Search results

This chapter examines if women in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) are constrained in their leadership style and if the organizational culture makes them less valued in senior management teams. It then explores if the 7-S organizational framework has relevance to gender and leadership in HEIs.

The nature of authority within HEIs increases the complexity of leadership within an academic context. Leadership is often vested in a single person, and the positional power of Rectors/Vice-Chancellors (VCs) is based on authority, discipline knowledge, experience, and peer and professional recognition. The literature highlights that HEIs continue to be male dominated and that women are underrepresented in university leadership.

A total of 44 interviews with female and male university senior managers in Australia and Portugal were conducted by the authors and then analyzed using thematic content analysis.

This chapter analyzed the leadership styles of female and male leaders in HEI management teams in Australia and Portugal. It found that both women and men in Australian universities valued transformational leadership skills, whereas the male respondents in Portugal saw traditional management as more effective, even though female respondents considered women demonstrated transformational leadership. It also found that while women’s leadership is recognized in Australian universities, in Portugal men saw women’s leadership as problematic.

The findings suggest that there is more possibility for transformation in the academy if both men and women in HEI leadership value women’s leadership role.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse if the existence of equal opportunity legislative frameworks and affirmative action programs make any difference to the way senior managers perceive the role of top university managers in influencing women's position in their institutions. A comparative study was therefore undertaken between a country with traditions in implementing AA in universities – Australia – and another which has no tradition in this domain – Portugal.

A qualitative methodology was chosen to collect and analyse data. A total of 44 interviews with male and female university senior managers – 21 in Australia and 23 in Portugal – were conducted by the principal researcher in each country.

When describing the role of top managers, gender equality was not often mentioned, suggesting that it may not be a topic on the current institutional political agenda either in Australia or in Portugal. When specifically asked about gender, respondents considered that Rectors and VCs in the two countries took opposite positions with Australian VCs being more aware of their role in improving gender equality. The study therefore concluded that the existence of equal opportunities frameworks and AA policies may have an influence in increasing top managers’ awareness of their roles in improving women's representation in management teams.

The research was restricted to public universities. In Portugal the system is more diverse and comparing HE with private and polytechnic institutions could provide important insights about senior managers’ roles in relation to improving women's position in HE. More in‐depth qualitative studies are needed, to obtain top managers’ perceptions of the variables that impact on their views and attitudes to women in senior management.

This study provides new and innovative contributions to knowledge about the perceptions of senior managers of their top managers and their roles in eliminating gender discrimination and the influence of affirmative action in HE in these perceptions.

This paper contributes to the discussion on the advantages and disadvantages of using affirmative action programmes by analyzing a dimension which has not been explored – its impact on senior managers’ perceptions of their role in promoting gender equality in HEIs.

This introduction sets forth the main themes of the volume, reviews the methods employed by the contributors, and demonstrates the relationships among the chapters.

Each of the chapters demonstrates the gendered nature of the academy and some of the ways in which women, especially women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines, are disadvantaged. None of them provides complete catalogues of the issues confronting women and none reach definitive conclusions regarding the ways and means of transforming the academy. Additional research and experimentation will be required.

The gender transformation of the academy holds the promise of more opportunities for women, especially but not only in STEM disciplines and higher administration, and greater probability of balance between work and personal life for all.

The chapter serves as an overall introduction to the volume and the subject matter more generally.