Abstract
Why is the gender gap so large in researchers’ career progression? Do men and women have different priorities in their academic careers? This study explores men’s and women’s academic work to shed light on the strategies of male and female researchers. The online survey collected data on Andalusian researchers to determine possible differences in academic work that may explain the gender gap in the higher ranks of academia. The results reveal that men’s and women’s research performance mainly follows the same patterns, but they do differ in the diversity of women’s priorities, goals and working styles. This may explain women’s vulnerability that leads to their minority presence at the top. These results underline the importance of incorporating new approaches in academic careers based on non-linear trajectories departing from the ideal concept of career paths based on masculine hegemony.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Ackers, S. (Ed.). (1989). Teacher, gender and careers. New York, NY: Falmer Press.
Adler, N. J. (1984). Women do not want international careers: And other myths about international management. Organizational Dynamics, 13, 66–79.
August, L., & Waltman, J. (2004). Culture, climate, and contribution: Career satisfaction among female faculty. Research in Higher Education, 45, 177–192.
Bagilhole, B., & Goode, J. (2001). The contradiction of the myth of individual merit, and the reality of a patriarchal support system in academic careers: A feminist investigation. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 8, 161–180.
Bailyn, L. (2003). Academic careers and gender equity: Lesson learned from MIT. Gender, Work and Organisation, 10, 137–153.
Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories. Intellectual enquiry and the culture of disciples. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Benschop, Y., & Brouns, M. (2003). Crumbling ivory towers: Academic organizing and its gender effects. Gender, Work and Organization, 10, 194–212.
Blake, M., & La Valle, I. (2000). Who applies for research funding? Key factors shaping funding application behaviour among women and men in British higher education institutions. London: The Wellcome Trust.
Bordons, M., & Mauleón, E. (2006). Women’s research careers and scientific productivity in public research. In OECD, Women in scientific careers. Unleashing the potential (pp. 77–85). Paris: OECD.
Bozeman, B., Dietz, J. S., & Gaughan, M. (2001). Scientific and technical human capital: An alternative model for research evaluation. International Journal of Technology Management, 22, 716–740.
Buzzanell, P., & Goldzwig, S. (1991). Linear and nonlinear career models: Metaphors, paradigms, and ideologies. Management Communication Quarterly, 4, 466–505.
Ceci, S. J., Ginther, D. K., Kahn, S. W., & Williams, W. (2014). Women in academic science: A changing landscape. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 15, 75–141.
Cole, J. R., & Zuckerman, H. (1984). The productivity puzzle: Persistence and change in patterns of publication of men and women scientists. Advances in Motivation and Achievement, 2, 217–258.
Connell, R. W., & Wood, J. (2002). Globalization and scientific labour: Patterns in a life-history study of intellectual workers in the periphery. Journal of Sociology, 38, 167–190.
Crane, D. (1972). Invisible colleges: Diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press
de Solía Price, D. J. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149, 510–515.
Etzkowitz, H., & Ranga, M. (2011). Gender dynamics in science and technology: From the “Leaky Pipeline” to the vanish box. Brussels Economic Review, 54, 131–147.
European Commission. (2009). The gender challenge in research funding: Assessing the european national scenes. Brussels: Directorate-General for Research Science, Economy and Society.
European Commission. (2012). She figures 2012: Gender in research and innovation. Statistics and indicators. Brussels: European Commission.
Everts, J. (2000). Analysing change in women’s careers: Culture, structure and action dimensions. Gender, Work and Organization, 7, 51–61.
Faulkner, W. (2007). ‘Nuts and bolts and people’ gender-troubled engineering identities. Social Studies of Science, 37, 331–356.
Faulkner, W. (2009). Doing gender in engineering workplace cultures. II. Gender in/authenticity and the in/visibility paradox. Engineering Studies, 1, 169–189.
Fels, A. (2004, April). Do women lack ambition? Harvard Business Review, pp. 1–11.
Fox, M. F. (2005). Gender, family characteristics, and publication productivity among scientists. Social Studies of Science, 35, 131–150.
Fox, M. F., & Xiao, W. (2013). Perceived chances for promotion among women associate professors in computing: Individual, departmental, and entrepreneurial factors. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38, 135–152.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
González Ramos, A. M., Navarrete Cortés, J., & Cabrera Moreno, E. (2015). Dancers in the dark: Scientific careers according to a gender-blind model of promotion. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 40, 182–203.
Grant, J., & Low, L. (1997). Women and peer review: An audit of the wellcome trust’s decision-making on grants. Resource document. PRISM (Report No. 8). 10 November 2012. Retrieved April 4, 2014, from http://www.wellcome.ac.Uk/stellent/groups/corporatesite/@policy _communications/documents/web_document/wtd003212.pdf
Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14, 575–599.
Haraway, D. (1991). Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. New York, NY: Routledge.
Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Harding, S. (1998). Is science multicultural? Postcolonialism, feminism, and epistemologies. Bloomington, EN: Indiana University Press.
Heilman, M., & Chen, J. (2005). Same behavior, different consequences: Reactions to men’s and women’s altruistic citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 431–441.
Heilman, M., & Wallen, A. (2004). Penalties for success: Reactions to women who succeed at male gender-typed tasks. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 416–427.
Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the corporation. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Krefting, L. A. (2003). Intertwined discourses of merit and gender: Evidence from academic employment in the USA. Gender, Work and Organization, 10, 260–278.
Kuijpers, M., & Scheerens, J. (2006). Career competencies for the modern career. Journal of Career Development, 32, 303–319.
Laudel, G., & Gläser, J. (2008). From apprentice to colleague: The metamorphosis of early career researchers. Higher Education, 55, 387–406.
Long, J. S., & Fox, M. F. (1995). Scientific careers: Universalism and particularism. Annual Review of Sociology, 21, 45–71.
Longino, H. (1990). Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Lyon, D., & Woodward, A. E. (2004). Gender and time at the top: Cultural constructions of time in high-level careers and homes. The European Journal of Women’s Studies, 11, 205–221.
Mauleón, E., & Bordons, M. (2009). Male and female involvement in patenting activity in Spain. Scientometrics, 30, 147–155.
Moss-Racusin, C., Dovidio, J., Brescoll, V., Graham, M., & Handelsman, J. (2012). Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 16474–16479.
O’Neil, D., & Bilimoria, D. (2005). Women’s career development phases. Idealism, endurance, and reinvention. Career Development International, 10, 168–189.
O’Neil, D., Hopkins, M., & Bilimoria, D. (2008). Women’s careers at the start of the 21st century: Patterns and paradoxes. Journal of Business Ethics, 80, 727–743.
Pack, I., Peacey, M. W., & Munafô, M. R. (2013). Modelling the effects of subjective and objective decision making in scientific peer review. Nature, 506, 93–96. doi:10.1038/naturel2786
Powell, G., & Mainero, L. (1992). Cross-currents in the river of time: Conceptualizing the complexities of women’s careers. Journal of Management, 18, 215–237.
Schiebinger, L. (2001). Has feminism changed science? Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Schiebinger, L. (2008). Gendered innovations in science and engineering. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Schiebinger, L., & Schraudner, M. (2011). Interdisciplinary approaches to achieving gendered innovations in science, medicine, and engineering. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 36, 154–167.
Schönemann, P. H. (1991). In praise of randomness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 162–163.
Steinpreis, R., Anders, K., & Ritzke, D. (1999). The impact of gender on the review of the CVs of job applicants and tenure candidates: A national empirical study. Sex Roles, 41, 509–528.
Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2005). Gender patterns of research and licensing activity of science and engineering faculty. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 30, 343–353.
Vahan, V. (1998). Why so slow? The advancement of women. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Van den Brink, M., & Benschop, Y (2011). Gender practices in the construction of academic excellence: Sheep with five legs. Organisation, 19, 507–524.
Van den Brink, M., Benschop, Y., & Jansen, W. (2010). Transparency in academic recruitment: A problematic tool for gender equality? Organisation Studies, 31, 1–25.
Van den Brink, M., & Stobbe, L. (2009). Doing gender in academic education: The paradox of visibility. Gender, Work & Organization, 16, 451–470.
Ward, K. B., & Grant, L. (1995). Gender and academic publishing. In A. E. Bayer & J. C. Smart (Eds.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 172–212). New York, NY: Agathon.
Wennerâs, C., & Wold, A. (1997). Nepotism and sexism in peer-review. Nature, 387, 341–343.
White, K. (2004). The leaking pipeline: Women postgraduate and early career researchers in Australia. Tertiary Education and Management, 10, 227–241.
Whittington, K., & Smith-Doerr, L. (2005). Gender and commercial science: Women’s patenting in the life sciences. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 30, 355–370.
Whittington, K., & Smith-Doerr, L. (2008). Women inventors in context: Disparities in patenting across academia and industry. Gender & Society, 22, 194–218.
Xie, Y. (1998). Sex differences in research productivity: New evidence about an old puzzle. American Sociological Review, 63, 847–870.
Xie, Y., & Shauman, K. A. (2003). Women in science. Career processes and outcomes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
González Ramos, A.M., Fernández Palacín, F. & Muñoz Márquez, M. Do men and women perform academic work differently?. Tert Educ Manag 21, 263–276 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2015.1065904
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2015.1065904