Search results

Purpose: Previous research identified a measurement gap in the individual assessment of social misconduct in the workplace related to gender. This gap implies that women respond to comparable self-reported acts of bullying or sexual discrimination slightly more often than men with the self-labeling as “bullied” or “sexually discriminated and/or harassed.” This study tests this hypothesis for women and men in the scientific workplace and explores patterns of gender-related differences in self-reporting behavior.

Basic design: The hypotheses on the connection between gender and the threshold for self-labeling as having been bullied or sexually discriminated against were tested based on a sample from a large German research organization. The sample includes 5,831 responses on bullying and 6,987 on sexual discrimination (coverage of 24.5 resp. 29.4 percentage of all employees). Due to a large number of cases and the associated high statistical power, this sample for the first time allows a detailed analysis of the “gender-related measurement gap.” The research questions formulated in this study were addressed using two hierarchical regression models to predict the mean values of persons who self-labeled as having been bullied or sexually discriminated against. The status of the respondents as scientific or non-scientific employees was included as a control variable.

Results: According to a self-labeling approach, women reported both bullying and sexual discrimination more frequently. This difference between women and men disappeared for sexual discrimination when, in addition to the gender of a person, self-reported behavioral items were considered in the prediction of self-labeling. For bullying, the difference between the two genders remained even in this extended prediction. No statistically significant relationship was found between the frequency of self-reported items and the effect size of their interaction with gender for either bullying or sexual discrimination. When comparing bullying and sexual discrimination, it should be emphasized that, on average, women report experiencing a larger number of different behavioral items than men.

Interpretation and relevance: The results of the study support the current state of research. However, they also show how volatile the measurement instruments for bullying and sexual discrimination are. For example, the gender-related measurement gap is considerably influenced by single items in the Negative Acts Questionnaire and Sexual Experience Questionnaire. The results suggest that women are generally more likely than men to report having experienced bullying and sexual discrimination. While an unexplained “gender gap” in the understanding of bullying was found for bullying, this was not the case for sexual discrimination.

Purpose – This chapter outlines and describes a number of case studies detailing the experiences and activities of individual women scientists, innovators and entrepreneurs who have made substantial contributions to particular fields of science, engineering, technology and mathematics (STEM) activities.

Methodology/approach – The chapter employs a qualitative case approach to offer detailed insight into the experiences of successful women entrepreneurs.

Findings: These case study reports describe the tactics, strategies and achievements of successful female innovators within the STEM sector.

Research limitations/implications – Although offering rich descriptions of the achievements of women innovators, these cases cannot be generalised. However, they do illustrate that woman have a notable and meaningful presence within the field of entrepreneurial STEM innovation.

Practical implications – These cases can act as role model illustrations to encourage other women to act as STEM innovators and entrepreneurs.

Social implications – Indicative that despite gendered ascriptions which limit women's engagement with STEM subjects they can, and do, offer a critical contribution to innovation and entrepreneurial activity within the field.

Originality/value of chapter – A relatively rare celebration of women's achievement within the STEM sector.

Purpose – This chapter explores the actual situation of women as patent originators in the European Union (EU) and provides insights into the innovation climate in companies by presenting best-practice examples.

Methodology/approach – Based on a gendered secondary patent database analysis from the European Patent Office (EPO), gender-specific patent data were obtained by a first name assignment, followed by a statistical analysis and input–output comparisons with a focus on high-technology sectors. The best-practice examples are based on expert interviews with male and female inventors.

Findings – The success of women in patenting is lower than their participation in research and development would otherwise predict. The production of technological knowledge depends also on scientific subcultures with dramatic input–output gaps even in feminised sectors. Exemplarily, the case studies reveal success factors on the organisational as well as on team and individual levels which enhance women's performance in the innovation arena.

Research limitations/implications – Further qualitative research is needed to investigate factors in the innovation area which have an impact on the patenting behaviour of men and women.

Social implications – Women are contributing significantly to European patents. Yet overall, their high potential is not being fully included in the innovation process. Their under-representation in patenting should be a concern to policy makers in the EU.

Originality/value of chapter – The availability of gender-disaggregated data in innovation supports the political commitment for the long-term promotion of women's participation in science and technology.

This project focused on data from institutions graduating baccalaureate students who ultimately earned science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) doctorates in the sciences across a 15-year period. This project employed multiple regression and comparison of difference scores to identify colleges that produced comparatively high numbers of black bachelor's graduates who went on to earn STEM doctoral degrees. It identified colleges and universities that “overproduced” compared with peers and with predicted numbers of students of color who earned baccalaureate degrees and then went on to earn doctorates in STEM fields.

The nation's first Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) were founded before the end of the U.S. Civil War. However, most were established in the post-Civil War era, through the Freedmen's Bureau and other organizations such as the American Missionary Association (AMA) when the U.S. federal government initiated an organized effort to educate newly freed slaves (Hoffman, 1996). Additional support for HBCUs arose from the second Morrill Act of 1890, which provided opportunities for all races in those states where Black students were excluded from public higher education. Thus, since their founding in the 1800s, the nation's HBCUs have had as their missions to provide access to higher education for the disenfranchised and underprivileged of our society. Today, these institutions continue to make significant contributions in educating African American and other underrepresented minority students, particularly in the areas of science and engineering. Although they comprise only 3% of U.S. institutions of higher education, HBCUs in 2008 awarded 20% of the baccalaureate degrees earned by Blacks in science and engineering (National Science Foundation, 2011).

Despite significant investments in efforts to broaden participation, the number of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields who leave the academy is disheartening. Some reports suggest half of women STEM faculty will leave tenure track positions within 10 years after hire (Kaminski & Geisler, 2012). For women of color, the data are equally bleak (Ginther & Kahn, 2012) and affirm the need for continuously evolving practices and policies to retain underrepresented faculty in STEM and ensure career satisfaction and success. Unfortunately, current programs for career development and mentoring largely promote rigid conformity to traditional performance expectations, which enable the persistence of narrow departmental norms regarding markers of success. By drawing on person–environment (PE) fit theory, and combining data from our own institution with evidence-based practices from others, the authors have created a faculty development program designed to upend this practice. The objective of this program is to help faculty advance their careers in the academy while staying true to what they value, while simultaneously helping departments reflect on how they can create more inclusive and supportive environments for all faculty. The authors describe the program in detail and provide initial assessments of impact on faculty participants as well as departmental and institutional practice.

Critical mass theory suggests that attaining a certain proportion of a minority group triggers transformation that improves conditions for minority group members. Using faculty gender composition as a continuous rather than categorical predictor, the present research discerns whether the proportion of women influences perceptions among STEM faculty.

STEM faculty completed a survey examining perceptions of department climate for women (i.e., advancement and discrimination) and division of work time. The proportion of women in each department was calculated.

Using multilevel modeling, we found that women (vs. men) faculty perceive less departmental advancement of women, but that a greater proportion of women in a department is related to increased perceptions that the department advances women. We did not find differences in time male or female faculty reported spending on research, teaching, or service; however, as the proportion of women in a department increases, there is a decrease in the amount of time individual male and female faculty spent on research and an increase in time spent on service. Contrary to critical mass theory, we found a linear rather than quadratic effect of proportion of women on perceptions of department climate and division of work time.

These effects may not be attributable to gender proportion alone.

Given our finding of incremental effects of proportion of women, a critical mass is not necessary or sufficient for change. Underlying problems of discrimination and stereotyping need to be addressed while recognizing that each woman hired has a positive impact.