Gender Equality in Interface Organizations between Science, Technology and Innovation

Abstract

The article addresses the question of gender equality in the context of interface organizations between science, technology and innovation, focusing on gendered work practices in science parks. Drawing upon the notions of gendered work practices, feminization of work and feminist science and technology studies, the article explores: 1. Key aspects of work practices in science parks; 2. Gender segregation embedded in these practices; and 3. Practices which help to promote gender equality in intermediary work. The study is empirically based on interviews with top managers and female experts of four Finnish science parks, complemented by one focus group interview with representatives of funding agencies, ministries and intermediary organizations. The study demonstrates that work in science parks is simultaneously future-oriented knowledge work and service work characterized by features of feminization and care (i.e. sensitivity to the needs of clients). Gender segregation commonly seen in the science, technology and innovation sector is reproduced in novel ways in the work practices of the science parks, especially due to the gendered patterns of professional recognition and male networking. This implies that -in spite of the feminised work practices -women do not find easy careers in science parks. The data show, however, that there are also several practices which are used to counteract segregation and promote gender equality, including a number of positive actions developed by women themselves in order to promote recognition and networking in science parks.

Practising Gender When Networking: The Case of University-Industry Innovation Projects

“…To capture the actual momentary practising of gender, for instance during a coffee break when someone makes a sexist joke, one needs to be present at the moment, which requires observational methods. Earlier studies were based on narrative interview accounts and mainly looked at discursive gendering practices (Benschop, 2009;Holgersson, 2012;Martin, 2001Martin, , 2003Martin, , 2006van den Brink and Benschop, 2012;Vehviläinen et al, 2010). These studies provide useful insights regarding gender practices, but do not study the dynamics of gender practices 'in the heat of the moment'.…”

“…Networking is increasingly important for (technological) innovation (Berkhout et al, 2010;Dhanaraj and Parkhe, 2006;Lam, 2005;van der Valk and Gijsbers, 2010). Add to that the gender imbalance of the technological innovation field (Vehviläinen et al, 2010), and this context presents a good opportunity to look into gender practising in formally arranged and informal networking.…”

“…I n an organizational context, gender is shown to affect individuals' social networks, usually to the disadvantage of women (Brass, 1985;Ibarra, 1992Ibarra, , 1995Ibarra, , 1997Loscocco et al, 2009;McGuire, 2002;McPherson et al, 2001;Vehviläinen et al, 2010). Networks thus contain inequalities, the 'systematic disparities between participants related to power and control over resources and outcomes, opportunities for interesting work and promotion, monetary rewards, respect and status' (Acker, 2006, p. 443).…”

The Dimensions of Occupational Gender Segregation in Industrial Countries

“…Academic literature suggests the following hypotheses about occupational feminization: (1) feminization produces largely negative outcomes (Acker, 1990; Perales, 2010; Reskin and Roos, 1990; Standing, 1989, 1999); (2) feminization has neutral outcomes or very subtle effects (Adams, 2005; Boulis and Jacobs, 2008); and (3) feminization creates differences which may be viewed as positive, such as more flexible work hours (Standing, 1989), or a greater service orientation to clients (Vehviläinen et al, 2010).…”

Gender gap in innovation: an institutionalist explanation

“…Innovation is closely related to science and technology, which should operate under meritocratic and universalistic principles (Etzkowitz and Kemelgor, 2001). However, Vehviläinen et al (2010) and Nissan et al (2012) confirm some gender segregation in overtly male-dominated fields, such as science, technology and innovation, where the underrepresentation of women in innovation-related fields can be proven (Womenable, 2010).…”