Becoming a female leader in higher education: investigations from a regional university

Abstract

Issues of gender imbalance in leadership have long been a significant issue in universities, as is the case across most industries. This paper explores the experiences of seven females who have successfully achieved senior leadership positions at a regional university in Australia. While the experiences of these women differ in many ways, there are certainly similarities in the challenges and adversities that they have faced, and their perceptions of what has allowed them to experience success in their leadership roles. This paper provides a number of recommendations for women aspiring to be leaders in higher education, such as committing to ongoing development, taking opportunities when presented, developing resilience, developing a track record and seeking support, and also recommendations for institutions.

The Challenges for Gender Equity and Women in Leadership in a Distributed University in Regional Australia

“…Further concepts explored included the progression of pay equity; ability-based recruitment and promotion, where the University considers achievement relative to opportunity (as opposed to time served) (Winchester et al 2006); and not being a workplace that prizes 'male' attributes over 'female' attributes as progressive steps to enabling gender equity. By these steps, the University is breaking the culture of the glass ceiling and the traditional patriarchal systems (Morley 2014;Redmond et al 2017). Instead, the University is providing pathways and enabling programs to assist women who aspire to be educational leaders to achieve such.…”

How Job Sharing Can Lead to More Women Achieving Senior Leadership Roles in Higher Education: A UK Study

“…We suggest it is highly plausible that if universities adopted job sharing at all levels their ability to both retain existing talented women and recruit more talented women would likely be increased. The HE sector has a responsibility not only to eliminate some of the barriers that exist for women (Stead 2013) but to create more appropriate organisational structures (Redmond et al 2017). Additionally, universities might be well placed to focus on what Shepherd (2017) describes as the minutiae politics and cultural traditions that underpin the current practices and procedures in HR departments.…”

“…An increase in confidence helps to counter some of the gender stereotype-based expectations between men and women with men typically stereotyped with agentic characteristics such as confidence and assertiveness and the risk women can face in not conforming to expectations (Heilman 2001). Further, women leaders often have less self-confidence when compared to men (Hoyt 2010), despite women very often placing significant expectations on themselves in terms of standards and levels of work (Redmond et al 2017). This lack of confidence is one of the factors inhibiting women's career progression (Manfredi et al 2014).…”

“…The benefits of having role models (Hoyt and Johnson 2011) is a helpful mechanism to enhance confidence for women. Both mentoring and using role models enable women to develop a shared, trusted relationship through a personal support mechanism (Redmond et al 2017). In a sense a senior leadership job share creates this type of relationship in a naturlistic manner and it is more readily available and accessed through day to day interactions.…”

Let the right one in: A Bourdieusian analysis of gender inequality in universities’ senior management

“…Individual women may adhere to these masculine norms to succeed but changes to the underlying structures continue to be limited and limiting for women and other diverse staff (Barnard et al, ). Inequity has been attributed to various factors such as homophily, pipeline issues, individual career decision‐making, lack of confidence, lack of work–life flexibility policies, supervisor relationships, organizational culture, recruitment practices, the glass ceiling, unconscious bias, micro‐politics, lack of mentoring support, culture, networks and so on (Redmond, Gutke, Galligan, Howard, & Newman, ; Liff & Ward, ; Morley, ; O'Connor, ; O'Connor, ; Treviño, Balkin, & Gomez‐Mejia, ; Van Engen, Bleijenbergh, & Paauwe, ). However, by utilizing Bourdieu's theory these factors become explicit as areas of symbolic violence which the habitus, created by and creating the field, entrenches and reproduces inequity.…”