf
http://triggerproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Newsletter-5_
def.pdf
AREA 2
The Cases
3434
9. ACTIVE INVOLVEMENT OF MEN
CASE 1 → INVOLVEMENT OF MEN PLANNED FROM THE
BEGINNING
The starting point
In one of the first FP7-funded projects, the involvement of men was planned
from the very beginning. In most of the project teams there weren’t any
men, but cooperation with some important men in the organisation was
constant (e.g., heads of department). Another key point was to involve very
important men, who felt recognised being informed and/or consulted about
the progress of activities, and anchor the project to them, even if they were
not directly involved.
The dynamics
As expected, things worked better with influential men who were already
pro-gender. Concerning other men, efforts were made to make them aware
of inequalities – something they rarely perceive – and the fact that it is a
negative situation for the institution. Information seldom met resistance.
However, sometimes it was more difficult to involve men who should directly
participate in the activities, such as heads of department. At the beginning of
the implementation process, cooperation with the heads of department was
generally good, even though men’s attitudes and participation levels varied.
At two departments, the heads were informed and engaged together, and
as one of the heads was very pro-gender, the head who was more negative
found it more difficult to oppose in isolation. However, relying on these two
male heads ran into a problem after the elections, when one of the heads
of department changed. The new male department head was not inclined at
all to continue project activities, and as there was no obligation to follow
the previous decision of the former head, his department discontinued
their involvement in the project. What was lacking was the anchoring of
the project activities in formal structures, making them less dependent on
individual men.
Some results
The equality activities went on in the departments where pro-gender equality
men were involved, succeeding in revitalising gender equality work, which
is mandated by the institution but not always active. In other cases, the
activities were slowed down or interrupted after the end of the project.
CASE 2 → WELCOMING MEN’S CRITICAL POSITIONS
The starting point
During the operational planning of an action plan, the team was very careful
to make sure that a woman and a man were always coordinating public
initiatives together. This entailed trying to find specialists of both sexes, in
the scientific areas involved, to act as panellists and trainers for researchers
and professors. The idea was to foster reflection on the gendered aspects of
the professional and scientific practices of women and men, including young
researchers both sexes, to avoid ghettoing these issues or labelling them as
women-only subjects.
The dynamics
In one of the two departments concerned, a very competitive STEM
department in the international dimension, the selected experts were
completely external to the university and foreigners, so as to show how
these issues are addressed in an international perspective.
In the other one, where social sciences were involved and there had
previously been some tension, an intermediate solution was found. A former
professor of the university was invited, currently working in another national
university, thus able to speak about gender and careers with his peers
sharing with them a common background.
To facilitate participation, it was decided to organise these meetings
following a “one-shot” format, hoping to maximise the number of attendees.
The attempt to reach the public was successful in terms of the variety of
different research groups represented. The team succeeded in convening
also critical colleagues, mainly men, who freely expressed their positions.
Some results
Even though it was impossible to convince radical opponents, the team
was still happy to launch a debate on issues that generally are neglected
and remain unnoticed, like the existence of a gender bias in the process
of selection. Among others, this allowed generally indifferent people to
recognize the existence of issues, even problematic ones, around the alleged
gender neutrality of scientific and professional practices in academe.
35
The Cases
CASE 3 → EXCLUDING A MALEDOMINATED CULTURE RATHER
THAN EXCLUDING MEN
The starting point
In an action plan under a FP7 project, two training courses were planned for
the STEM departments with the aim of empowering young women researchers
to increase their funding application levels and their published articles. The
project team designed these initiatives on the basis of the obstacles met
by women researchers in publishing and in accessing research funds and
managing research projects.
The dynamics
To overcome opposition to women-only initiatives expressed by the office
responsible for researcher training and the lack of interest towards gender
trainings among young researchers, it was decided to insert a gender-aware
perspective in the design of an initiative that fitted the actual needs of the
target group. What was done in this case was to reverse the current practice,
based on the idea that women have to adapt to programmes and services
designed according to a “neutral” (i.e., male) perspective. In this case, the
training needs were similar for researchers of both sexes, mainly young, so
the concerned skills were very valuable for all the participants. Men were
admitted only if attending the whole course (including the introductory
modules on gender equality).
Some results
Attendance levels and participant satisfaction, for both women and men,
were very high. The course has been planned for the next few years.
3636
Support from middle managers and senior researchers
10. IMPLEMENTATION BACKING
THE ISSUE
Institutional change cannot happen at any institution without the
support of either middle managers or senior researchers (heads of
department, principal investigators, research group leaders, etc.).
Top managers are undoubtedly able to endow an action plan with political
backing, but middle managers and senior researchers may ensure that
“things go smoothly” for the action plan. For example, ensure that
decisions taken are actually implemented, that legal and administrative
obstacles can be removed, that the scientific quality and contents of
the activities can be guaranteed, or the logistical and organizational
aspects of the action plan can be appropriately addressed.
We can refer to such a role as “implementation backing”, i.e.,
facilitating the implementation of the action plan from all the many
relevant perspectives (scientific, organizational, logistical, legal,
administrative, and the like). An action plan lacking this kind of support
would be particularly exposed to the risk of failure or slow progress,
since a significant part of the energy of the team would be necessarily
devoted to managing these aspects alone.
Implementation backing is also necessary in that it creates the
conditions for actually embedding gender equality at the heart of the
organisation. Indeed, middle managers and senior researchers are at
the crossroads of any strategy and policy of the organisation, and
overall they are in direct contact with all the researchers and
employees. Capturing their interest and motivations and getting their
active support is therefore an unavoidable step for the action plan to
permeate and be active in all sectors of the organisation.
THE PROCESS
The experiences emerging from the mutual learning highlighted how
the involvement of middle managers and senior researchers is indeed
crucial, but sometimes difficult to gain.
• Case 1 shows how research leaders, especially in STEM, can be
deeply sceptical about the possibility of addressing gender
inequality, in some cases on the basis of stereotypical arguments.
In this case, they generally tend to emphasise the wider societal and
cultural roots of the problem (thus placing it outside their institution,
so that scientists cannot do anything about that), or to see any
support to women as detrimental to the principle of meritocracy,
which is supposed to underpin the scientific enterprise.
• Case 2, in turn, highlights the presence of various organisational and
practical problems, despite the support of some top and middle
managers, limiting the involvement of senior researchers,
including work overload, potentially conflicting relations between
senior researchers and their team members, and little scientific
recognition of the team in charge of the action plan.
• Case 3, finally, shows the importance of adopting well-tested
participatory approaches in order to favour the involvement
of managers and research leaders, so as to create a sense of
ownership about the action plan. In this case, too, many practical
and organisational factors (especially lack of time and difficulties
in coordinating busy agendas) hindered a greater participation of
middle managers and senior researchers.
AREA 2
37
Support from middle managers and senior researchers
The Cases
10. IMPLEMENTATION BACKING
CASE 1 → STEREOTYPES AND SCEPTICISM IN SUPPORTING
WOMEN’S CAREERS
The starting point
At one of the universities concerned, with a long tradition of gender equality
actions and gender studies, the gender action plan had a strong focus on
making the approach of gender-aware science an ordinary feature at the
targeted STEM departments. More traditional equality-oriented actions were
of course also addressed, with the aim of boosting numbers of women at
senior and decision-making levels. To this end, an articulated set of actions
has been devised, and the active participation and support of authoritative
scientists, both women and men, has been secured to test innovative
research procedures, fully integrating the gender perspective. A board
encompassing all the heads of the concerned departments has been created
to follow the implementation of the actions.
The dynamics
Also thanks to the long experience of gender equality of the project team,
a general endorsement was given by the heads of the STEM involved
departments to gender-aware research, and stronger support was provided
by some interested senior professors, while a clearly less interest and
engagement have been shown on work-life balance and women’s career. For
this reason,while the research tests in STEM disciplines, coinciding with the
research interests of the professors involved, were started – and some were
also concluded – before the end of the project, resulting in success, more
problems were encountered in activating the actions related to women’s
careers and women’s access to top positions. Above all, it turned out to
be difficult to convene STEM heads of departments to discuss gendered
aspects of scientific careers. Once asked about their points of view about
the results of research on women’s careers within the university, the majority
of the people convened declared they were sceptical about the possibility of
taking action on disparities which are deeply rooted in culture and social
structure, thus not directly pertaining to the working environment. Besides
this, the most common objection about dealing with gender inequalities was
that it would question meritocracy.
Some results
Difficulties in involving senior researchers and research leaders to adopt
measures to support women careers were met for a large part of the project
duration. Nevertheless, some positive evolution is likely in the final phase
of the project. Different factors will probably impact the situation, perhaps
allowing for gender inequality issues to be more openly addressed, mostly
in STEM. The other things which entered into play included implementation
progress, which increasingly made gender inequality visible, as well as
achievements at local and national level, and the election of a new, pro-
equality rector, surrounded by a new generation of heads of department and
other research managers (e.g., heads of doctoral schools), mainly younger
and open-minded compared to former ones.
CASE 2 → FACTORS HINDERING THE INVOLVEMENT OF SENIOR
RESEARCHERS
The starting point
Also in this case, as the gender equality office was created several years
before the beginning of the European project, knowledge of the university
and its main actors allowed for smooth implementation of the majority of
the numerous actions encompassed in the rich and complex gender action
plan. Institutional support was given to the project well before the start.
A committee composed of the top leader of the university, the human
resources director, the general services director, the head of the two
departments targeted by the project, as well as the two referents for gender
equality in the same departments, was created to advise and follow the
gender action plan.
The dynamics
Despite the generally favourable context, some difficulties arose in directly
targeting professors, who were supposed to be involved in specific workshops
and initiatives on gender equality.
Some concurrent aspects emerged, hindering the relationship with the
scientific personnel of the university. One is their work overload, which
increases with career level. The second is the lack of a training culture for
scientific personnel, which in some cases resulted in the open opposition
of some middle managers to the team’s proposals. Finally, the position of
the team within the university services and not in the research departments
makes it more difficult to directly address professors and researchers.
On the other hand, the project team did benefit from the commitment of some
pro-equality individuals, like the heads of department, who in several cases
supported the implementation of the actions (e.g., facilitating the team’s
access to some laboratories to conduct interviews and direct observation,
suggesting possible ways to reorganise a study based on statistical data
difficult to retrieve).
Some results
Several actions addressed to students, administrative personnel and early
career researchers were easily implemented. Other successful actions were
added during operation, following the advice of the stakeholders involved.
For example, thanks to good relations with the university communications
office, a contest on gender equality for undergraduate students was
organised. The team is studying other ways to involve women professors,
e.g., more informal meetings like cocktails, having less impact on the
working time and offering “light” occasions for networking.
3838
The Cases
CASE 3 → PARTICIPATORY METHODS TO INVOLVE MANAGERS
AND RESEARCH LEADERS
The starting point
At one partner institution in the framework of an EC-funded project, training
courses for leaders (a combination of managers, research leaders at two
research institutes) were organised, and the same leaders were actively
involved in interpreting fluctuations in the number of women academics
in their own departments/faculties/institutes. The discussion following the
presentation of the data was led by the project team applying participatory
methods for analysing data with a group of stakeholders, widely adopted and
taught in the institution.
The method allows a “situation” model to be built in the form of a causal
loop diagram. The dynamic patterns, the relations between crucial factors in
this issue are pictured while analysing and discussing. It results in increased
insights in gender inequality processes and possible new strategies to
address them. The project teams functioned as facilitator, supporting the
group to build the model, based upon sharing knowledge with participants.
In this case, it was used to model the causes and consequences of the small
proportion of women in higher academic ranks.
The dynamics
Even though interest was expressed in preparatory meetings, the team
had to convince the research leaders to invest time in the labour intensive
training sessions focusing on gender equality issues at both the involved
research institutes. It was especially complicated to coordinate the many
busy agendas of the persons involved. Nevertheless, in both institutes about
twelve leaders participated.
Some results
Even though interest was expressed in preparatory meetings, the team
had to convince the research leaders to invest time in the labour intensive
training sessions focusing on gender equality issues at both the involved
research institutes. It was especially complicated to coordinate the many
busy agendas of the persons involved. Nevertheless, in both institutes about
twelve leaders participated.
39
The Cases
Key issues
ACTIVATION AND MOBILISATION
In this section, some crucial questions for the success of an action
plan have been discussed, i.e., how to activate and mobilise key actors,
stakeholders and individuals on gender equality issues and how to make
their involvement in the gender equality actions possible in practice.
Six main strands emerged from the mutual learning process, i.e.:
• Scientific recognition (gender inequality gaining recognition
as a scientifically proven phenomenon and the action plan as a
methodologically sound approach to address it)
• Political backing (action plan getting support from top leaders and
managers)
• Creating space for engagement (action plan creating new groups,
networks and arrangements making participation actually possible)
• Mobilisation of pro-women actors (action plan gaining the
support of internal and external actors already engaged in gender
equality in science)
• Active involvement of men (action plan gaining the support of the
male component of the organisation)
• Implementation backing (action plan getting the support of
middle managers and senior researchers).
These strands clearly do not complete the picture of how to activate the
relevant actors and how to get them to cooperate in the implementation
of the action plan. However, they make it possible to identify some key
issues which should be taken into account when a gender action plan is
to be designed or implemented, briefly recalled here below.
Attend to the interpretive and symbolic aspects of the action
plan. Two factors, among others, seem to play an important role in
pushing people into or hindering people from getting involved in
a gender action plan: if they agree with the interpretation of gender
inequality (its actual existence, its extent, its seriousness, its impact,
etc.) underpinning the action plan and if they perceive the action plan
as something important for the organisation, for the employees and
for themselves. Thus, to a large extent, the success of an action plan
in activating participatory processes depends, on the one hand, on
the accuracy, scientific validity and reliability of the interpretation it
presents about gender inequality in the organisation and, on the other,
on the capacity of the team to symbolically present the equality effort
as strategically connected to the main goals of the organisation and
its many stakeholders. Hence the need for the team to avoid it being
labelled the expression of old-fashioned feminist claims, for example,
or an ideologically-oriented attempt promoted by a lobby to get more
power, just another bureaucratic burden for researchers, a marginal
aspect of organisational life or, lastly, something which simply has
nothing to do with one’s own personal or professional life.
Promote targeted mobilisation strategies.As trivial as it may
seem, it is important to reiterate that mobilisation strategies should be
specifically tailored to the features of the addressed groups (leaders,
researchers, administrative personnel, etc.). Most of the problems met
by the teams are indeed related to the difficulty of “moving the right
levers” to mobilise actors. It is therefore important to understand, for
each relevant group, which are their interests, expectations, and views
about gender equality, what organisational challenges are they most
willing to address, and to what extent and under which conditions would
they be interested in investing their time, resources and capacities
in the action plan. This is why the adoption of highly participatory
approaches, allowing different mobilisation strategies and tools to be
tested, is strongly recommended from the start of the project.
Find external support to increase internal visibility and
authoritativeness. Many teams reported that they succeeded in
becoming more visible within an institution by becoming more visible
outside it. This result was achieved by participating in national
committees, for example, or accessing national or international
networks, establishing connections with pro-women associations or
creating forms of cooperation with other universities and research
institutions engaged in gender equality action plans. The importance
of these kinds of relations is sometimes overlooked. External relations
in fact may provide an action plan with important opportunities, such
as getting extra-resources, involving international experts in the action
plan, creating new linkages between the organisation and policy makers
or increasing the reputation of the organisation in the national context.
Accessing these opportunities may in turn have an impact within the
organisation, such as increasing the reputation of the team among the
leaders, raising the interest of researchers and employees on gender
equality issues or making the action plan a tool for the organisation to
develop its overall public relations and external cooperation policies.
Create autonomous mobilisation agents. There is the tendency
in many teams to promote or establish new actors (e.g., researchers’
networks, research teams, working groups, committees, etc.). This
choice often proves to be particularly effective, provided that these
AREA 2
4040
actors can act autonomously from the team in a reasonable lapse of
time. The establishment of new actors is in fact important, not only to
bring in people who are interested in being engaged in gender equality,
or to multiply the effects of the action plan. In the long run, they can
become new internal transformational agents, able to perform different
roles (e.g., promoting new actions, functioning as a “watchdog” of
established actions, functioning as the institutional counterpart of
the management of the organisation) once the original action plan
is completed. However, it should be highlighted that creating a new
autonomous actor is not always simple, and problems are frequently
met, as concerns the competencies and the energy which are necessary
to act autonomously.
Balance the fragility of voluntary engagement. Engagement is a
process, the intensity of which may be extremely variable over time.
A person or a group may be intensively engaged for a period of time
and almost totally disengaged in the next. The same can happen with
leaders, whose support for the action plan is often provided occasionally
or even sporadically. Hence the need for a team to balance the fragility
of the engagement process by adopting appropriate measures such as:
refraining from involving the same group of action plan “friends” too
often (so as to prevent burnout and saturation); developing a step-by-
step mobilisation approach, to better address sudden and unexpected
participation gaps; planning different levels of participation in the action
plan in order to help each one to find the most appropriate; expanding
throughout the action plan the pool of actors, stakeholders and leaders
potentially interested in getting involved in order to ensure, so to speak,
a turnover in the people supporting the action plan.
Key issues
41
MAKING AN IMPACT
AREA 3
“Impact-making” and “implementation” are not to be confused, as implementing an action and producing an
impact are not the same thing. While it is true that implementing actions is necessary to impact the organisation,
the reverse is not always true. Implementing actions does not necessarily lead to modifying existing institutional
arrangements, making them more gender-sensitive and less male-dominated. Indeed, too many variables may
interfere between an action and its expected impact.
A more effective way to deal with the relation between actions and impacts could be a bit more probabilistic,
acknowledging that the more a set of actions are well conceived and implemented, the more some impacts (even
if maybe not all the expected ones) are likely to occur.
This section, indeed, is not aimed at indicating how to implement an action plan, but at identifying some of the
recurrent factors that come into play in making an impact more likely to occur through the implementation of a
set of gender-equality measures.
Probably, the factors and processes to be considered should be many more than those addressed in this section.
Leveraging upon the experience of the TRIGGER partners and the sister projects, we will limit ourselves to six of them:
• Self-reflexive processes
• Gender-sensitive communication
• Gender-sensitive education
• Action Plan tailoring process
• Policy integration
• External backing.
The third component of the process of change refers
to the capacity of gender equality action plans to make
an impact on the organisation.
Key issues
42
Reflexive praxes in the teams and in the management
of research institutions
11. SELFREFLEXIVE PROCESS
THE ISSUE
The first strand of this component concerns “self-reflexive”
processes.
This term has been increasingly used in the last decades to refer to
the need for individuals and institutions to adopt mechanisms and
procedures which allow them to be more aware of themselves, e.g. by
constantly analysing their actions, their aims, the possible intended and
unintended impacts they may produce, the risks they may be exposed to,
the actors who are involved in their activities, and so forth.
As experience in the implementation of many gender action plans
suggests, impact-making processes are facilitated by self-
reflexivity mechanisms allowing research organisations, among
other things, to:
• Evaluate measures and norms introduced in terms of their potential
impact on gender relations
• Keep a check on the number of women in the organisation at any
level, quickly detecting factors which may distort or delay women’s
careers and their scientific recognition
• Identify and seize existing internal and external opportunities to
consolidate gender-related strategies
• Anticipate the impacts of new national or European research policies
on women scientists.
Embedding mechanisms of this kind in research organisations is likely
to increase the impact of action plans and even to trigger long-term
processes of change.
What is true for the organisation is also true for the team. Adopting
self-reflexive procedures is in fact equally important to understand
which are the actual dynamics triggered by an action plan and to keep
a check on its effects, thus heightening the possibility of having an
impact in the organisation.
THE PROCESS
Teams use a wide range of different tools and techniques (survey,
administrative data collection, qualitative methods, application
of batteries of indicators, monitoring schemes, awareness raising
initiatives for unveiling stereotypes, etc.) aimed at increasing self-
reflexive attitudes on gender, so as to endow the organisation with, so
to speak, new permanent sensors for detecting inequality. However,
self-reflexivity processes may face obstacles of a different nature.
• Case 1, for example, focuses on the development of qualitative
indicators for measuring gender equality, integrating existing
statistics with data collected through a survey carried out under an
EC-funded project. The approach was extremely effective, but it also
required significant investment and expertise, which were difficult to
cover with ordinary institution funds.
• Case 2 shows the experimentation of a technique to help people
become aware of stereotypes in both gender and science. The
technique attained the expected results, even though expected
resistance and unexpected problems related to privacy protection
also emerged.
• Case 3 shows a success story, in which the production of new
knowledge through an employee satisfaction survey led the
management of the organisation to reintroduce measures to improve
work-life balance, which had been previously discontinued.
In the box below, a quite innovative approach to the evaluation of the
action plans has been developed and applied in order to help teams
activate self-reflexive processes.
EVALUATION AS GUIDED
SELF-REFLECTION
In the GENOVATE project, accompanying the
implementation of gender equality action plans (GEAPs)
in six European universities, a seventh partner institution – the
Complutense University of Madrid (UCM), Spain – provided training and
support to the others for their GEAP evaluation process. This was conceived
as a part of the very process of change, being based on a collaborative
evaluation model designed to facilitate organizational learning
through the use of participatory, empowerment, learning and
building tools.
See: http://www.genovate.eu/media/genovate/
docs/GENOVATE_Guidelines_for_evaluating_
GEAPs_23.11.16.pdf
AREA 3
Reflexive praxes in the teams and in the management
of research institutions
43
The Cases
11. SELFREFLEXIVE PROCESS
CASE 1 → QUALITATIVE INDICATORS FOR MEASURING GENDER
EQUALITY
The starting point
In the framework of an FP7-funded project, one of the tasks encompassed
the elaboration of a new set of indicators, resulting in a gender equality
index, based on the EIGE model, but tailored to the experiences and features
of European universities. In one of the universities involved, this involved ad
hoc data collection, carried out not only by processing statistic figures, but
also through a survey addressed to around 1,000 people. The index includes
seven different dimensions, i.e., work (participation and quality of work –
e.g., type and duration of contracts), money (gender pay gap and access
to funds), time (time for work and care activities), knowledge (products of
research), space (space for work and work-life balance), health (well-being
at work and violence), power (presence of vertical segregation, presence in
academic bodies).
The dynamics
The development of this new approach, as well as the elaboration and
implementation of the survey, required the cooperation of specialists in
different scientific areas. Besides experts in quantitative methods (e.g.,
statisticians, engineers), psychologists and other social scientists were also
involved. This created some interesting problems of language and reciprocal
understanding. In particular, when different disciplines are involved in
research, it is not very easy to give a definition of concepts that can be
shared among all. Another difficulty was related to the transitory nature
of the European project. While it was crucial in fostering the decision to
implement a survey and to finalise the indicators and the summary index,
creating a general expectation towards the results, on the other hand it was
an occasion which will be difficult to repeat to hire personnel for some of
the scientific areas where no sufficient expertise was available. One of the
current problems is thus how to guarantee all the needed competences,
once the project ends.
Some results
The project and the survey took place during a change of central management
team. The new management team was immediately aware of the extent of
gender inequalities at the University, thus recognising the need to take
action, on the one hand, and to continue to monitor the situation, on the
other, through the elaboration of Gender Budgeting.
CASE 2 → TECHNIQUES FOR DETECTING GENDER STEREOTYPES
The starting point
Initial activities involving analysis and deconstruction of gender stereotypes
in science at each partner institution was envisaged under an institutional
change project. The idea arose from some papers written by gender experts
and project consultants about the nature of resistance and the existence
of very profound elements which cause it. It also highlighted that there is
a clash between science stereotypes and gender stereotypes, which add to
each other and interact in variable ways. The exercise was conducted through
the ReAct Theatre technique. The participants were asked to reproduce some
typical situations in their organisations and then to stop and think about
them. This is to understand how these situations can reveal the existence
of stereotypes, what forms they take, and how it is possible to contrast
stereotype-based modes of action. The technique requires the presence of
external actors, to lead the performance, and previous preparation with the
internal teams.
The dynamics
The technique was experimented first by the project teams during a consortium
meeting. The transnational group, consisting of about twenty people, was
divided into subgroups, each committed to identifying and staging a typical
discriminatory situation. The rest of the group then interacted and provided
interpretations, trying also to suggest ways of behaviour that could have
led to a different development. Out of 5 sub-groups, 3 decided to perform a
situation where decisions were taken informally in situations where women
were excluded. The scenario involved women coming to a meeting where the
decisions had already been made. It was thus necessary to understand what
would have to be done before, e.g.: to get rid of informality.
This proved that the feeling of isolation was not a situation in a single
organisation, but common to several organisations. Subsequently, each
partner organisation implementing a gender equality plan organised a
session at its premises. Only one of the partners decided not to implement
it. Where the sessions were held, different situations were depicted, which
pointed to a variety of discriminatory situations. Some resistance to actually
taking part in the performance emerged from some of the participants, often
because of confidentiality concerns regarding the situations represented. In
one case, a short movie was planned, but in the end the participants decided
not to do it.
Some results
Participation was good (better than a seminar on the same issues would
have been) and the technique used effective. Indeed, it made it possible to
transmit messages at a deeper level, as evidenced by the fact that real and
different situations, based on the context in which they actually happened,
came out. Actions were proposed to address the dynamics that emerged. It
is difficult to say if and how individual behaviours changed, in the absence
of a follow up in each of the organisations involved.
4444
The Cases
CASE 3 → ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF WRONG POLICIES
The starting point
At one of the universities involved in a structural change project, services
and measures supporting work-life balance were reduced or even eliminated,
due to economic restrictions, in the years immediately before the project
was launched. The project included, in its first period, a satisfaction
survey regarding the existing services and the work-life arrangements
for women researchers. Starting from the end of the first project year,
the team also began to analyse the university’s internal regulations on
research fellowships, researchers working on a temporary basis, research
scholarships, the working conditions of PhD students and freelancers hired
by the university.
The dynamics
The survey made it possible to gauge the impact of university decisions on
the lives of its employees, demonstrating a great imbalance between women
and men researchers in family care and showing how women were badly
affected, in their careers, by their care burden.
In the same period, an analysis of administrative documents highlighted
significant discrepancies between the internal regulations concerning
temporary researchers and the university’s general rules, thus leading to
uneven treatment.
The team’s decision was to give broad publicity to the research reports,
affecting different audiences in the university, and to open discussions with
the top management about the results of the analysis of the administrative
documents.
Some results
The rector, even if not particularly committed to gender equality, decided –
after the presentation of the research results – to restore the benefits which
had been cut. Thanks to the survey, at the start of the second project year the
administration signed a number of agreements with various co-operatives to
satisfy the need for childcare services of university employees, students and
PhD students and others working for the university on a temporary basis.
In the same period, some amendments to the internal regulations were put
forward to the Academic Senate, aiming at offering the same treatment to
permanent and temporary staff. Once the Academic Senate expressed its
approval, the Board of Directors adopted the amendments proposed.
45
The Cases
The relevance of language for administrative leaders
and staff
12. GENDERSENSITIVE COMMUNICATION
THE ISSUE
Trying to produce an impact on the organisation without acting on
communication is like trying to hold back the tide with a broom:
practically impossible. This is because gender-biased communication
can restore and reproduce overnight, so to speak, the inequality patterns
we are trying to dismantle during the day.
Changing communication contents, styles, languages and
images is, however, a long process. In particular, changing the way
people communicate in the working environment is difficult and takes
time. More realistically, an action plan could aspire to start the process
by persuading the management to review and change the language,
contents, style and symbols used in administrative documents and
institutional communication.
It may seem a little thing. However, making institutional communication
more gender-sensitive may have multiplying effects throughout the
organisation and greatly support the action plan in its implementation
and impacts.
THE PROCESS
Many different approaches are used by the teams to support the
management in adopting more gender-sensitive communication. The
choice of such approaches undoubtedly depends upon many factors,
including some of those already discussed in previous sections, such
as the strength and visibility of the team or the involvement of leaders,
middle managers and senior researchers.
• In Case 1, the team adopted an approach revolving around the
training of the administrative staff, so as to lead them to
analyse critically the current administrative language from a gender
perspective. Despite some minor resistance, the process went
smoothly and some significant improvements clearly occurred.
Moreover, the team succeeded in including such training in the
broader compulsory training scheme for administrative staff.
• Case 2 shows an approach adopting a composite set of
tools, including the development of a practical guide on writing
administrative documents, a video on the importance of gender-
neutral language, and the review of a set of documents already
issued by the administration. In this case, some resistance emerged
from different players, based overall on the typical assumption
that changing the language is of little help in combating gender
inequality.
• In Case 3, a conference was organised to promote gender-aware
communication in the organisation, involving both internal and
external players. The event allowed both to raise awareness on
this issue (demonstrating the damage produced by gender-biased
communication) and to urge the top management to establish a
commission for revising language and contents of institutional
communication.
The box concerns the monitoring process of institutional
communication set up by a team in Spain, which led to the drafting of
a set of guidelines for non-sexist use of language in communication.
FIGHTING SEXISM IN
INSTITUTIONAL COMMUNICATION
The team of TRIGGER at the Universidad Politécnica de Madrid has
been monitoring sexist language and stereotypes within their institution.
The Equality Unit conducts sustained activity that registers and reports cases
of use of sexist language or gender stereotypes. On a six-month basis, the cases
identified are gathered in a report uploaded on the website of the Unit and submitted
to the university management board . Additionally, the website of the Department
of Urban and Regional Planning was thoroughly checked for sexist language and
systematically corrected, with the aim of establishing it as good practice
and an example for other UPM departments and units. This work was
completed in the first project period. Based on this experience, a
guideline on non-sexist language was drafted and disseminated.
See: http://www.upm.es/sfs/Rectorado/Gerencia/Igualdad/
Documentos/GUIALenguaje_20161202%20(dic.2016).pdf
AREA 3
4646
The Cases
12. GENDERSENSITIVE COMMUNICATION
CASE 1 → TRAINING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF TO USE
GENDERSENSITIVE LANGUAGE
The starting point
At one of the universities involved, the implementation of the gender action
plan in the first 18 months of the project generated the interest of the top
management of the academic administration. This allowed the project team
to promote a participatory approach in order to enhance the awareness of
the administrative staff and their compliance towards changing practices.
The dynamics
To improve administrative communication and involve employees,
an interactive training course for administrative staff on the use of
administrative language in a gender-sensitive way was organised. The
course was held at the end of the second project year and comprised 10
hours of class-work, and 5 hours of online training, plus a final test. Thirty-
seven employees attended. The course was part of the compulsory training
offered by the university to administrative staff. The interest for the issues
dealt with increased during implementation. Compared to the others, the
head of the office was less motivated and involved. There were, however,
no problems, in the framework of the course, in accepting the idea of
performing an analysis of the documents and changing them in a way that
was gender-sensitive. The only opposition came from the person in charge of
drafting PhD regulations, who found the texts revised according to a gender-
sensitive format to be too long.
Some results
All the participants appreciated the course, as is evident from the positive
rating of 3.7 (out of 4) received in the evaluation. An analysis of the language
of administrative documents drafted after the course showed the impact it
had on the participants, who were able to adopt the gender-sensitive format
they learned in their everyday work. The administrative staff were involved in
the document collection and analysis process, also after the course, and in
reviewing them according to gender sensitive language. The new university
governance bodies asked the team to repeat the course the following year,
which they did. The former participants cooperated in the practical part of
the new course.
CASE 2 → RESISTANCES TO CHANGE COMMUNICATION
STANDARDS
The starting point
With the intention of changing the strongly masculine symbolism of science
and to make women more confident in pursuing a scientific career, the
project team of one of the FP7-funded projects started several actions
promoting gender-unbiased language in all internal documents. Among
these, a practical guide to help employees in writing documents, a video
to increase awareness of the importance of gender-unbiased language, and
a review of the student guide. In general, the team provided watchful and
enduring attention to ensure good application of these measures.
The dynamics
The team member from the university’s presidency, supervising the work of
human resources, strongly supported this measure, giving frequent inputs to
the administrative offices to put into practice a non-biased communication
style, e.g., improving the language of job offers and other key documents.
Despite this, little interest in this aspect (as well as in training sessions
on gender equality and diversity) was shown by the employees concerned,
who, however, responded positively to the requests from their bosses to
comply with the new indications. Open criticism was manifested by different
stakeholders (administrative staff, researchers, students, members of trade
unions), who questioned the actual relevance of this measure to promote
gender equality.
Some results
Thanks to the joint efforts of Human Resources and the communication
service, gender-un-biased language is currently being adopted in the jobs
offers to encourage women to apply and also in the Student Guide. The
project team presents the issue of gender bias in language during training
sessions for students and in the “career path day” for staff. Even though a
top-down approach is being used, the result of changing communication
standards is being achieved.
47
The Cases
CASE 3 → A CONFERENCE TO RAISE AWARENESS ON GENDER
BIASED LANGUAGE
The starting point
At mid-term of an EC-funded project, a conference was held pointing out the
relevance of a gender aware language, at the initiative of different internal
and external pro-gender equality stakeholders (among others, committee
on gender equality, research group on gender, pro-vice rector for gender
equality, network of women journalists).
The dynamics
The speakers were social scientists and linguists, plus some social workers,
who presented research studies and practical cases, demonstrating how
the use of the masculine with a neutral function in a neo-Latin languages
is almost always associated with the disappearance of women or the
belittling of their competences and visibility in different domains (public
communications and mass media, different professional milieus, politics).
Some results
At the end of the project, some institutional changes were observed in the
university. Among others, the new rector’s team, which is aware of gender
inequalities at the university, has decided to create a commission on
gendered language.
48
Dealing with gender in starting a scientific education
and career
13. GENDERSENSITIVE EDUCATION AND TRAINING
THE ISSUE
To produce long-term impacts, action plans cannot only act on
procedures, norms and practices, but they need also to change
people’s mindsets and culture, upon which such procedures, norms
and practices ultimately depend. Education plays a pivotal role in
this process, especially if we consider that, for institutional change
processes to take off, more time is needed than the average duration
of an action plan.
As we have also seen in the previous sections, it is not by chance that
gender action plans are usually densely packed with training
and education initiatives addressing different targets.
In this strand, attention is especially focused on the core of the
educational activity of a research organisation, i.e., the education of
students and young researchers, who are destined to become the
next generations of scientists and leaders.
THE PROCESS
Many gender action plans encompass training initiatives designed to
introduce gender equality and gendered science in the courses offered
at universities. This is often difficult, since such subjects can be viewed
as not essential in many disciplinary fields. Hence the need for teams
to demonstrate how educating students and young researchers on these
issues is relevant for them, the organisation and scientific research at
the same time. The cases below highlight both the obstacles hindering
this process, as well as some of the encouraging prospects it opens up.
• Case 1 concerns the establishment of introductory seminars
targeting PhD students, and describes the many efforts made by
the team to encourage students to participate, although the initiative
was not mandatory for them. Results were promising, especially
because the number of participants increased from the first to the
second edition.
• Case 2 focuses on an introductory module on gender issues
for undergraduate students, which was much appreciated by the
participants and the institution. In this case, initial problems came
from the scepticisms and opposition of the administrative staff,
who considered gender issues not important enough to become the
subject of a specific training activity, nor deserving of the amount of
commitment required from them.
• In Case 3, the team organised a short module on gender in
science for PhD students with the aim of making it permanent. In
this case, the main obstacles were the busy agenda of the potential
participants, which prevented many of them from participating, and
the difficulties of coordinating the courses with other academic
deadlines. Despite this, most of the attendees were highly satisfied
with their participation, and took part in subsequent initiatives on
the same issue.
The following box presents another approach aimed at educating
students and young researchers, i.e., the establishment of a contest
for research work on sex and gender aspects of chemical research.
A CONTEST FOR STUDENTS ON SEX
AND GENDER ASPECTS OF CHEMICAL
RESEARCH
The Julie Hamackova Award (JHA) was established in 2015, stemming from
the need to communicate the issue of sex/gender analysis for gendered innovations
toward the academic staff and to students, and to motivate students to engage in
explorations of the opportunities that sex/gender analysis offers. Julia Hamackova was a first
female professor and first female dean of a faculty (1956) of the Technical University in former
Czechoslovakia. Her name was nearly forgotten, but the history of her career was revived
within the TRIGGER project. The Award has three categories, one of which is dedicated
to student theses which have an integrated gender dimension. Students can
pick one of the proposed topics or they can come up with their own. In this
category, the first Julie Hamackova Award for a student thesis with a
gender dimension was awarded in 2015, the second in 2016. See:
https://gro.vscht.cz/files/uzel/0022757/0002~~Poster%20CHJ%20
nahled.pdf?redirected
AREA 3
49
Dealing with gender in starting a scientific education
and career
The Cases
CASE 1 → THE DIFFICULTIES OF ATTRACTING PHD STUDENTS
The starting point
At one of the universities involved in an FP7 project, a 12-hour introductory
seminar was organised for PhD students in Bio-sciences on gender
stereotypes, gender and science, gendered data, and equal opportunities.
The dynamics
Two editions of the course were implemented. Participation was not
mandatory, so there were not too many people attending, and more women
than men. The first edition was divided in four workshops spread along some
months. During the second edition, the choice was made to concentrate
the workshops in two days, and – in order to have a better idea of the
impact of the course on the beneficiaries – a system to collect initial and
final feedback from participants was introduced. Practical class work was
organised in which the participants were required to draw scissor diagrams
representing the inequalities of gender at their departments, comparing
them with the general trends of gender equality in higher education in
Europe. In this second edition, participation was higher and satisfaction
improved. Part of this enhanced interest was perhaps due to the fact that,
more in general, sensitiveness on gender issues in the last year seemed
to have increased among students at the university, as was seen during
Women’s Day. The course tried to link this general mood with an awareness
of gender inequalities in scientific organisations and how these latter affect
students’ lives.
Some results
As evidenced in students’ feedback, the course was highly appreciated. This
pushed the course organizers to propose to the central management of the
university that it be extended to other STEM doctoral schools.
CASE 2 → A COURSE FOR STUDENTS FACING SCEPTICISM AND
OPPOSITION FROM ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF
The starting point
One of the country’s most advanced universities for gender equality decided
to provide an introductory module on gender issues, in the framework of
an EC-funded project, to all 1st year students at the very beginning of their
undergraduate studies. Thanks to this training, the university’s policy on
equality may be widely disseminated and awareness on gender inequalities
and stereotypes raised.
The dynamics
When deciding about this massive investment, on the wave of the European
project, the project team had to address some scepticism and opposition
among the administrative employees of the university faculties. Some of
them pointed to the little time available for students at the very beginning of
their courses, others the actual need for this kind of training. To ease things,
the project team offered to take complete charge of all organisational
issues, freeing the other services of any organisational burden (which was
the most important hidden obstacle for implementing the initiative).
The initiative was repeated yearly during the course of the project.
Implementation was smooth enough. The most important factor was
choosing good trainers, able to make people reflect on the current situation,
involving them without inducing a sense of guilt in (mainly men) participants.
The choice of the period of the year (at the very beginning of the academic
year) was crucial, because of the greater attention of the younger students,
their relative ignorance of university rules, which fosters greater receptivity,
although there were no credits awarded, poor reciprocal knowledge and
relative shyness which enhances concentration.
Some results
The team generally received positive assessments from the course
participants. Apart from some occasional criticism (e.g. a mother of a
student strongly opposing the so-called gender ideology), feedback was
good at all levels. Some undergraduate students offered to implement their
student work (a period of volunteering in the services of the university) at
the gender equality office. Some current master students, now transferred
to other universities, reported some years later to their professors of being
aware of gender issues in higher education because they had been trained on
this in their first year, something they considered an educational standard.
13. GENDERSENSITIVE EDUCATION AND TRAINING
5050
The Cases
CASE 3 → HANDLING BUSY AGENDAS TO CREATE SPACE FOR
GENDERSENSITIVE TRAINING
The starting point
Based on the experience gained during the first part of the project, one of
the universities involved in a European project designed and is testing a
permanent module on gender in science for PhD students in Engineering
and Medicine. Considering the busy agenda of these students, the team
decided to concentrate the training module in two days, devoting the first
day to an introductory part on the leaky pipeline phenomenon among women
researchers, and the second day (to be organised separately for the different
disciplines) to deepen aspects related to the gender and sex dimension of
research in the respective scientific areas.
The dynamics
In the first part of the project, mainly targeting women in engineering and
medicine, three courses on the leaky pipeline phenomenon were organised
for early-career researchers (including PhD candidates) in the scientific
areas concerned. It was not always easy to attract participants, due either
to their busy agendas or to the low number of people that made up the
target. It was necessary to spread the word through full professors in touch
with the team and to activate all the formal and informal team member
networks, plus those of former participants. Other difficulties were related
to the concurrence of some academic or professional deadlines, which are
not always fully predictable. In any event, once they had started the course,
most trainees successfully concluded the training.
Some results
Through the input provided by the team and dialogue and exchange among
young researchers in the same and different fields, these courses allowed
attendees to understand the importance of gender in scientific institutions
and raised interest for gendered aspects of research in STEM fields. Some
participants in the first edition were also testimonials for the second and the
third, enhancing the impact of the training.
The pool of trainees has also been involved in further project actions, and
some of them included gendered analysis in their own research work.
13. GENDERSENSITIVE EDUCATION AND TRAINING
51
The Cases
Tailored design and participatory planning
14. ACTION PLAN TAILORING PROCESS
THE ISSUE
The fourth strand of the component pertains to the crucial issue of
tailoring the action plan to the features and needs of the organisation
and the players involved.
It is a crucial issue since fit-for-all solutions do not exist, especially
where complex and deeply rooted social dynamics like gender inequality
are concerned, whose features and expressions are highly contextual.
This does not prevent teams from using the huge amount of experience,
knowledge, practices and tools developed in the last decades in
promoting gender equality. Rather, it mainly involves the need to
constantly adapt such experiences, knowledge, practices and
tools in the new context of application.
However, such a process cannot only happen through desk work, which
is of course also needed. Much more, the tailoring process implies
field work or, better, action research, to be carried out by the team
and based on an intense consultation process with beneficiaries and
stakeholders.
In this perspective, tailoring should be understood as a dynamic
process, since the necessary information can only be collected through
“learning-by-doing” or “trial-and-error”, for the simple reason that
there cannot exist teams who know their own organisation well enough
to have control over the many variables and expectations involved in
implementing any single action of an action plan.
THE PROCESS
The main approach adopted by the teams to tailor the action plans to
their own organisations was the participatory approach, allowing
them to constantly interact with the different players involved in the
activities to be carried out. Participatory processes are also important
in that they facilitate negotiation among the various stakeholders,
for example about why and how to organise activities, what are the
main aims and contents, who is to be involved, which are the priority
issues to be addressed or who will manage them and their results,
thus preventing conflicts and facilitating cooperation. The cases below
show how the tailoring process can be concretely shaped through
participatory process.
• Case 1 shows how the results of a qualitative study on work-life
balance were used to activate a consultation process between the
team and the organisational units and leaders concerned.
• In Case 2, the consultation process involved women interested in
accessing leadership positions, so as to identify the most effective
actions to be developed for sustaining their careers.
• Case 3 is about a set of interviews with young researchers
organised by the team in order to acquire in-depth knowledge of the
people belonging to this target and to identify their needs, so as to
plan and design customised activities to be developed.
In the box, an example is given of a participatory planning process
based on the involvement of a network of women researchers established
under the action plan precisely to facilitate the tailoring process and to
push the activities forward.
WOMEN RESEARCHERS PLAN
TRAINING INITIATIVES
The network of women researchers established at the University
of Milan in the framework of STAGES was closely involved in the design
of selected activities in the action plan. This was applied to the design of
two courses: the School of International Publishing and the School of European
Projects Drafting and Management for post-doctoral and early career researchers.
Even though publishing and research funding are a need for all researchers,
particularly the young, the design was based on the obstacles most
frequently met by women researchers, as they emerged from network
discussions.
See: http://www.stages.unimi.it/actionplanCard.php?eventID=2
http://www.ingenere.it/en/articles/structural-transformation-
achieve-gender-equality-science
AREA 3
5252
The Cases
14. ACTION PLAN TAILORING PROCESS
CASE 1 → RETHINKING WORKLIFE BALANCE MEASURES
BASED ON RESEARCH RESULTS
The starting point
In order to implement actions promoting work-life balance, a qualitative
study was conducted in the two institutes (both STEM areas) involved in
the action plan of one partner university in an FP7 project, as well as in a
department of humanities, included to complete the panel and to verify if
some work habits were specific to specific scientific areas. The results of
the study have been discussed in different structures and university
The dynamics
The qualitative study, well supported by the heads of the institutes involved,
encompassed different methods, in three steps: field observation (direct
observation of the working environment), an online questionnaire and some
sociological interviews. Women proved to be more interested than men in
participating in the study, expressing their approval of discussions on the
issues of work-life balance in their institution. The results confirmed the
relevance of time constraints for the researchers’ lives, albeit in different
forms at each of the institutes involved. Among others, the use of working
time revealed differences between women and men, where the first proved
to be more involved in teaching than the second, more intensively involved
in research and in more prestigious activities (e.g., organising conferences)
than women. Family care where there were children impacted women’s
careers more than men’s.
Some results
After presentation and discussion with the departments involved, some
changes were decided regarding the measures planned to support work-life
balance. For example, to improve mothers’ careers, a new rule establishing
that, after a maternity leave, all the women researchers will have a sabbatical
leave (i.e., during one semester, they will not teach in order to allow them to
do more research) has been introduced. This measure will have a financial
impact, since the university will give a specific budget to the departments
concerned in order to replace the women researchers who are in sabbatical
leave. Instead, other measures, which were expected to start in the second
part of the project, had to be reviewed following the results of the study.
CASE 2 → CONSULTATION TO IDENTIFY WOMEN’S CAREER NEEDS
The starting point
In a technical university involved in an FP7-funded project, activities to
promote women’s careers in leadership positions were inserted in the action
plan. The initial idea was to support a pool of motivated researchers, through
training initiatives, to start a path towards higher levels of responsibility in
their departments, i.e., accessing decision-making boards and committees.
The dynamics
Some difficulties arose in the beginning, since it was not easy to identify the
target group. Besides this, the idea of measures addressing women to help
them access higher positions was not supported enough by the university
leaders, on the one hand, and the women researchers, on the other.
In order to ensure the impact of the training sessions, the core team
decided to identify aspiring women researchers for qualification and full
professorship. This group of women was contacted to ask them to participate
in a brief survey aimed at career planning and career development needs.
In total, there were 35 responses to a questionnaire. The questionnaire was
very effective in identifying career development needs. In addition, four
in-depth interviews were carried out with the target group of women, to
deepen the understanding of the obstacles facing women’s career progress.
The core team, in cooperation with a professional career counselling
service, developed a training module of 8 training sessions. Four of these
sessions were delivered during the third project year and the other four
in the subsequent semester. The training package is comprehensive,
and focuses on building competences for managing teams, conflict
resolution, interpersonal relations, time management, project management,
communication skills.
Some results
The evaluation of the first four trainings was extremely positive. Many
participants reported some initial scepticism, based on their previous
experience with similar workshops, but at the end of the training module
they were satisfied and surprised. Some of them added that after the
first course the timidity of several attendees lessened and they became a
supportive, bonded group of women sharing the same interests.
53
The Cases
CASE 3 → A WORKSHOP TO INVOLVE THE TARGET GROUP
The starting point
In an FP7 project focused on the younger generations of researchers, the
initial phase of interviews and in-depth analysis allowed the team to identify
the actual training needs of this target in the two different departments
involved in the project.
The dynamics
Interviewing young women and men researchers with non-permanent
contracts at engineering and sociology departments revealed two different
gaps in the training and support on offer for these groups of people. In the
first case, the most relevant need seemed to be the capacity to draft projects
able to get funded in bids and calls. In this case, the project team organised
a workshop on this issue, suggesting, among other things, the inclusion
of sex and gender criteria as possible ways to design more innovative
research projects. The second gap derived from the uncertainty about their
professional path, which was experienced by both young female and male
researchers. It concerned a lack of ability to imagine and plan a career
in tune with the qualification obtained within and outside the university.
Besides a workshop with successful researchers in private organisations,
the possibility of individual colloquia to discuss their careers with senior
researchers was given to the attendees.
Some results
Participation in both targeted initiatives was high, proving that the design
was in line with expectations and that it covered a set of needs which were
unrecognized until that moment.
5454
THE ISSUE
The integration of an action plan into the broader policy framework
of the organisation is another relevant process which may greatly
contribute to increased capacity to have impact in the organization.
Through this process, the action plan becomes part of or coordinates
with the key policies of the organisation, especially gender policies and
all policies affecting gender issues.
In fact, initiatives supported by external entities (typically the gender
action plans funded by the European Commission) or promoted by
specific players (for example, gender equality measures promoted by
networks, associations or trade unions) may be perceived as stand-
alone policies or special programmes, i.e., something separate
from the ordinary policy processes of the institution.
This tendency is risky for action plans. First, it may lead staff and leaders
to see the action plan as isolated, informal, provisional, negligible,
temporary or of little relevance to the priorities and key tasks of the
organisation. This can limit the capacity of the action plan to mobilise
stakeholders, for example, or to activate long-term processes, modify
existing arrangements or gain visibility within the organisation, limiting
overall impact.
Hence the need for the team to promote the integration of the action
plan into the policy framework, looking for synergies with the
relevant policies and measures promoted by the organisation and
especially establishing forms of coordination and cooperation with
the managers and organisational units concerned.
THE PROCESS
Usually, in order to foster policy integration in gender equality or related
fields (diversity management, inclusiveness, workplace quality, etc.),
the teams offer to provide the management of the organisation with
expertise, resources, and time to develop institutional policies, even
when this may require a modification of the action plan. In this way, the
management is urged to progressively incorporate the action plan by
merging, for example, action plan initiatives with similar already planned
initiatives, including some action plan actions in its own programmes or
activating new initiatives together with the team.
Some examples of policy integration processes based on such a strategy
are given in this section.
• In Case 1, a team supported the institution in the application of
a national law on the inclusion of gender aspects in academic
curricula. This was possible because the action plan already included
actions which were part of the university’s plans, so that cooperation
was relatively easy to develop.
• Case 2 is about strong synergy between the team in charge
of the action plan and the organisational unit in charge of the
implementation within the organisation of a national plan on gender.
This result was difficult to attain, as it required a long and time-
consuming negotiation process and the implementation of a set of
intermediary steps.
• Case 3 concerns the great support given by a team to leaders
and managers of their organisation in setting up the structure
necessary to develop a gender equality policy. Support involved
aspects such as the creation of gender focal points throughout the
organisation, support given to the Communication Department and
the implementation of initiatives aimed at involving students.
Another example is presented in the first box on the next page, where a
team provided its support to the institution in organising a big European
event on gender equality.
A different case is described in the subsequent box, which explains
how a centre devoted to women in science and engineering in an Irish
university, thanks also to its participation in an EC funded project,
advanced toward the incorporation of gender equality in the institutional
strategies of the organisation.
Support for and coordination with institutional
strategies on gender
15. POLICY INTEGRATION
AREA 3
55
Support for and coordination with institutional
strategies on gender
SUPPORTING INTERNATIONAL
EVENTS ON GENDER EQUALITY
The TRIGGER team at the Paris Diderot University was entirely included in
the organisation committee of the 9th European Conference on Gender Equality in
Higher Education, which was held on 12-14 September 2016 at the institution. This
allowed the institution to reconfirm its public commitment to gender equality and
to gain visibility and public recognition on this aspect, thus also maintaining
commitments made to the Ministry of Higher Education.
See: https://9euconfgender.sciencesconf.org/
https://9euconfgender.sciencesconf.org/resource/page/id/
MAKING GENDER EQUALITY
A PILLAR OF THE INSTITUTIONAL
STRATEGY
To mark International Women’s Day 2015, during the INTEGER project, the Trinity
Centre for Women in Science & Engineering Research (WiSER) produced a video on
Trinity’s commitment to gender equality, featuring the Provost and the Vice-Provost/Chief
Academic Officer. The video demonstrates the College’s commitment to gender equality as a
driver of research excellence, and highlights Trinity’s achievements and role as a national leader in
driving gender equality in the higher education sector in Ireland.
Trinity has led the way in equality and diversity in Ireland through WiSER and the Athena SWAN
charter, in which the College was instrumental in forming a consortium involving six other
Irish Universities, as well as 14 Institutes of Technology, and the Royal College of
Surgeons. In addition, there is a commitment to gender equality in the college’s
2014-19 strategic plan, being a fundamental principle driving excellence
within Trinity College Dublin.
See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpB9y-ILWj0
http://hea.ie/assets/uploads/2017/04/hea_review_of_gender_equality_
in_irish_higher_education.pdf
5656
The Cases
15. POLICY INTEGRATION
CASE 1 → SUPPORT TO THE UNIVERSITY IN APPLYING A
NATIONAL LAW
The starting point
The consideration of gender aspects in academic curricula is a general
provision under the national law, an innovative rule which is not always
applied in the country concerned. Based on the law, in a technical university
involved in an EC funded project, a semester-long elective course focusing
on gender contents and methodologies had been inserted in the courses
on coffer at the university for post graduate students. This course had
been inserted in the Master Program list of courses by the team leader of
the European project many years ago. However, until the beginning of the
European project, this course was only on paper, because the professor was
on leave of absence and no one else had the specific expertise and interest
to teach the course. The European project encompassed a set of actions on
gender equality and gender in research, some of which were already in the
plans of the university, but still unimplemented.
The dynamics
The team leader of the European project is a professor with a long record of
studies on gender in research in her scientific area. This made it possible
for her, once the project was approved by the EC and she returned to the
university from her leave of absence, to actually activate the postgraduate
course at her school. Besides this, in the framework of the project, several
introductory modules were proposed in different university schools for
undergraduate students, too. Following the attention raised on these issues
by the project team, other professors, initially not involved, also started new
activities on gender aspects in the institution.
Some results
The courses were activated and replicated during the project. The Equality
Plan approved during the last project year by the university governing board
includes measures to consolidate the integration of gender in teaching and
research within the institution, thus implementing the law in force. Other
initiatives, not part of the project albeit inspired by its concepts, are ongoing.
Of particular interest is the current project to participate in an interuniversity
Master’s Program on gender involving the five public universities of the
town where the university is based, funded by the regional government.
This master’s is now in the approval phase and will probably start next
year.
CASE 2 → SYNERGY BETWEEN THE ACTION PLAN AND A
NATIONAL INITIATIVE ON GENDER
The starting point
Synergies are often established when universities are engaged in applying
for national accreditation systems or national award schemes for gender
equality or inclusive HR management. In one university, participating in
an FP7 project, the gender equality plan, albeit completely independent
and original, was also intended as a tool to support the achievement of
the objectives of a national award, while at the same time widening and
deepening its scope.
The dynamics
During the first period of the project, negotiations at university level on how
to design and implement a university-wide mentoring programme were held.
This necessary step was complex and time consuming, resulting in a delay
in the start of the programme. The mentoring scheme was developed and
officially launched around project mid-term. It targeted junior academics,
research and teaching staff (as mentees); more senior academics (from
senior lecturers upward) were given the chance to be mentor. The programme
saw the participation of mentor-mentee couples from different departments.
A handbook on good practice for mentoring activities, which is an important
support for the mentoring programme, has been drafted and it is currently
published online. Before implementing the action, a literature review on
mentoring academic women was drafted, presented at an international
conference and published as a paper in an international peer-reviewed
journal.
Collaboration with the HR department, coordinating the efforts of the
institution in applying for the national award, brought to the launch of a
second edition, one year later.
Some results
Besides successful implementation, an important result for the institution was
to overcome the first rejection of its application for the national award, also
thanks to the efforts of the project team. This latter, in turn, achieved internal
authoritativeness and visibility, thus deserving to be represented in all the
gender and equality-related committees in the institution. The participation
in the self-assessment team of the university for the national award was
especially important to plan the future sustainability of the mentoring and
the leadership programme encompassed in the European project. Also, the
contribution of the project team was essential to lobby for the university to
become a member of a national campaign for gender equality in science.
56
57
CASE 3 → HELPING THE ORGANISATION TO SET UP ITS GENDER
POLICIES
The starting point
One of the EC-funded European projects took place in a period of particular
regard for gender issues in the organisation (i.e., launch of activities on gender
in research and curricula, appointment of a gender officer), but in which
internal infrastructures on gender equality were not as yet very developed.
Following the implementation of the project, which implied huge visibility for
the leadership’s commitment, new expectations and demands for intervention
emerged from different stakeholders, asking the leadership to enhance and
diversify the gender policy of the institution, to take action on different
problems – e.g., sexual harassment – and to be involved permanently in its
implementation.
The dynamics
The project team tried to address some of the issues raised by the different
components of the university. In particular, the decision was made to involve
students, listening to their requests and trying to take them into account in
designing new initiatives and tools targeting them (e.g. reviewing the students’
charter in a way that was gender sensitive). Besides this, the team supported
some of the campaigns on gender-related issues proposed by different
stakeholders.
A network of gender focal points was created to act as interface with the
university population. The team also supported the communications
department (initially sceptical with regard to these kinds of activities) in
creating a message and setting communication tools (e.g., a newsletter) which
will be kept as part of institutional communications.
Some results
The institution’s gender policy is now more visible and active, well beyond the
expectations of the project team. Unexpected interest was raised in students,
professors and managers, and new initiatives were developed, starting from
the initiatives launched by the project, but continuing quite independently of
the project team.
The Cases
57
5858
Networks and alliances with external actors
16. EXTERNAL BACKING
THE ISSUE
Producing an impact on the organisation often requires the team
to look for support from actors and stakeholders outside the
organisation.
This issue has already been touched upon, in the previous section
(point 8), stressing the importance of involving external pro-women
players, which indirectly strengthens the capacity of the action plan
to attract internal stakeholders. Here, the same issue is discussed in
more general terms. Any research institution is in fact part of a broader
system of relations and obligations. None of them can be viewed as an
isolated and fully autonomous entity. For this reason, any internal policy
has an impact on external policies and vice versa.
The same can be said for gender action plans. They cannot be understood
as part of the organisation’s “internal affairs”. Rather, any action
plan, regardless of its features and contents, is immediately part of
broader dynamics going beyond institutional boundaries and affecting
the local, national and even the transnational level. This becomes further
evident in the action plans included in EC-funded projects, where inter-
institutional connections have existed from the beginning.
On a very practical level, teams often successfully used external
cooperation and networking initiatives to pursue different aims
related to their action plans, such as addressing internal resistance,
accessing additional resources, increasing their internal visibility,
making the leaders’ commitments more binding and offering support to
the organisation in implementing its public relations policies.
THE PROCESS
There are a variety of ways to get external backing. In some cases,
external links are established to develop specific actions, while in other
cases they involve the team in itself and the action plan as a whole. Also
the kind of external stakeholders involved may be of different types,
including national governmental bodies, gender equality programmes,
women’s networks and associations, research and professional
communities or other universities and research organisations.
The cases presented below help understand how such complex dynamics
may occur.
• In Case 1, the team promoted a new national professional
network and joined other associations, with the aim also of
addressing the many obstacles met within the institution. This
strategy proved to be effective from different standpoints, since it
allowed the team to increase the chances of continuing some of
the actions launched under the action plan or to extend the internal
impact of the action plan as a whole.
• In Case 2, the team extended its range of action from one
to several universities belonging to the same consortium of
university institutions. Thus, an action plan initially intended to be
implemented in one single organisation had the opportunity to be at
least partially conducted in many research institutions. This process
was complex and not free from obstacles and difficulties of different
types.
• Case 3 involves a team that increased its engagement at national
level, leveraging also upon its skills and capacities on gender
issues, to look for external backing to address effectively resistance
and obstacles within the organisation.
In the box, a case is presented involving two agreements established by
a team with local and national health public authorities on the gender/
sex dimension of health.
COOPERATION AGREEMENTS
ON GENDER HEALTH
In order to guarantee a favourable framework for gendering
contents and methods of scientific research on health, the TRIGGER
team at the University of Pisa launched a collaboration initiative with two
strategic partners, one at regional and the other at national level. The work
performed and the negotiation process held led to the signing of two framework
agreements for promoting gender equality in research and gendering contents
and methodologies, respectively with the Region of Tuscany, specifically
the Department of Health, and the National Institute of Health, the
leading technical/scientific body of the Italian National Health
Service.
See: http://triggerproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/
Newsletter-5_def.pdf
AREA 3
59
The Cases
16. EXTERNAL BACKING
CASE 1 → EXTERNAL NETWORKS TO STRENGTHEN THE ACTION
PLAN INTERNALLY
The starting point
At one of the technical universities implementing a gender action plan in
the framework of an EC project, the creation of a new network of women
researchers was planned. Its purpose was to foster participation and support
for the development and implementation of the action plan, then to be
institutionalised and function as a permanent actor within the university.
The core group in the network should have included women from two out of
the three faculties participating in the project, later to include the third and
progressively reach interested women professors and researchers at other
faculties and schools.
The dynamics
This action was slightly delayed due to the relatively low interest, among
women professors and researchers, in setting up a more formal way of
working together, and also because of a sort of self-imposed lack of visibility
among some of them, connected maybe to an underestimation of their own
scientific merits and roles, but mostly to their desire not to highlight their
specific situation as professional women. In order to create a core group of
inspiring women, a blog was created around the mid–term of the project,
intended as a seed for the network, but also as platform to make women
and their work more visible. Political changes within the university led to a
different institutional policy which did not support specific actions to make
women visible such as an only women’s blog showcasing their work. This
affected also the part of the original draft of the Equality Plan included in
the EC project, where this network was a part of the measures to promote
women equality. In order to accelerate change, the team then decided to
re-adapt the initial idea, creating an outward initiative, by strengthening
existing external networks and creating new ones, related to both scientific
personnel and equality officers at national and international level. Two
members of the project team are in the founding group of a new professional
association at the national level. Thus, some other action plan operations
can be connected to the Association, in order to reinforce and extend their
impact. Some other collaborations and networking activities with external
organizations, such as other professional bodies, local authorities and
private companies, were initiated or intensified.
Some results
The redesign of the initial idea about outside collaboration and networks
had some positive aspects. First, it made networking more independent from
university boundaries and contributed to its sustainability beyond the life of
the European project. Secondly, this kind of networking was able to reach
both researchers and professors at the university in a different way and with
a wider field of action. Thirdly, it also extended its scope to further women,
because most of the students develop their professional careers outside the
academic sector.
CASE 2 → A COMPLEX EXAMPLE OF COOPERATION AMONG
UNIVERSITIES
The starting point
One of the universities implementing a gender action plan funded by an EC
project is also member of a consortium of universities which was created
following a national reform. During the initial phase of the European project,
the project team at the university proposed to the other institutions forming
part of the consortium to develop a common gender equality policy. After
intense negotiation, the leadership of the consortium asked the project team
to coordinate the network of the equality officers appointed at each member
university, providing it also with funds to extend the project action to the
other institutions.
The dynamics
During the first year of the project, some of the planned actions were slowed
down at the university due to a change of institutional leadership. A long
time was necessary for the project team to be accredited, and to present to
the new management team the opportunity to change some internal rules in
an openly pro-women direction. This process, indeed, would have required
a clear political positioning and risked being controversial, in a turbulent
moment of transformation of the national higher education system. On the
other hand, the project team intensified its inter-institutional efforts, e.g.,
extending the gender equality training offer to the other universities of the
consortium and creating new common initiatives (e.g., a service against
sexual harassment).
Some results
The initiatives conducted were echoed and praised by the national media,
and the university increased its public prestige. All these effects provided
substantial evidence about the effectiveness of the gender action plan
proposed by the project team, thus contributing to overcoming internal
resistance.
59
6060
The Cases
16. EXTERNAL BACKING
CASE 3 → INCREASED VISIBILITY AT NATIONAL LEVEL AND ITS
IMPACTS IN THE ORGANISATION
The starting point
The project team of a technical university in a male-dominated field
involved in a structural change project devised a complex and challenging
gender action plan, including gender equality actions and promotion of
gendered research, the first of its kind in the country. This happened in a
general national and political context which was not favourable to gender
policies, with a conservative attitude in society in general, and among men
in particular. Some actions of the plan aimed at establishing constant
relationships with other universities and research centres involved in EC
projects all around the country.
The dynamics
The university leadership showed mild interest initially. At mid-term, after
the renewal of the management with persons partially different from the
ones who followed the action plan from its very beginning, the project
team, not surprisingly, faced strong resistances. These mainly came from
middle managers, a very busy group with priorities different from gender
equality (for example, two planned workshops targeting them had to be
cancelled). Top management, even though generally less hostile, proved to
be a problematic group as well, difficult to involve, mainly because of their
multiple commitments. A certain interest, but not strong support, came
from a group of women full professors of the university, who periodically
convened. Despite internal difficulties, the project team continued its
networking activities, extending the scope of its external relationships at
national level, creating and being actively involved in working groups dealing
with gender issues and innovation with representatives of the Ministry of
Education and other public authorities responsible for European research.
This external activity and visibility was to an extent echoed in the institution,
on the occasion of public initiatives.
Some results
The team succeeded in devising, and in some cases completing before the
end of the project, a wide array of activities, some of which were really
innovative, reaching different kinds of beneficiaries, also thanks to the
increased external reach of its action.
60
61
In this section, the focus is on the process that allows an action plan to
have an impact, in terms of institutional change, on the organisation.
The section doesn’t explore how to implement an action plan, but rather
which recurrent factors may come into play in making an impact
more likely to occur while implementing an action plan.
On the basis of the mutual learning process carried out under the
TRIGGER project, six factors were discussed:
• Self-reflexive processes (the action plan introducing procedures
and mechanisms allowing the organisation to be aware of and
anticipate intended and unintended consequences of their or others’
actions on gender equality)
• Gender-sensitive communication (the action plan supporting the
adoption of gender-sensitive communication in the organisation to
increase the potential impact of the implemented actions)
• Gender-sensitive education (the action plan inducing a change in
the culture and mindset of future generations of researchers and
leaders through educational programmes)
• Action plan tailoring process (the action plan adapting its
approach and continuously tailoring its action to the features and
emerging needs of the organisation)
• Policy integration (the action plan establishing synergies, as well
as forms of coordination and cooperation, with existing relevant
policies of the organisation)
• External backing (the action plan establishing forms of cooperation,
coordination and agreement with external players so as to strengthen
its impact on the organisation).
There will surely be many other factors that greatly influence the
impact-making process. Nonetheless, those presented here highlight
how implementation dynamics can be managed by the team. In this
regard, some key issues can be singled out.
Careful handling of the concept of impact. The concept of impact
is necessary, but at the same time extremely difficult to manage. It is
of course necessary, since it represents a guiding principle for a team
interested in triggering significant changes in the institution. However,
when used as a parameter to evaluate an action plan, it becomes almost
unmanageable, for different reasons: it is a vague concept (actually,
everything can be understood as an impact); the majority of impacts take
time to occur and often they occur after the action plan is completed;
sometimes, unexpected and unintended impacts prove to be more
important than those proactively pursued; intangible and difficult-to-
measure impacts (for example, changes in social and cultural attitudes)
are, in the majority of cases, more meaningful than the impacts which
can be easily measured. Thus, using the concept of impact is necessary;
but careful handling is equally necessary.
Adopting an open-minded and flexible approach. Many examples
provided in this section suggest that, in many cases, producing impacts
entails profound changes in the action plan as it was originally planned;
for example, changes in alliances with other players, changes in
methods adopted, changes in the scope and nature of the actions to
be carried out, changes in the timeline of the activities or changes in
communication styles and contents. Hence the importance for a team to
adopt an open-minded and flexible approach to the action plan, to avoid
it being viewed as an end and not as a means. Uncritically sticking to
the established plans is not a productive strategy.
Understanding negotiations as the main tool for making an impact.
A discussion of this section allows us to identify another key element
which comes into play in the impact-making process, i.e., negotiations.
As a matter of fact, the major effort the teams are continuously making
throughout the project centres on negotiations over the action plan
with many actors, individually or collectively: negotiations on contents,
timelines, priorities and activity methods; negotiations on players to be
involved, their tasks and roles; negotiations on data and interpretations
about gender inequality dynamics in the organisation; negotiations on
the language to be adopted or the messages to be launched; negotiations
on rules and procedures. Thus, it is extremely important for the team
to understand the key role played by negotiation in producing impacts,
at different levels (symbolic, interpretive, normative, operational) and
in different domains (work-life balance, women’s careers, gendered
science, women’s leadership), and to learn rapidly how to negotiate
effectively and appropriately with the different stakeholders.
Leveraging on existing tools, policies and opportunities, when
possible. It is naive to think that an action plan could produce
remarkable impacts in the institution by acting alone. Action plans
would not have the resources, political power and time perspectives
necessary to permanently change the situation. This is the reason why
many teams see their action plans as a sort of a triggering device,
i.e., something able to activate broader change mechanisms in the
organisation. It is therefore extremely important for the team to identify
Key issues
MAKING AN IMPACT
The Cases AREA 3
6262
existing tools, policies and opportunities which the action plan may
support, activate or enhance, in order to multiply its own impact and to
produce new ones.
Keeping a realistic view of impacts. As shown by experience, many
actions often prove to be much more difficult and complex than they
were supposed to be. As for the impacts, usually they take time to
occur and, as we have already noticed, often even more time than the
duration of the action plan. Having too high expectations of the impacts
could be damaging, since it may induce a sense of disappointment and
frustration in the team, or in the other involved actors. Alternatively, it
may lead to seeing impacts that are not still there. Probably, the most
productive attitude is to be realistic and perceive the action plan as a
step in a broader process, capable of producing a set of impacts, but
mostly important to allow the entire process to go on.
Key issues
63
SUSTAINABILITY
AREA 4
In the case of gender-oriented institutional change projects, sustainability has a crucial role. The very adjective
“institutional” suggests that the changes introduced in the organisation should be, if not permanent, at least
sustainable in the long run. An institutional change which disappears with the end of the action plan or because
of a simple leadership turnover is not institutional by definition.
Even if sustainability refers to something which is expected to occur after the completion of the action plan, it is misleading
to think of it as something which automatically happens (or does not happen), as if it were a sort of a final judgement for
the action plan: if it is good, it will continue; otherwise, it will stop. Sustainability could rather be described as an output
of a process which develops all through the action plan and can be driven (at least partially) by the team.
This section concerns precisely such a process and, in particular, how teams usually manage the problem of creating
the conditions for the actions initiated under the action plan to be embedded in the ordinary activities of the research
organisation, or to be taken over by someone else.
There are some necessary requirements for sustainability. Some of them are evident enough: for example,
that new funds are allocated to replace those provided by the project, or that new actors become responsible for or
involved in steering the actions. Many other conditions are difficult to identify in advance and emerge only while the
process proceeds.
In the light of the mutual learning exercises developed under TRIGGER, some recurrent elements seem to have an
influence on sustainability. In particular, in this section, five strands are discussed, all of them pertaining to the
embedment of gender in some key organisational processes:
• Inclusion of gender in monitoring systems
• Inclusion of gender in scientific excellence
• Inclusion of gender considerations in service provisions
• Inclusion of gender in the organisation’s standards
• Inclusion of gender in the organisation’s structure and mission.
The fourth and final component of the process of change is
sustainability. This notion, in the context of project management,
refers to the capacity of a project to ensure that its outcomes
continue after the end of the external funding.
Key issues
63
64
Permanent tools to monitor gender equality
in the institution
17. INCLUSION OF GENDER IN MONITORING SYSTEMS
THE ISSUE
It is difficult to sustain commitment to a gender action plan if gender
issues are not perceived as strategic by management and staff; and they
are not likely to be considered strategic if they are not detected by the
“sensors” used by the organisation to keep its internal and external
environment under control.
The “No data, no problem, no policy” concept is appropriate here.
Lack of data about gender dynamics in an organisation makes it easier
to deny, overlook or practically neglect gender inequality. This, in turn,
makes it easier for investment in gender policies to be considered
unnecessary and to be discontinued.
Breaking the loop starting with its first element – “no data” – is
therefore a pre-requisite for sustainability. The lack of gender
monitoring mechanisms generating data and information about gender
inequality (its features, dynamics, impacts, etc.) largely contributes to
making actions against gender inequality marginal, questionable, not
assessable and finally not sustainable.
THE PROCESS
The teams propose a wide range of techniques and methods to monitor
gender dynamics. However, the main problem the teams usually have is
not that of developing such techniques and methods, but that of pushing
organisations to adopt and integrate them in their usual monitoring
procedures. In this regard, different strategies are devised, as shown in
the cases presented in this section.
• Case 1 describes one team’s attempt to institutionalise a self-
updating database on the situation of women and men within the
organisation, leveraging upon the interest of the top-managers in this
initiative. The case also shows how administrative and bureaucratic
dynamics may hinder, slow down or endanger the process.
• Case 2 focuses on an attempt to introduce gender budgeting as a
method for detecting gender inequality in all aspects of the life of a
research organisation. In this case, the team succeeded in pushing
the management to establish an internal commission to introduce
gender budgeting as a permanent monitoring tool.
In the box below, another example is given of the establishment of a
permanent observatory on gender equality in an Italian university.
A PERMANENT OBSERVATORY
ON GENDER EQUALITY
During the first project year, the team of GenderTIME at the
University of Padua promoted the creation of an Observatory of
Gender Equality providing data for all the university and cooperating with
all the bodies in charge of equality issues at the university. It is composed
of both administrative and scientific personnel, belonging to different
areas, including also representatives of undergraduate and graduate
students. The coordinator is the project team leader and it is set
to be a permanent structure of the university.
See: http://gendertime.dei.unipd.it/?lang=en
https:// www.unipd.it/osservatorio-ateneo-pari-opportunita
AREA 4
65
Permanent tools to monitor gender equality
in the institution
The Cases
CASE 1 → A DATABASE OF GENDERED DATA AIMING AT
INSTITUTIONALISATION
The starting point
One of the action plans, funded thanks to an EC project, encompassed the
creation of a self-updating database on the situation of women and men,
mainly focused on the 6 STEMM departments targeted by the project, but
also containing information on the whole university and comparative data on
the national situation. The database was created through links with existing
databases which were not entirely public and connected. A specific part of
the database is connected with in-depth information on CVs and publications
by women scientists who accepted to have them published (among them,
the delegate of the Rector on gender equality and gendered research).
The dynamics
Despite the team having a clear idea of the final output and the requirements
needed, the implementation of the public bid for the database was slowed
down by the overly bureaucratic procedures of a public university. After
concluding the identification of a subcontractor (at the end of the second
year), the third year was almost entirely dedicated to the implementation
of the online database. It was created and could be accessed and queried
through a web platform at the end of the third year. During the fourth year,
the database and the relatedonline platform were regularly updated. The
persons in charge of implementing the platform were completely in tune
with the project team, thus there were good matches for with all their
requests. The only problem is the precarious status of the statistician in
charge of the database, an employee expressly hired for the project.
Some results
The database is currently being used by the project team to monitor the
situation of female scientists and illustrate it to all interested stakeholders.
Thanks to this, the general director of the university, as well as the new
rector, are particularly interested in using the database as a monitoring tool
also for their current human resources policies in the future.
CASE 2 → A COMMISSION FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF GENDER
BUDGETING
The starting point
During the last project year, the team leader of an FP7-funded project, and
another person involved in it, participated in a meeting devoted to gender
budgeting, held by various national representatives of European projects.
On this occasion, their idea was to introduce this methodology also in
their university, taking individual elements from the different approaches
proposed in the meeting, but also adding some new aspects specific to the
experience of their university.
The dynamics
The project representatives decided to launch gender budgeting through a
training initiative for the administrative staff of the university. Thanks to
an agreement with the office in charge of employee training, the gender
budgeting initiative was included in the training courses offered by
the university. Both administrative managers and heads of department
participated in the training and were very interested in the topic. The
initiative raised interest and new awareness in the administrative and
scientific staff attending the training and also beyond, gradually involving
new people in the university.
Some results
Based on the expectations created by the training, the proposal was made by
the Rector’s delegate for gender equality to create a commission for gender
budgeting in the university. The rector appointed the commission, intended
to be permanent, and the activity of gender budgeting was launched.
17. INCLUSION OF GENDER IN MONITORING SYSTEMS
65
6666
Shaping research organisations around a gender-aware
understanding of science
18. INCLUSION OF GENDER IN SCIENTIFIC EXCELLENCE
THE ISSUE
The second strand of sustainability concerns the notion of scientific
excellence. The connection between sustainability and scientific
excellence might not be evident at first glance, even though it is
strong and direct. This happens because there is the tendency, among
researchers and research leaders, to distinguish drastically between
science as a specific working environment and science as a
specific form of knowledge. While science, as working environment,
is viewed as gender-biased (as any other working environment), science,
as a specific form of knowledge, is strangely viewed as not biased at all,
as if the way in which the working environment works had no impact on
how scientific knowledge is produced. This fostered and is still fostering
the idea that advancements and scientific recognition are only regulated
by criteria of scientific excellence, such as merit, creativity, skills or
specific moral attitudes (such as courage or commitment).
This view is misleading, since it fails to acknowledge that all science
– socially, substantively and symbolically – has been shaped on specific
cultural and social patterns, which are largely gender-biased. This has
very practical and measurable consequences on aspects such as
women’s careers, research contents and methods, peer-review evaluation
processes, access to research funds, or scientific recognition and awards.
Thus, challenging the current views of scientific excellence is not
just a philosophical battle, but a necessary step to increase women’s
ownership of science, which in turn increases the sustainability
perspectives of the action plans.
Indeed, it is practically useless and, in the long-run, unsustainable,
to implement actions aimed at promoting gender equality when science
remains anchored to principles and symbols which provide the ground
to and justification for inequality.
THE PROCESS
There is not a simple and linear approach to addressing scientific
excellence as a gender-biased social construction. Teams actually tend to
adopt tools acting at different levels – symbols and communication,
norms and regulation, public dialogue, awareness-raising, etc. – trying
to produce long-term impacts on how scientific excellence is viewed
and practised. In this regard, the cases presented in this section clearly
exemplify the tendency of combining different kinds of actions.
• In Case 1, the team launched an award named after a woman
scientist and associated it with a contest to promote the sex/gender
dimension of science. Other initiatives have also been connected
to the award, including training modules and initiatives aimed at
mobilising women scientists.
• Case 2 presents the team’s efforts to connect gender equality
and scientific excellence through a multiple-action strategy
including, among other things, the establishment of alliances with
other internal actors and lobbying aimed at activating a national
award for gender equality in research.
The box below presents another way of promoting a cultural review of
the understanding of scientific excellence, i.e., the establishment of a
UNESCO Chair on Gender Equality in Science, Technology and Innovation.
UNESCO CHAIR ON GENDER
EQUALITY POLICIES IN SCIENCE,
TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION
At project mid-term, the TRIGGER team of the Technical University of
Madrid received confirmation of their application for a UNESCO chair, the first
UNESCO Chair on Gender in a technical university in the world, and one out of around
12 actively dealing with gender. The UNESCO-UPM Chair on Gender has a double objective.
Firstly, to improve the level of participation and leadership of women in science, technology
and innovation, and supporting structural changes in organisations to achieve this aim. Secondly, to
advance the integration of gender perspectives in research, technology and innovation, and in higher
education curricula in technological areas (engineering, planning, and architecture). The chair has
joined different existing associations and working groups at national and international level,
and has promoted some new ones. It also signed agreements with other institutions and
has worked for some public administrations providing consultancy.
See: http://unsdsn.org/where-we-work/members/unesco-chair-on-gender-equality-
policies-in-science-technology-and-innovation-universidad-politecnica-de-madrid/
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/themes/gender-equality/resources/
single-view-gender/news/first_of_its_kind_meeting_with_unesco_
chairs_on_gender/
AREA 4
67
Shaping research organisations around a gender-aware
understanding of science
UNESCO CHAIR ON GENDER
EQUALITY POLICIES IN SCIENCE,
TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION
At project mid-term, the TRIGGER team of the Technical University of
Madrid received confirmation of their application for a UNESCO chair, the first
UNESCO Chair on Gender in a technical university in the world, and one out of around
12 actively dealing with gender. The UNESCO-UPM Chair on Gender has a double objective.
Firstly, to improve the level of participation and leadership of women in science, technology
and innovation, and supporting structural changes in organisations to achieve this aim. Secondly, to
advance the integration of gender perspectives in research, technology and innovation, and in higher
education curricula in technological areas (engineering, planning, and architecture). The chair has
joined different existing associations and working groups at national and international level,
and has promoted some new ones. It also signed agreements with other institutions and
has worked for some public administrations providing consultancy.
See: http://unsdsn.org/where-we-work/members/unesco-chair-on-gender-equality-
policies-in-science-technology-and-innovation-universidad-politecnica-de-madrid/
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/themes/gender-equality/resources/
single-view-gender/news/first_of_its_kind_meeting_with_unesco_
chairs_on_gender/
The Cases
CASE 1 → AN AWARD FOR BREAKING MALEDOMINATED
PRACTICES AND VIEWS OF SCIENCE
The starting point
To root gender topics in the academic life of a technical university, the
project team of an EC-funded project proposed to the leadership to create
an institutional award named after a well-known woman scientist in the
university’s field of study. In its first edition, the award encompassed
two categories: a contest for students’ research works that integrated
a gender dimension and a prize to an outstanding woman researcher for
her contribution to the development of science, research, pedagogy and
innovation. In its second edition, one year later, a further category was
added, i.e., an award to an employee who made significant contributions
to the field of supporting and promoting equal opportunities in working
relations and research.
The dynamics
Initially, the award was funded and organised in the framework of the EC
project, to launch an innovative and challenging strand of activities (i.e.,
gendered research in a very technical STEM field). Besides this, an internal
team worked on these issues, organising training initiatives and involving
women professors in suggesting topics to be proposed for the students’
works. Moving on to the second edition, the team noticed a significant
improvement in the quality of the students’ works submitted.
Some results
The award was officially presented in the first year by the rector and in the
second year by the vice-rector for research. The rector, the vice-rector for
strategy and the bursar took part in the ceremony. The news and photos
were published on the main web page of the institution. Thanks to internal
negotiation and the good results of the first year, the university management
decided to fund the prizes for the researcher and the employee from the
institutional budget and to institutionalise it. As for the contest for the
students’ research works, the commitment was expressed to use the
research department budget to fund it for the years to come after the end
of the project.
CASE 2 → A MULTIPLEACTION STRATEGY FOR CONNECTING
GENDER EQUALITY AND SCIENTIFIC EXCELLENCE
The starting point
One of the first EC-funded projects for structural change took place in a
university with a long history of gender equality, where the commitment of
the leadership was evident, a sort of gender hub was already in place and
three teams were actively operating in as many STEM faculties to promote
gender equality. Despite the long-standing effort, the internal evaluation
of the project underlined the difficulty, among other things, in changing
management practices, so as to introduce durable mechanisms to ensure
gender equality.
The dynamics
Through the action plan, gender bias has been addressed at all levels,
including the top management, through a set of various actions (e.g.
collection and dissemination of sex-disaggregated data, improvement of
women researchers’ visibility, institutional benchmarking). New internal
alliances have been established and internal consensus has grown. Besides
this, the project team (based at the gender hub) has participated in political
lobbying at national level to introduce a system of awards for universities
and scientific institutions which already exists in other countries and which
promotes gender equality as a mark of excellence. At the beginning of the
last project year, a new strategy for national higher education was launched,
including the activation of the awards.
Some results
The set of measures devised by the project proved successful. A set of
dissemination tools (including a video) show how the university is now
officially committed to promoting gender equality as a strategy to foster
academic excellence, attracting and retaining the best female and male
talents, also by applying for the national award system, which will allow, in
the years to come, to support the project team so it can continue its gender
equality activity.
18. INCLUSION OF GENDER IN SCIENTIFIC EXCELLENCE
67
6868
New or extended services for emerging needs
19. INCLUSION OF GENDER CONSIDERATIONS
IN SERVICE PROVISION
THE ISSUE
Science is a highly competitive environment. Especially in some research
fields, it is based, even more than in the past, on an increasing number
of researchers who are driven to offer their total commitment, under
uncertain temporary contracts and high mobility levels, to work as hard
as possible with a view to obtaining a permanent position, sustained by
the myth and charm of science. Few of them, however, succeed. Most
give up and change their career paths, sometimes from personal choice,
but more often due to lack of opportunities, coupled with insufficient
support from the organisations.
Women are more exposed to this kind of mechanism than men,
because of the unbalanced distribution of family care and parental
leaves between men and women, unfair access to scientific recognition,
rewards, salaries and research funds. Thus, women risk working more
to get less, and it is not surprising that they leave scientific careers
remarkably more often than men do. This perverse dynamic also
concerns the sustainability of gender action plans.
Indeed, an action plan promoting women’s careers without ensuring
provisions and services which – even if open to all – are tailored to
women’s experiences and needs, is simply not sustainable. It could
even paradoxically be a sort of trap, increasing their full commitment
to science without providing the needed support to manage their lives
as a whole.
This strand therefore concerns a pivotal issue, i.e., how to support
women through services and provisions geared to make science a
friendly environment, to back them in areas of professional life where
they are particularly exposed to the risk of exclusion, or to manage the
burden of care.
THE PROCESS
Beyond the individual initiatives, it is interesting to observe that that
there are many possible services and provisions which could be helpful
to women, as well as the amount of resistance that the teams often
meet while trying to introduce them.
• In Case 1, the team promoted the establishment of support services
to prevent and manage cases of sexual harassment in the working
environment. The team had to face resistance and opposition from
some leaders, who perceived the establishment of such services as
a public admission that a problem of harassment actually existed in
the organisation, which was generally dismissed.
• Case 2 focused on a successful attempt made by a team to give
young researchers with temporary contracts access to services
which until then had only been accessible to employees with a
permanent contract. Also in this case, resistance was reported.
• Case 3, finally, concerns services to help researchers, especially
women, commercialise their research results. The example is
interesting, since women usually meet more obstacles than men
also when innovation processes are concerned, but services and
provisions in this domain are extremely rare.
In the box below, another case is briefly presented of a team engaged in
extending benefits to temporary researchers which previously had only
been enjoyed by the permanent staff.
EXTENDING THE BENEFITS OF
PERMANENT STAFF
TO OTHER TARGETS
In concurrence with the implementation of the GARCIA project, and in
the framework of its Plan of Positive Actions for Equal Opportunities 2014-
2016, the University of Trento decided to participate in the “Family Audit” Project,
aiming at gaining a national certification based on the recognition of efforts to reconcile
employees work and family lives. Over the next three years, the University will thus define
and implement a series of actions aimed at facilitating the reconciliation of the work and
family life of all its employees and staff, including personnel on fixed-term contracts.
At the end of the project, a permanent platform was created for PhD students and
research fellows, where it is possible to retrieve information about rights
and duties of researchers with non-permanent positions.
See: http://www.unitn.it http://www.unitn.it/en/ateneo/51638/work-life-
balance
http://webmagazine.unitn.it/news/ateneo/19621/piano-di-
azioni-positive-2017-2019
AREA 4
69
The Cases
CASE 1 → SERVICES FOR COMBATING SEXUAL HARASSMENT
The starting point
At one of the partner universities of an FP7 project, the decision was
made, after the beginning of the project, to add to the initial action plan
an important strand of activity, related to combating sexual harassment. A
preliminary study of the needs of the organisation, as well as an international
review of some current experiences were conducted. The national context
was favourable, since during the second project year the minister of higher
education had recommended creating structures to address this issue. Also
the local context was supportive, since the university belongs to a network
of universities whose president shared the idea and provided a budget for all
network members.
The dynamics
Despite the favourable circumstances, convincing the president of the
university to take action against sexual harassment took more than one
year. The president of the university was reluctant to admit the existence
of the problem of sexual harassment, due also to the fear of how it would
be communicated externally, on the media. It was necessary to lever on
competition between universities and take examples from other countries
(for instance, the team told the top management about cases in Canada,
explaining positive and negative aspects). The solution found was to create
an external structure to serve multiple universities, at the premises of a
medical department.
Some results
The structure is now fully operational, established with a multiannual
contract and a triple mandate (receiving victims, helping victims and
training different university professionals), endowed with a yearly budget.
In less than one year, around 20 cases were treated, some of which were
really serious, thus confirming the relevance of the issue. A working group
has been created at the faculty of Medicine, where the situation appears
worse than elsewhere.
CASE 2 → SERVICES AND PROVISIONS FOR PROTECTING YOUNG
TEMPORARY RESEARCH WORKERS
The starting point
In a technical university implementing a gender action plan, retaining young
researchers, mostly women, is very difficult, due to the general situation
of higher education in the country. Furthermore, in a moment of economic
crisis, trade unions mainly protect the interests of the employees rather than
those of temporary researchers. Precariousness is very high and supporting
early-career scientists is a challenge that the project has tried to address.
The dynamics
In this framework, the project team tried to enlarge the support offered
by the university to young researchers. Starting with the first project year,
thanks to the action of the team leader, use of the internal kindergarten was
also offered to the children of PhD students. Some informal mentoring and
advice on career aspects were also implemented. Besides this, the project
team leader started internal negotiations with the university management
team to promote a human resources policy suited to the population of the
university, conducting meanwhile, together with representatives of other
universities, lobbying action with the ministries responsible, designed to get
more job stability for young researchers. In the second part of the project,
the university decided to create a Career Advisory Department, for students
and early-career researchers, involving in it the project team coordinator and
taking on some of the training and counselling activities initially performed
under the umbrella of the project.
Some results
The activity of advocacy to obtain more stable contractual arrangements for
early career researchers failed because of the general situation, related to an
increase in competition for funding distributed through grant competitions,
which has increased work precariousness as temporary contracts are the
norm. This condition, according to the rectors, makes it impossible to
employ people on a permanent basis due to the uncertainty of funding.
Instead, internal provisions for supporting this target group, enabling them
to look for career opportunities also outside academia, will continue even
after the conclusion of the project.
19. INCLUSION OF GENDER CONSIDERATIONS
IN SERVICE PROVISION
69
7070
The Cases
CASE 3 → HELPING WOMEN RESEARCHERS TO COMMERCIALISE
RESEARCH RESULTS
The starting point
A university involved in a European project focused one of its actions on
the aspect of commercialisation of research products, to verify if and how
women are disadvantaged in harnessing the results of their scientific work,
and aiming to improve women scientists’ opportunities to commercialise
their research by building synergies with other relevant players outside the
university.
The dynamics
During some preliminary internal and external meetings with the actors
involved in commercialisation, the team realized that commercialisation
activities were quite low, independently of the researchers’ gender.
Subsequently, a university-wide survey was elaborated and launched
to further understand the interest, involvement, and future plans of the
scientific staff in relation to commercialisation activities.
This survey confirmed the results emerging from the previous meetings,
i.e. the level of commercialisation is low, and also, commercialisation is
considered a particularly time-consuming activity in which many academics
seem to be reluctant to engage. The results from the survey were presented
to the two faculties in which the project was operating. The project team
proposed to appointing innovation “champions” in departments and research
groups, i.e. members of the staff who can help colleagues to understand
and develop the commercial potential of their research.the project team
coordinator and taking on some of the training and counselling activities
initially performed under the umbrella of the project.
Some results
As a result of the action geared towards verifying the state of the art of
commercialisation, and subsequent proposals, in one of the two faculties a
“Research Development Manager” was appointed in the second project year.
70
71
Binding procedures to make gender
equality actions permanent
20. INCLUSION OF GENDER IN ORGANISATIONAL STANDARDS
THE ISSUE
The fourth strand of sustainability emerging from the mutual
learning exchange carried out under the TRIGGER project pertains to
the embedment of gender issues in the standards adopted by the
organisation.
As we already highlighted above, institutional change also means
changing the “rules of the game”; and such rules are inevitably
embodied in a set of organisational standards, be they established
procedures, norms, protocols, or standardised documents.
Thus, an action plan which does not succeed in embedding its
actions in the organisational standards is not sustainable and
risks remaining temporary, marginal and isolated from the dynamics
of the organisation, in short, something unable to trigger long-term
institutional changes.
THE PROCESS
Embedding the actions in the organisational standards is the most
pursued strategy adopted by the teams in order to make them
sustainable in the long run. However, the process may be much more
troublesome than expected, since standards have much to do with the
allocation of power within the organisation. Three cases are presented
here in this regard.
• Case 1 focuses on a team which proposed the adoption of a European
quality label pertaining to human resources management,
the idea being to create the right context for the inclusion of new gender-
sensitive managerial procedures. The process was difficult to implement
but at the end it was successful.
• Case 2 concerns the introduction of new protocols and guidelines
to combat harassment in the organisation. This attempt was
successful but the process was characterised by conflicts, setbacks
and bottlenecks.
• In Case 3, the team combined the need for new rules on home
working with providing support for women returning to work
after maternity or parental leaves, since home working is an
important tool for facilitating the re-entry process.
The box below shows a case where the team, based on successful action
focusing on female PhD students, succeeded in including mentoring as a
permanent service offered by the institution, producing also a handbook
on mentoring activities.
MENTORING AS A PERMANENT
SERVICE OFFERED TO YOUNG
RESEARCHERS
The mentoring action devised by the TRIGGER team at the Birkbeck
College of London, encompassing a literature review, a longitudinal study and
two subsequent programmes, all resulting in a Handbook on good practice for
mentoring activities, has achieved sustainability beyond the project duration. The
mentoring programme has been included in the Athena SWAN action plan for
maintaining the Bronze and achieving the Silver Award of the institution
as a whole. It will be thus carried on in the following three years,
after the end of TRIGGER.
See: http://www.bbk.ac.uk/trigger/our-research/activities/
mentoring-programme
The Cases AREA 4
7272
CASE 1 → CONNECTING GENDER TO HIGHQUALITY HUMAN
RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
The starting point
The leader of the gender equality plan at a university is a member of the
President’s team supervising HR policies. When the project approached its
last year and the team was reflecting on future sustainability, the idea was
launched to apply to the European Quality Label HRS4R. Besides being an
important means to improve the management of human resources and a way
to attract further European funds, the programme to obtain the label would
allow for the incorporation of a series of gender equality measures already
tested or proposed through the European project, which, once the label is
obtained, will become operational at university level.
The dynamics
A first attempt to apply for the label was made at the end of the first
project year. The application process was stopped by the former head of
HR, who deemed it too demanding at that moment. When, two years later,
the head of HR changed, the head of the project team seized the occasion
to create a working group of new employees motivated to participate in the
application process for the label. The process needed to be very quick, since
the application procedure was going to be modified, and the team intended
to apply before it happened, to avoid delays.
Thanks also to the European project, provisions concerning work-life balance
(among others, the offer of sabbatical given to women researchers returning
after maternity), women’s careers, gender training, struggle against sexual
harassment, were included. The measures identified were submitted to
university staff through a questionnaire which had a good response rate
among scientists and employees in a very short time. Following the results,
some measures included in the programme were modified. No objections
were made by the university decision councils, since the team leveraged on
the possibility of getting more funding, in a moment of national financing
shortage. The only opposition came from a representative of the trade
unions, questioning the extra work needed to prepare the application and to
comply with the requirements included in the programme.
Some results
The application has been accepted by the European Commission, which
only requested small amendments to some measures suggested. The
consultation via online questionnaire will be replicated annually in the
following four years, until the EC‘s re-evaluation of the university’s position.
CASE 2 → PROTOCOLS AND GUIDELINES AGAINST HARASSMENT
The starting point
In one of the universities involved in an FP7 project, protocols on workplace
and sexual harassment were drawn up and negotiated with the leadership,
containing procedures to deal with relevant cases, to be widely publicised
throughout the university. As part of its gender action plan, the project team
proposed a set of implementation guidelines.
The dynamics
The approval of the protocol was blocked for many months as one of the
many results of the internal conflicts between trade unions representatives
and university management. These conflicts arose as a consequence of
the layoff of over 300 administrative staff. The layoffs were forced by the
university’s very difficult budgetary situation, resulting from the overall
economic crisis in the country. Despite the stalled situation, the project
team followed its programme, preparing a set of guidelines, giving them
a publishable format and starting to disseminate them through internal
meetings with different stakeholders. In these meetings, the team and
the participants realised that coordinated interventions on the problem of
harassment were needed. The public presentation of the guidelines was
organised on the occasion of the day on violence against women, with the
participation of university authorities, national experts and multiple internal
and external stakeholders.
Some results
Awareness of the issue was raised. The presentation was widely echoed.
Finally, the protocol was approved, thus allowing the university to take
charge of the problem institutionally and systematically.
The Cases
20. INCLUSION OF GENDER IN ORGANISATIONAL STANDARDS
72
73
CASE 3 → NEW RULES FOR HOME WORKING AND SUPPORT FOR
WOMEN RETURNING TO WORK
The starting point
A technical university involved in an FP7 project has included a series of
actions, from the very beginning of its gender action plan, which were geared
towards promoting better work-life balance for women and men researchers.
Among these, the promotion of home offices and the inclusion of a rule
about the possibility for PhD students on parental leave to participate in an
internal grant competition, with a view to facilitating re-entry.
The dynamics
The team succeeded in successfully negotiating the new rule concerning
the participation of PhD students on maternity leave, who want to go back
and continue PhD studies, in the internal grant competition. Even if seldom
used at the moment, this possibility means a significant transformation of
the institutional culture.
As for home offices, while the technical facility was implemented in the first
phases of the project, the application encountered bureaucratic and legal
problems, which required the intervention of lawyers. One of the issues dealt
with concerns how to calculate and share out the costs of the overheads,
mainly regarding electric power and Internet connections, between employer
and employees. Changes in national legislation in the end supported the
solution adopted at the university. Finally, perhaps the most important
issue is related to the agreement between the employees interested in the
practice and their direct heads, who definitely have the power to hinder the
actual implementation of the practice, unless direct interventions are made
by the academic leadership to support it.
Some results
In the final year of the project, important rules are already in force at the
university. Their actual application in the years to come is to be sustained by
the academic governance.
The Cases
73
7474
Permanent positions and units devoted to gender issues
and equality permanent
21. INCLUSION OF GENDER IN AN ORGANISATION’S
STRUCTURE AND MISSION
THE ISSUE
The last strand of the sustainability process is the embedment of gender
issues in an organisation’s structure and mission.
It is not a mere formal aspect. What we already highlighted above
about organisational standards is also valid here: what cannot be found
in the organisational structure, or in its mission statements, is not
substantially addressed by the organisation.
Thus, sustainability becomes possible when appropriate institutional
space is created to allow gender equality to exist in the organisation’s
structure and mission. This explains the big effort usually made by
the teams to promote the establishment of an officer, a committee,
a research group, a new unit responsible for gender equality, or such
like, to reinforce and back existing ones and to include gender equality
among the strategic objectives pursued by the organisation.
Otherwise, gender equality efforts risk being reduced to a set of sporadic
and patchy initiatives which can be terminated at any time, because not
actually rooted in the organisation.
THE PROCESS
The solutions adopted by the teams to include gender equality in
the organisational structure and mission are usually extremely
context-sensitive, since these solutions are highly dependent on the
organisations’ features and needs. Some examples are presented below.
• Case 1 concerns the establishment of a university-wide multi-
year equality plan, designed on the basis of the gender action plan
carried out by a team under an EC-funded project. A new institutional
structure was put in place, including a new commission in charge of
designing the plan and procedures allowing the team and the Board
of the university to cooperate in its implementation.
• Case 2 focuses on a successful attempt made by a team to include
gender equality in the mission of the organisation, leveraging upon a
charter on gender-sensitive governance signed by the leadership
of the institution. The process was complex but fostered the adoption
of various gender oriented measures in the organisation.
• In Case 3, the team promoted the establishment of a senior
position within the organisation in charge of coordinating all
the activities focused on gender equality. The team helped get the
process going by implementing a research initiative documenting the
presence of gender inequality in the institution.
A similar case is presented in the box below, concerning the appointment
of a rector’s delegate in charge of both gender studies and equal
opportunities.
APPOINTING A RECTOR’S DELEGATE
FOR GENDER STUDIES
AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES
In the framework of the TRIGGER project, the team at the university of Pisa
promoted the appointment of a rector’s delegate on gender equality and gender
studies. In the second part of the project, after the elections of the new rector,
the same person was appointed pro-vice rector and reconfirmed as delegate
for gender studies and equal opportunities, to strengthen both her role
and the equality policy of the university.
See: http://triggerproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/
Newsletter_2_final.pdf
AREA 4
75
CASE 1 → GIVING A WIDER INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK TO
GENDER EQUALITY POLICIES
The starting point
Together with actions targeting specific departments, the team of a
European project based in a technical university had included in its gender
action plan some activities involving the whole institution, such as a review
of some university regulations to make them more gender-equal and gender-
sensitive. These reviews were supposed
The dynamics
Following the activities conducted in the first year and their results, in
particular those of the initial survey on women and men in the institution,
the rector of the university decided, urged by the team, to take action,
starting a multi-year institutional gender action plan. Since the project team
was involved in this process, the internal regulations review was integrated
in the development of the new plan as a joint initiative of the team and
the Board of the university. To do this, a commission in charge of drafting
a University Gender Equality Plan, composed of different representatives
from the university, was created. This new commission was co-chaired by
the project team leader and the General Manager of the university. The
Equality Plan was ready at the end of the second year of the project, to be
subsequently approved at the beginning of the following one. In concurrence
with the internal elections of the university’s new management team,
things slowed down. A new rector with different views on equality issues
was elected. The commission for the plan was reconfigured and started to
work some months later, keeping two members of the project team and
maintaining most of the original draft.
Some results
Some changes were introduced in the initial draft of the equality plan, but
the structure and most of the contents agreed upon by the first commission
were kept. The final text of the Equality Plan was approved during the last
project year.
CASE 2 → INSERTING GENDER EQUALITY IN ALL RELEVANT
INSTITUTIONAL DOCUMENTS
The starting point
Based on the general assumption that each project action plan should be
formulated so as to become almost immediately institutional, in the second
half of its running time, a European project drafted a charter for gender-
sensitive governance to be signed by the top leadership of each partner
institution, as part of their commitment to gender equality at various
levels. An important part of this commitment involves integrating and
mainstreaming the objective of gender equality in the strategic documents
of the organisations and when establishing and communicating their long-
term priorities.
The dynamics
Following the implementation of the first part of the project, mainly thanks
to the involvement of the top-level managers, one of the teams had a big
success in terms of public attention from several stakeholders. Thanks to
various allies found in the middle management, and despite some initial
scepticism of the human resource manager and the director of communication,
various measures related to gender-sensitive communication and the fight
against sexual harassment were adopted. Leveraging on this, and to ensure
future sustainability, the team has been trying to intervene in all the ongoing
internal processes where institutional strategies are being devised, while
renegotiating and reframing relevant institutional documents.
Some results
Not in all cases was the effort to reframe official documents successful. As for
the statute, the review of which was managed according to a top-down procedure,
the team was not able to intervene. It was redrafted during the first part of the
project and team members were not even invited to participate. The team
succeeded, instead, in modifying some important institutional documents in
a gender-sensitive way, such as the charter on student life and the agreement
on work from home. Another document under renegotiation was the institution’s
scientific strategy.
The Cases
21. INCLUSION OF GENDER IN AN ORGANISATION’S
STRUCTURE AND MISSION
75
7676
CASE 3 → CREATING A SENIOR POSITION TO DEAL WITH
GENDER INEQUALITY AT INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL
The starting point
One of the teams in charge of an FP7 project is based in a university having
a research group interested in gender studies and a set of initiatives in
place related to gender equality in different domains (scientific careers and
professional work in the institution), each shouldered by working groups
or committees. What was lacking, according to the project team, was a
centralised form of responsibility, to respond to the challenges constantly
arising in the university and to manage an institutional policy on equality.
The dynamics
During the first period of project activity, among others, the team
implemented a research phase on the university’s gender culture. The
results highlighted how international academic trends impact on career
routines, the differences between careers following an academic path
and those following an administrative/support/professional role, and the
persistence of indirect and subtle forms of gender discriminations. These
results not only led to the drafting of a set of recommendations, but also
helped the research team to put forward a proposal to appoint a Pro-Vice-
Rector for Equality at the university. This proposal was shared with the
other groups active on gender issues in formal and informal meetings with
different bodies and representatives of the institution at the university and
with the leadership.
Some results
The proposal to appoint a new senior figure in charge of gender equality has
been taken in due consideration by the leadership, even though the way to
implement it is still under negotiation. Different interpretations are being
given of this role and its cogency for the institution.
The Cases
76
77
In this section, we dwelled upon the last component of the institutional
change process: sustainability. This notion refers to the capacity of a
project to ensure that its outcomes continue after the end of external
funding, which encapsulates the very meaning of “institutional change”.
However, sustainability is not a mere evaluation parameter to apply
after an action plan is completed. As experience shows, sustainability
results from a complex process which proceeds throughout action plan
implementation, and which can be in part steered by the team. In the
section, five strands influencing sustainability have been discussed,
as they emerged from the mutual learning conducted under TRIGGER:
• Inclusion of gender in monitoring systems (action plan
permanently introducing gender issues in the monitoring systems
usually adopted by the organisation)
• Inclusion of gender in scientific excellence (action plan
modifying the concept of scientific excellence and the practices
related to it, so as to unveil its gender-biased nature and to establish
a gender-aware vision of science at all levels)
• Inclusion of gender considerations in the provision of services
(action plan ensuring services and provisions supporting women in
managing their lives as a whole)
• Inclusion of gender in organisational standards (action plan
ensuring that future gender-oriented actions hinge on existing
organisational standards)
• Inclusion of gender in an organisation’s structure (action plan
ensuring that future gender-oriented actions are fully embedded in
an organisation’s structure).
The strands presented in this section allow us to identify some key
issues in the sustainability process.
Making sustainability a shared concern. The sustainability of an
action plan is not a specific team issue, but of general interest to an
organisation. An action plan which fails to become sustainable or to
generate sustainable solutions is a waste of resources for both the
external funding agency (if any) and the recipient organisation. This
implies that any efforts made by the team to look for sustainable
arrangements should be done by openly involving all stakeholders
in a public and transparent discussion, clearly presenting problems,
resistance, opportunities and possible solutions.
Planning sustainability from the beginning. One of the consequences
of the previous consideration is that teams should be prepared to lead the
entire sustainability process by planning sustainability arrangements as
early as possible, developing a sustainability plan in parallel with the
action plan. As any planning process, sustainability plans are bound
to be altered and even substantially modified during implementation.
However, planning is helpful to continue scanning for sustainable
solutions all through the duration of the action plan.
Coupling sustainability with action plan quality assessment. Not
everything in an action plan deserves to be permanently embedded in an
organisation. All action plans include actions which are planned only as
starters, or may encompass initiatives which prove to be controversial,
for example, or ineffective, or incapable of involving beneficiaries
and stakeholders, or simply badly designed. A sustainability process
should also include these aspects, which the teams probably prefer
not to publicise too much. It might, however, be advisable to couple
sustainability planning with a quality assessment of the different parts
of the plan, so as to select the actions to promote, those that are most
strategic, to ensure they continue after the completion of the action plan.
Tailoring the approach to sustainability to the features of each
action. It is extremely infrequent that an action plan as a whole is taken
on by a research organisation. However, each action can be embedded
in the organisation through specific arrangements and leveraging
on different stakeholders. Consequently, different approaches to
sustainability should be developed, each tailored to the action or group of
actions concerned. This requires the team to gain in-depth knowledge of
the internal dynamics of an organisation, to multiply negotiation efforts
and to be flexible enough to modify actions appropriately when needed.
Promoting the establishment of a new entity, or strengthening
a pre-existing one, acting as management interlocutor after the
end of the action plan. In many cases, new entities (such as networks,
associations, or research groups) are established under the action
plans to pursue different tasks and objectives. However, these new (or
revisited) entities may also be more important when the sustainability
process is concerned. Actually, they may play many different roles of
pivotal importance for sustainability: continue mobilising stakeholders
and employees on gender issues; supporting the organisation’s
management to complete and develop the actions initiated under the
action plan; functioning as a watchdog on gender issues; monitoring
women’s progress in the organisation; providing opinions on new
regulations and measures which may have an impact on women’s lives
and careers; collecting complaints, suggestions and ideas.
Key issues
SUSTAINABILITY
The Cases AREA 4
7878
SELECTED RESOURCES
TRIGGER project
Project website:
triggerproject.eu
• Bedford R., Jones E.J., Johnson M.H., Pickles A., Charman T. and
Gliga, T. (2016). “Sex differences in the association between infant
markers and later autistic traits”. Molecular Autism, 7(1), 1.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/296425824_Sex_
differences_in_the_association_between_infant_markers_and_
later_autistic_traits
• Biancheri R., Cervia S., Declich G.(2015). “Fostering structural
changes through gender equality strategies”, InGenere, April 21, 2015.
http://www.ingenere.it/en/articles/fostering-structural-changes-
through-gender-equality-strategies
• Biancheri R., Landi S., (2016). “Gender and healthcare environments:
a proposal of gender-sensitive methodology for improving the
environmental quality in the existing heritage”. Territory of research
on settlement and environment, International journal of urban
planning, n. 17, 2016. http://www.rmojs.unina.it/index.php/tria/
article/view/5056?acceptCookies=1
• Cervia S., Biancheri R. (2016), “Women in science: the persistence
of traditional gender roles. A case study on work-life interface”.
European Educational Research Journal, pp. 1-14.
• Declich G. (2016). “The Experience of the TRIGGER Project. Integrated
Equality Strategies, Gender in Research and Mutual Learning”. Les
femmes dans le monde académique, perspectives comparatives,
page 211, PUR edition
• Dell’Osso L., Gesi C., Massimetti E., Cremone I.M., Barbuti M.,
Maccariello G., Moroni I., Barlati S., Castellini G., Luciano M., Bossini
L., Rocchetti M., Signorelli M., Aguglia E., Fagiolini A., Politi P., Ricca
V., Vita A., Carmassi C., Maj M. (2016). “Adult Autism Subthreshold
Spectrum (AdASSpectrum): validation of a questionnaire investigating
subthreshold autism spectrum”. Comprehensive psychiatry, 2017
Feb;73:61-83. doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2016.11.001. Epub 2016 Nov 9.
• Di Pilla M., Bruno R.M., Taddei S., Virdis A. (2016). “Gender differences
in the relationships between psychosocial factors and hypertension”.
Maturitas, 93:58-64.
http://www.ingenere.it/en/articles/fostering-structural-changes-
through-gender-equality-strategies
• Lawton Smith, H., Henry, C., Etzkowitz, H. & Poulovassilis, A.
New
Perspectives in Gender, Science & Innovation
. Cheltenham: Edward
Elgar Publishing.
• Lawton Smith H., Meschitti V. (2015). “Transforming Institutions by
Gendering Contents and Gaining Equality in Research (Viewpoint)”.
International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 7(3).
• Lawton Smith H., Poulovassilis A., Henry C., Etzkowitz H., Meschitti, V.
(2017). Female Academic Entrepreneurship: Reviewing the evidence
and identifying the challenges. In Henry C., Nelson T., Lewis K.
(Eds.),
The Routledge Companion to Global Female Entrepreneurship
.
London: Routledge.
• Lhenry S. (2016). “The lecturer-researchers and the male standard
of success”. Les femmes dans le monde académique, perceptives
comparatives, page 107, PUR edition.
• Novella Abril I. (2016). Recognition in architecture and urban
planning. Reshaping the profession for the New Urban Agenda.
http://www.rmojs.unina.it/index.php/tria/article/view/5054/5681
• Sánchez de Madariaga I. (2015). Women at UPM, Gender Statistics
at Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, https://triggerprojectupm.files.
wordpress.com/2015/01/d5-1_womenatupm_2015-01-26_low.pdf
• Víznerová H., Nyklová B. (2016). Searching for dynamic equilibrium:
Three generations of women researchers at UCT Prague. Prague:
ISAS nad UCT Prague, 206 p., http://vydavatelstvi.vscht.cz/katalog/
publikace?uid=uid_isbn-978-80-7080-933-4
GENIS Lab project
• Genova A., De Micheli B., Zucco F., Grasso C., Magri B. (2014).
Achieving gender balance at the top of scientific research: guidelines
and tools for institutional change. Genis Lab project Rome.
• Zucco F., Molfino F. (2012). Breaking the vicious cycle of gender
stereotypes and science, Genis Lab, http://www.genislab-fp7.eu/
images/flash/Zucco_Molfino.pdf
INTEGER project
• Pepin A., Collin J., Pontois M.T. (2015). Drew Eileen, Marshall Claire,
Šidlauskiene Virginija, Jazdaukas Gintautas, Lipinsky Anke, Schafer
Maria INTEGER Review Report, January 2015.
• INTEGER Online Guidelines. http://www.integer-tools-for-action.eu/en
STAGES project
• Cacace M., Balahur D., Bleijenbergh I., Falcinelli D., Friedrich M.,
Kalpazidou Schmidt E. (2015). Structural Transformation to Achieve
Gender Equality in Science. Guidelines, STAGES project,
http://www.stages.unimi.it/upload/documents/Guidelines_STAGES_new.pdf
• Cacace M., Declich G. (2016). Accompanying research on
implementation dynamics; final report of the STAGES (Structural
Change to Achieve Gender Equality in Science) project.
FESTA project
• Salminen-Karlsson M. with FESTA partners (2016). The FESTA
79
SELECTED RESOURCES
handbook of organizational change Implementing gender equality in
higher education and research institutions, http://www.festa-europa.
eu/sites/festa-europa.eu/files/Handbook_of_organizational_
change_0.pdf
• Handbook On Resistance To Gender Equality In Academia (2016),
http://www.resge.eu/
GenderTIME project
• Badaloni S., Perini L. (2016).
A model for building a Gender Equality
Index for academic institutions
, Padova university press, Padova.
• GenderTime Toolbox, http://www.gendertime.org/Toolbox
GENOVATE project
• Fältholm Y., Wennberg P., Wikberg Nilsson Å. (eds). Promoting
Sustainable Change A Toolkit For Integrating Gender Equality and
Diversity in Research and Innovation Systems, http://www.genovate.
eu/resources/genovate-gender-and-diversity-toolkit/
• Implementing Measures for Gender Equality in Recruitment, Promotion
and Progression in Academic and Research Careers Contextualised
Guidelines for Universities and Research Organisations, http://www.
genovate.eu/media/genovate/docs/intconferencebrusselsdocs/
Contextualised-Guidelines.pdf
• Espinosa J., Bustelo M., Velasco M. (coords.), (2016). Evaluating
Gender Structural Change. Guidelines for Evaluating gender Equality
Action Plans, Complutense University of Madrid (UCM),
http://www.genovate.eu/media/genovate/docs/GENOVATE_
Guidelines_for_evaluating_GEAPs_23.11.16.pdf
GARCIA project
• Bozzon Rossella, Murgia Annalisa, Poggio Barbara (eds.) Supporting
Early Career Researchers through Gender Action Plans. A Design and
Methodological Toolkit Garcia Working Papers 9, http://garciaproject.
eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/GARCIA_working_papers_9.pdf
• http://garciaproject.eu/?page_id=52
EGERA project
• Egera charter for gender sensitive governance in research & higher
education institutions (2016). http://www.egera.eu/fileadmin/user_
upload/Deliverables/D5.3_EGERA_Charter_for_Gender_Sensitive_
Governance.pdf
• Description of Structural Change Toolkit on Gender (2016).
http://www.egera.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/Deliverables/D.7.5_
Structural_ChangeToolkit.pdf
References
• COM(2012) 392 final - Communication from the Commission to
the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. A Reinforced
European Research Area Partnership for Excellence and Growth,
http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/reinforced-european-
research-area-partnership-excellence-and-growth
• European Commission (2012), Structural change in research
institutions: Enhancing excellence, gender equality and efficiency
in research and innovation Luxembourg: Publications Office of the
European Union, https://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/
document_library/pdf_06/structural-changes-final-report_en.pdf
• European Commission, RTD-B7 “Science with and for Society”
Vademecum on Gender Equality in Horizon 2020, 26-02-2014,
http://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_gender_equality/
vademecum_gender_h2020.pdf#view=fit&pagemode=none
• Gender Equality in Academia and Research - GEAR tool. Making a
Gender Equality Plan, http://eige.europa.eu/gender-mainstreaming/
toolkits/gear
• Schiebinger L. (ed.), (2008).
Gendered Innovations in Science and
Engineering
. Stanford University Press. Stanford.
• Gendered innovations project, http://genderedinnovations.stanford.
edu/what-is-gendered-innovations.html
Websites of the structural change projects (FP7 2010-2013)
GENISLAB http://www.genislab-fp7.eu/
INTEGER http://www.integer-tools-for-action.eu/en,
http://www.tcd.ie/wiser/integer/
FESTA http://www.festa-europa.eu/
STAGES http://www.projectstages.it/
GENDERTIME http://www.gendertime.org/
GENOVATE http://www.genovate.eu/
EGERA http://www.egera.eu/
GARCIA http://www.garciaproject.eu
TRIGGER http://www.triggerproject.eu/
8080
THE FIVE TRIGGER ACTION PLANS
UNIPI – University of Pisa
The University of Pisa is one of the oldest and largest Italian universities,
with 52,000 enrolled students and beyond 1,500 professors in 20
Departments. The percentage of women in each step of careers was in
the project beginning in line with the national average (female were 52%
among undergraduate students, 51% of graduate students, 42.8% of
researchers, 33% of associate professors, and 15% of full professors).
Despite the several differences among the various departments, the
gradient of exclusion is more pronounced in the scientific field. Because
of this, the actions promoted by the TRIGGER project focus on six
Science and Technology Departments (in medical area and engineering).
To support gender equality and gender sensitiveness at Pisa University,
the action plan promotes an integrated set of actions focused on both
permanent innovative institutional arrangements aimed at implementing
structural changes conducive to gender equality and equal opportunities,
and content-oriented initiatives, aimed at practically demonstrating the
usefulness of taking into account gender priorities, points of view and
peculiarities within research and innovation processes.
An articulated set of actions has been devised in the six Departments, and the
active participation and support of distinguished scientists (also from other
universities, thanks to the collaboration with the National Conference of Italian
University of Equality Bodies) has been ensured with a view to testing innovative
research procedures fully integrating the gender perspective (also sponsoring
scholarship and annual dissertation awards). On the basis of the results of the
tests conducted, at the end of the project a teaching module on the gendered
aspects of research and on gendered research tools and procedures in the
medicine area and engineering will be established.
Website:http://www.unipi.it/
VSCHT – University of Chemistry and Technology in Prague
The university of Chemistry and Technology in Prague is the largest
and most significant educational and research institution of its kind
in the Czech Republic and also in the Central Europe. Its two-hundred-
year history combines tradition with the progressive trends and modern
technologies in a wide range of chemical disciplines. UCT Prague consists
of four faculties, Rector’s office departments and students facilities. As
the recent statistics show, the number of female students has been on
the rise, and this fact needs to be reflected in the university’s human
resources management policy. This resulted in a decision to participate
in the TRIGGER project, with the aim to start addressing gender diversity
and equality and transform the institutional culture. The lack of
experience with gender in research led to the cooperation with gender
experts from the Institute of Sociology of the Czech Academy of Sciences.
Jointly, we drafted an Action Plan tailored to the needs of UCT Prague.
The idea behind the action plan, which enjoys the support and active
participation of the top management at the University level, is testing
various tools aimed at achieving gender equality. The Faculty of Food
and Biochemical Technology is a specific target for many actions, even
though the project also addresses the other Faculties, particularly
the Dept of Water Technology and Environmental Engineering of
Faculty of Environmental Technology, and the university as a whole.
A starting point toward structural change is recognising that there
is no systematic overview and assessment of the situation at VSCHT
and no systematic exchange of good or successful initiatives.
The action plan is geared at promoting change in several areas:
providing career advice to young researchers, promoting work-life
balance, activating occasions of women’s empowerment, promoting
communication and visibility of women scientists, promoting a gender
sensitive knowledge production and management.
Website:https://www.vscht.cz/; https://gro.vscht.cz/
BBK – The Birkbeck College, University of London
The BBK, ranked in the top 25% of UK multi-Faculty higher education
institutions, is also the leading provider of part-time, evening education,
serving the needs of diverse and non- traditional students. BBK consists
of five Academic Schools, of which two have relevant SET components (the
School of Science and the School of Business, Economics and Informatics).
At BBK, even though women were well represented in the student body at the
start of the project , comprising over 56% of the 17,890 enrolled students,
they were underrepresented among the academic staff. This is especially
higher level professors (and also among readers and senior lecturers) and
even more so in SET-related disciplines. Women were also underrepresented
in influential committees at College level.
Gender quality oriented policies and initiatives have been adopted over
time, even if not uniformly present in all Schools and Depts. The College
has been awarded Bronze level National Athena SWAN scheme (aiming
to promote good practice in recruiting, retaining and promoting women
in SET). It is in this context that BBK decided to join the TRIGGER project.
TRIGGER in fact, even though it promotes a completely independent and
original plan of action, also represents a unique tool to support the
achievement of the objectives of the Athena SWAN, while at the same
time widening and deepening its scope.
APPENDIX
81
The TRIGGER plan of action of Birkbeck therefore included actions
impacting different sides of the gender-and-science issue, ranging from
the daily working environment, the gendering of research procedures
and the promotion of women’s leadership in the practice, management
and communication of research. It has done this through developing
‘agency’ among scientific women, enhancing their ability to be leaders
and have co-ownership of resources.
A particularly relevant feature of the AP is its effort in supporting the
commercialisation of women’s research and innovation. Even though
selected actions target the whole BBK, SET-related Schools (School of
Science and the School of Business, Economics and Informatics) are
more directly involved.
Website: http://www.bbk.ac.uk/trigger/
UPD – University Paris Diderot
The University Paris Diderot is the only multidisciplinary university in
Paris to offer a wide range of degrees in the Humanities, Medicine and
the Sciences. Women represented at the project start 39% of teaching
and research staff, 48% of the assistant professors and 26% of the
full professors. As regards students, women represented 61.6% of the
students and 54% of the doctoral students but only 32% of the physics
students.
In 1985, UPD was one of the first French universities to establish gender
studies research and teaching. In 2005, a financial support from the
European Social Fund allowed to initiate some actions and, first of them,
a study on women research lectures which disclosed actual gender
inequality. Then, from 2007 to nowadays, campaigns promoting gender
equality are permanent. A unit in charge of gender equality (Pole Égalité
femmes hommes) was subsequently established in 2010.
In TRIGGER, UPD proposes a broad and comprehensive plan targeting
different layers and factors of inequalities (organisational cultures
and behaviours, work life balance, support to early career researchers,
struggle against gender stereotypes, gendering research contents and
methods, women’s leadership in research, communication, management
and innovation).
The plan includes about 30 actions addressing, according to their
specific features, one or both of the more directly participating institutes
(Physics and Biology), but often also the whole university. Among them,
the creation of a permanent network of gender focal points in all the
department and services of the university.
The actions encompass regular collection and analysis of statistics,
qualitative research in the concerned departments to target further
actions, training courses addressing different audiences among
students and employees, promotion of new rules, raising awareness and
communication, including the organisation of international conferences.
PEFH Website: https://universite.univ-paris-diderot.fr/une-universite-
engagee/egalite-femmes-hommes
Video on TRIGGER project:
https://diderot-tv.univ-paris-diderot.fr/videos/le-projet-trigger
UPM – Technical University of Madrid
The Technical University of Madrid is the largest Spanish technological
university. More than 2,400 researchers carry out their activity at the UPM,
grouped in 200 Research Groups, 22 Research Centres or Institutes and 55
Laboratories.
At the project start, at UPM women accounted for around 33% and 34%
of undergraduate and graduate students respectively. Among professors
(all categories), women accounted for 23%. The presence of women was
particularly low among full professors (7.9%) and higher in the group of
adjunct professors (44.8%).
The Action Plan for UPM promotes an integrated set of actions aimed
at launching structural-level change at the University, to be later
incorporated in and made permanent through the Equality Action Plan
that UPM has to draft and implement following Spanish normative
requirements. The TRIGGER project thus also concretely support the
existing Equality Unit, which is part of its Board. The actions, addressing
many problem areas relevant to gender equality, are mostly targeting
the whole University, even though three Schools (School of Architecture/
ETSAM; School of Building Engineering/ETSEM; School of Industrial
Engineering/ETSII) are – even if to a different extent – the forerunners,
both in the planning and implementation of activities targeting all
Faculties and Schools, and in the testing of additional ones, specific to
their characteristics and previous experience.
Among the many actions geared at promoting a women-friendly
environment (changing behaviours and culture, supporting work-life
balance, sustaining early career researchers), a gender-aware science
and technology (struggle against stereotypes and insertion of gendered
methodologies and contents) and the emerging of a women’s leadership in
research, innovation, management and communication, it is to highlight
the successful creation of a Chair in Gender, Innovation and Sustainability
and the intense national and international networking activity.
Website: https://triggerprojectupm.wordpress.com/
APPENDIX
8282
SISTER PROJECTS TITLES AND PARTNER
GENIS LAB (The Gender in Science and Technology LAB)
(2011-2014) (SiS-2010-2.1.1.1 – Grant agreement n° 266636)
Project partners:
Fondazione Giacomo Brodolini, project coordinator (IT)
Spanish Superior Council for Scientific Research) - Institute for Polymer Science and
Technology (ES)
Leibniz-Institut für Polymerforschung Dresden e.V., (DE)
Faculty of Technology and Metallurgy, University of Belgrade (RS)
National Institute of Chemistry (SI)
National Institute for Nuclear Physics (IT)
Blekinge Institute of Technology (SE)
International Training Centre of the International Labour Organization (Gender Unit),
UN Agency
Associazione Donne e Scienza (Italian women in science organization) (IT)
INTEGER (INstitutional Transformation for Effecting Gender Equality in Research)
(2011-2015) (SiS-2010-2.1.1.1 – Grant agreement n° 266638)
Project partners:
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, project coordinator (FR)
Trinity College Dublin (IE)
Šiauliai University (LT)
GESIS-Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences (DE)
STAGES (Structural Transformation to Achieve Gender Equality in Science)
(2012-2015) (SiS 2011 2.1.1-1 – Grant agreement n° 289051)
Project partners:
Dipartimento per le Pari Opportunità della Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri,
project coordinator (IT)
ASDO (IT)
Università degli Studi di Milano (IT)
Fraunhofer Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschunge. V. (DE)
Aarhus Universitet (DK)
Universitatea Alexandru Ioan Cuza, Iasi (RO)
Radboud Universiteit, Nijmegen (NL)
FESTA (Female Empowerment in Science and Technology Academia)
(2012-2017) (SiS 2011 2.1.1-1 – Grant agreement n° 287526)
Project partners:
Uppsala University, Project coordinator (SE)
University of Southern Denmark (DK)
RWTH Aachen University (DE)
University of Limerick (IE)
Fondazione Bruno Kessler (IT)
Istanbul Teknik Universitesi (TR)
South-West University (BG)
GENDERTIME (Transfering Implementing Monitoring Equality)
(2013-2016) (SiS 2012 2.1.1-1 – Grant agreement n° 321378)
Project partners:
Egalité des Chances dans les Etudes et la Profession d’ingénieur en Europe, Project
coordinator (FR)
Inter-University Research Centre for Technology, Work and Culture (AT)
The University of Padua (IT)
Linköping University (SE)
University Paris Est Créteil (FR)
Mihailo Pupin Institute (RS)
Bergische Universität Wuppertal (DE)
Loughborough University (UK)
Tecnalia Research & Innovation (ES)
Donau-Universität Krems (AT)
University of Gothenburg (SE)
GENOVATE (Transforming organisational culture for gender equality in
research and innovation)
(2013-2016) (SiS 2012 2.1.1-1 – Grant agreement n° 321378)
Project partners:
University of Bradford, project coordinator (UK)
University College Cork (IE)
Luleå University of Technology (SE)
Ankara University (TK)
Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II (IT)
Trnava University in Trnava (SK)
Universidad Complutense de Madrid (ES)
GARCIA (Gendering the Academy and Research: combating Career Instability
and Asymmetries)
(2014-2016) (SiS.2013.2.1.1-1 – Grant agreement n° 611737)
Project partners:
University of Trento, project coordinator (IT)
Université catholique de Louvain (BE)
Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
University of Iceland (IS)
University of Lausanne (CH)
Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts (SI)
Joanneum Research Forschungsgesel (AT)
EGERA (Effective Gender Equality in Research and the Academia)
(2014-2017) (SiS.2013.2.1.1-1 – Grant agreement n° 612413)
Project partners:
Fondation nationale des sciences politiques, project coordinator (FR)
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ES)
Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Middle East Technical University (TR)
University of Antwerp (BE)
University of Vechta (DE)
Centrum Vyzkumu Globalni Zmeny AV CR v.v.i. (CZ)
Centro de Estudos para a Intervenção Social (PO)
NOTES
NOTES
8686
TRIGGERING INSTITUTIONAL
CHANGE TOWARDS GENDER
EQUALITY IN SCIENCE
Final Guidelines of the TRIGGER Project
