An autoethnographic account of a pragmatic inclusionary strategy and tactics as a form of feminist activism

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the enactment of a pragmatic inclusionary strategy and related tactics as a form of feminist activism in one university. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses analytic autoethnography. Findings It shows how it is possible for a feminist activist to create limited change in what is typically seen as an intractable indicator of gender equality, i.e. gender parity at full professorial level. Research limitations/implications Analytic autoethnography as a method has considerable methodological limitations although it also offers insights into insider strategies and tactics. Practical implications The identification of such a strategy and tactics may be useful to activists, decision-makers and policy makers with an interest in tackling any source of inequality. Social implications The identification of such a strategy and tactics may be useful to activists, decision-makers and policy makers with an interest in tackling any source of inequality. Originality/value Five tactics, reflecting a pragmatic inclusionary strategy are identified, i.e. provocative misbehaviour; individualised managing management; perverse alignments; resisting silencing and gaining legitimacy; activating latent social movement ties to change national policy.

Dilemmas of an Academic Feminist as Manager in the Neoliberal Academy: Negotiating Institutional Authority, Oppositional Knowledge and Change

“…However, there are also opportunities for agency, ambition and the pleasure of achieving results that improve the lives of students and colleagues alike. Some women thrive in University management positions, often to their own surprise (O'Connor, 2014(O'Connor, , 2019aShepherd, 2017).…”

“…My central concern is with a sub-set of female academic managers. Few studies focus directly on feminists as manager academics, and fewer still provide first person accounts (but see Acker, 2012;Drake, 2015;O'Connor, 2014;O'Connor, 2019a). This may reflect a reluctance among academic feminists to research management as a field of practice or to seek management roles in their institutions O'Connor, 2014).…”

“…This may reflect a reluctance among academic feminists to research management as a field of practice or to seek management roles in their institutions (Deem and Ozga, 2000; O’Connor, 2014). Nonetheless, some studies suggest feminist academic managers do appear to have the potential to transform their institutions in feminist-inspired ways using their outsider status to act as change agents, ‘moving beyond both gendered traditional forms of collegiality and new managerialist approaches to the academic labour process’ (Deem and Ozga, 2000: 154; see also (O’Connor, 2014, 2019a) albeit within significant constraints. According to the literature, the resources provided by FWGS scholarship and practice enable feminist academic managers to develop critical analyses of trends in HE, for example, towards quality assessment and management, performance-based cultures and measurement (Deem and Ozga, 2000: 158; see also Swan, 2010 on gendered and racialised dimensions of audit) as well as a range of strategies of resistance and change (Deem and Ozga, 2000: 160; O’Connor, 2019b).…”

“…Indeed, I have relished the opportunity that positional power has given me to take decisions to make a difference (Shepherd, 2017). Like O’Connor (2014; 2019a ) I have experienced management also as a position of visibility, personal authenticity and efficacy. As a tempered radical, I have been able to effect change through ‘small wins’ and ‘authentic action’.…”

Change in research and in higher education institutions

“…Therefore, in the attempt to assimilate changes, it is reasonable to identify the sources of resistances thus adjusting suitable good practices to mitigate them. Nevertheless, it should be noted that resistance and opposition to gender equality policies have been a relatively new problem in Europe (O'Connor, 2019b;Verloo, 2018), while simultaneously, the reasons for resistance towards gender equality initiatives are not fully studied or understood. There is evidence, however, that some of the reasons for resistance tend to have a more individual basis while others a more institutional one.…”