Abstract
Specific theorists and concepts were introduced and discussed in Chap. 5, and some of these ideas are drawn on in the analysis undertaken in this chapter. Considering catalysts (ladders) and inhibitors (snakes) gives insight into what it takes to make it to the professoriate and some of the factors involved. This chapter identifies four types of catalysts for and four types of inhibitors to career progression for women in the academy. These catalysts and inhibitors include Individual Influences, Academic Work Influences, Academic Environment Influences, and Social Influences, and each is discussed in this chapter. The culture of the Boys’ Club was identified as one of the four inhibitors in the category Academic Environment Influences. It is mentioned briefly in this chapter but is discussed more fully in Chap. 7.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
The first letter indicates whether the data source was the survey (S) , focus group interview (FG) , individual phone interview (IP) or individual email interview (IE). The second letter indicates if the academic was female (F) or male (M). Note that all focus group and individual interviewees were female. A one- to three-digit code was also assigned to participants in the surveys (N = 520), focus group interviews (n = 21), and individual phone and email interviews (n = 8).
- 2.
Identifiers: The first letter indicates whether the data source was the survey (S) , focus group interview (FG), individual phone interview (IP), or individual email interview (IE). The second letter indicates if the academic was female (F) or male (M). A one- to three-digit code was also assigned to participants in the surveys (N = 520), focus group interviews (n = 21), and individual phone and email interviews (n = 8).
- 3.
ATN’s Women’s Executive Development Program
- 4.
Early career researcher.
References
Australian Research Council. (2015). ARC research opportunity and performance evidence (ROPE) statement. Retrieved from http://www.arc.gov.au/arc-research-opportunity-and-performance-evidence-rope-statement.
Bagilhole, B., & White, K. (2003). Created in their image: An analysis of male cultural hegemony in higher education in Australian and the United Kingdom. In B. Groombridge & V. Mackie (Eds.), Re-searching research agendas: Women, research and publication in higher education: Proceedings of the Australian Technology Network – Women’s Executive Development (ATN-WEXDEV) 2003 research conference. Perth, Australia: Learning Support Network, Curtin University of Technology.
Baker, M. (2010). Career confidence and gendered expectations of academic promotion. Journal of Sociology, 46(3), 317–334.
Baker, M. (2012). Fertility, childrearing & the academic gender gap. Women’s Health and Urban Life, 11(2), 9–25.
Barrett, L., & Barrett, P. (2011). Women and academic workloads: Career slow lane or Cul-de-sac? Higher Education, 61(2), 141–155.
Bennett, C. (2011). Beyond the leaky pipeline: Consolidating understanding and incorporating new research about women’s science careers in the UK. Brussels Economic Review, 54(2/3), 149–176.
Blackaby, D., Booth, A. L., & Frank, J. (2005). Outside offers and the gender pay gap: Empirical evidence from the UK academic labour market. The Economic Journal, 115(501), F81–F107.
Boreham, P., Western, M., Baxter, J., Dever, M., & Laffan, W. (2008). Gender differences in early post-PhD employment in Australian universities: The influence of the PhD experience on women’s academic careers (Final Report). Brisbane, Australia: University of Queensland Social Research Centre. Retrieved from https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/Gender-differences-in-early-post-PhD-employment.pdf.
Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2011). Job satisfaction among university faculty: Individual, work, and institutional determinants. The Journal of Higher Education, 82(2), 154–186. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2011.0011.
Bradley, A. (2008). Derrida’s ‘of grammatology’: An Edinburgh philosophical guide. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
Bronstein, P. (2001). Older women in academia: Contemporary history and issues. Journal of Women’s History, 12(4), 184–201.
Browne, J. (2014). The critical mass marker approach: Female quotas and social justice. Political Studies, 62(4), 862–877.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, NY: Routledge.
Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. New York, NY: Routledge.
Camussi, E., & Leccardi, C. (2005). Stereotypes of working women: The power of expectations. Social Science Information, 44(1), 113–140.
Chesterman, C. (2005). Getting there and staying there: How to build and maintain a critical mass of women in senior positions in the current context. Paper presented at the Equal Opportunity Practitioners in Higher Education Australasia (EOPHEA) Conference, Brisbane, Australia.
Dany, F., Louvel, S., & Valette, A. (2011). Academic careers: The limits of the “boundaryless approach” and the power of promotion scripts. Human Relations, 64(7), 971–996.
Derrida, J. (1976). Of grammatology (G. Spivak, Trans.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Derrida, J. (1997). Deconstruction in a nutshell: A conversation with Jacques Derrida. Edited with a commentary by John D. Caputo. New York, NY: Fordham University Press.
Dickie, C. (2011). Winning the PhD Game: Evocative playing of snakes and ladders. The Qualitative Report, 16(5), 1230–1244.. Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1296&context=tqr.
Diezmann, C. M., & Grieshaber, S. J. (2013). Australian women in the academy: Challenges and aspirations. In W. Patton (Ed.), Conceptualising women’s working lives (pp. 157–173). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Doherty, L., & Manfredi, S. (2005). Improving women’s representation in senior positions in the higher education sector, stage 1 findings. Oxford, UK: Centre for Diversity Policy Research, Oxford Brookes University.
Duguid, M. (2011). Female tokens in high-prestige work groups: Catalysts or inhibitors of group diversification? Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 116(1), 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.05.009.
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. (2007). Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 85(9), 62–71.
European Commission. (2016). Meta-analysis of gender and science research: Synthesis report. Brussels, Belgium: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_gender_equality/meta-analysis-of-gender-and-science-research-synthesis-report.pdf.
Foster, N. (2001). A case study of women academics’ views on equal opportunities, career prospects and work and family conflicts in a UK university. Career Development International, 6(1), 28–38.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977 (C. Gordon, L. Marshall, J. Mepham, & K. Soper, Trans.). Brighton, UK: Harvester.
Gardiner, M., Tiggemann, M., Kearns, H., & Marshall, K. (2007). Show me the money! An empirical analysis of mentoring outcomes for women in academia. Higher Education Research & Development, 26(4), 425–442.
Gardner, S. K. (2012). “I couldn’t wait to leave the toxic environment”: A mixed methods study of women faculty satisfaction and departure from one research institution. NASPA Journal About Women in Higher Education, 5(1), 71–95.
Gheus, A. (2015). Three cheers for the token woman! Journal of Applied Philosophy, 32(2), 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12088.
Gladwin, M., McDonald, G., & McKay, J. (2014). Conversations with professors: An exploration of career success. Higher Education Review, 46(3), 26–51.
Hensel, N. (1991). Realizing gender equality in higher education: The need to integrate work/family issues (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 2). Washington, DC: School of Education and Human Development, George Washington University.
Heward, C. (1994). Academic snakes and merit ladders: Reconceptualising the ‘glass ceiling’. Gender and Education, 6(3), 249–262.
Ibarra, H., Carter, N. M., & Silva, C. (2010). Why men still get more promotions than women. Harvard Business Review, 88(9), 80–85.
Jackson, A. Y., & Mazzei, L. A. (2012). Thinking with theory in qualitative research: Viewing data across multiple perspectives. London, UK: Routledge.
Kimura, D. (1997). Affirmative action policies are demeaning to women in academia. Canadian Psychology, 38(4), 238–243.
Ledford, K. (2012). Navigating the world of academia as a mother and contingent faculty member: A narrative inquiry. Doctoral dissertation. Retrieved from http://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_dissertations/1029/.
Maranto, C. L., & Griffin, A. E. C. (2011). The antecedents of a ‘chilly climate’ for women faculty in higher education. Human Relations, 64(2), 139–159.
Merton, R. K. (1973). The Matthew effect in science. In N. W. Storer (Ed.), The sociology of science (pp. 439–459). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Morley, L. (2013). The rules of the game: Women and the leaderist turn in higher education. Gender and Education, 25(1), 116–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2012.740888.
Noon, M. (2010). The shackled runner: Time to rethink positive discrimination? Work, Employment & Society, 24(4), 728–739.
O’Connor, O. (2000). Resistance in academia. Paper presented to NAWE International Conference on Women in Higher Education, New Orleans, LA.
Penney, S., Young, G., Badenhorst, C., Goodnough, K., Hesson, J., Joy, R., … Pelech, S. (2015). Faculty writing groups: A support for women balancing family and career on the academic tightrope. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 45(4), 457–459.
Pyke, J. (2013). Women, choice and promotion or why women are still a minority in the professoriate. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 35(4), 444–454. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2013.812179.
Rossiter, M. W. (1993). The Matthew Matilda effect in science. Social Studies of Science, 23(2), 325–341. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631293023002004.
Schmidt, E. K., & Faber, S. T. (2016). Benefits of peer mentoring to mentors, female mentees and higher education institution. Mentoring & Learning: Partnership in Learning, 24(2), 137–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2016.1170560.
Seifert, T. A., & Umbach, P. D. (2008). The effects of faculty demographic characteristics and disciplinary context on dimensions of job satisfaction. Research in Higher Education, 49(4), 357–381.
Sloane, P. J., & Ward, M. E. (2001). Cohort effects and job satisfaction of academics. Applied Economics Letters, 8(12), 787–791.
Smith, J. W., & Calasanti, T. (2005). The influences of gender, race and ethnicity on workplace experiences of institutional and social isolation: An exploratory study of university faculty. Sociological Spectrum, 25(3), 307–334.
Soliman, I. (1998). Many routes one destination: Profiles of successful academic women. Armidale, Australia: University of New England.
Spivak, G. C. (1993). Outside in the teaching machine. New York, NY/London, UK: Routledge.
Su, X., Johnson, J., & Bozeman, B. (2015). Gender diversity strategy in academic departments: Exploring organizational determinants. Higher Education, 69(5), 839–858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9808-z.
Sussman, D., & Yssaad, L. (2005, February). The rising profile of women academics. Perspectives,6–19.
Symonds, M. (2007). Quantity, quality and equality. New Scientist, 194(2611), 48–49.
Tessens, L., White, K., & Web, C. (2011). Senior women in higher education institutions: Perceived development needs and support. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 33(6), 653–665. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2011.621191.
Thanacoody, P., Bartram, T., Barker, M., & Jacobs, K. (2006). Career progression among female academics: A comparative study of Australia and Mauritius. Women in Management Review, 21(7), 536–553.
Thomas, R., & Davies, A. (2002). Gender and new public management: Reconstituting academic subjectivities. Gender, Work and Organization, 9(4), 372–397.
Thornton, M. (1990). The liberal promise: Anti-discrimination legislation in Australia. Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.
Thornton, M. (2013). The mirage of merit: Reconstituting the ‘ideal academic’. Australian Feminist Studies, 28(76), 127–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/08164649.2013.789584.
van Anders, S. (2004). Why the academic pipeline leaks: Fewer men than women perceive barriers to becoming professors. Sex Roles, 51(9–10), 511–521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-004-5461-9.
van den Brink, M., & Benschop, Y. (2012). Slaying the seven-headed dragon: The quest for gender change in academia. Gender, Work and Organization, 19(1), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2011.00566.x.
Ward, B. (2003). The female professor: A rare Australian species – The who and how. PhD thesis. Murdoch University, Perth, Australia.
Ward, K., & Wolf-Wendel, L. E. (2004). Academic motherhood: Managing complex roles in research universities. Review of Higher Education, 27(2), 233–257.
Ward, M. E., & Sloane, P. J. (2000). Non-pecuniary advantages versus pecuniary disadvantages: Job satisfaction among male and female academics in Scottish universities. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 47(3), 273–303.
White, K. (2001). Women in the professoriate in Australia. International Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 3(2), 64–76.
Wilson, J., Marks, G., Noone, L., & Hamilton-Mackenzie, J. (2010). Retaining a foothold on the slippery paths of academia: University women, indirect discrimination, and the academic marketplace. Gender and Education, 22(5), 535–545.
Winchester, H., Lorenzo, S., Browning, L., & Chesterman, C. (2006). Academic women’s promotions in Australian universities. Employee Relations, 28(6), 505–522.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Diezmann, C., Grieshaber, S. (2019). Snakes and Ladders. In: Women Professors. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3685-0_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3685-0_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-3683-6
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-3685-0
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)