Top university managers and affirmative action

• Published date: 26 April 2013
• Date: 26 April 2013
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-03-2011-0014
• Pages: 394-409
• Author: Teresa Carvalho,Kate White,Maria de Lourdes Machado‐Taylor

Top university managers and

affirmative action

Teresa Carvalho

University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

Kate White

Monash University, Melbourne, Australia, and

Maria de Lourdes Machado-Taylor

CIPES, Matosinhos, Portugal

Abstract

Purpose – 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.

Design/methodology/approach – 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.

Findings – When describing the role of top managers, gender equality was not often mentioned,

suggesting that it may not be a topic on the cu rrent 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 awareof their rolein 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.

Research limitations/implications – 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.

Practical implications – 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.

Originality/value – 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.

Keywords Academic staff, Equal opportunities, Gender, Higher education, Qualitative research,

Australia, Portugal

Paper type Research paper

Introduction

A common trend in higher education (HE) in the last few decades in all developed

countries has been the increasing participation of women at all levels which has led to

the emergence of the idea of a “feminised future” (Leathwood and Read, 2009).

However, a deeper analysis reveals that patterns of difference still persist, with women

more concentrated in soft “areas” and under-represented in senior position s (Bagilhole,

2000; Sagaria and Agans, 2006; Saunderson, 2002; Leathwood and Read, 2009;

Bagilhole and White, 2008). Roos (2008, p. 195) argues that “institutional actors need to

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/2040-7149.htm

Equality, Diversityand Inc lusion:

An International Journal

Vol. 32 No. 4, 2013

pp. 394-409

rEmeraldGroup PublishingLimited

2040-7149

DOI 10.1108/EDI -03-2011-0014

394

EDI

32,4

identify and eliminate the kinds of concrete behaviours and policies that cumulatively

reproduce gender inequity”. In trying to reduce such inequity some countries have

developed affirmative action (AA) programmes in HE.

This paper compares the power of top university managers in Australia an d

Portugal in setting the strategic direction of universities, and especially in developing

positive attitudes to improve women’s position in academia. One reason for comparing

these two countries is that they have adopted different approaches to equality policies,

reflecting different traditions in relation to equal opportunities (EO) and AA legislative

frameworks[1] and resulting strategies and plans within HE. Another reason is

that they share some similarities on the gender gap index, as defined by the World

Economic Forum (WEF) (2012). Both countries have similar ratios of females to males

in political empowerment, health and surviv al and educational attainment. However,

there are low levels of economic participation and opportunity – (0.68) in Portug al and

even lower in Australia (0.76) (see Table I).

In comparing countries with different traditions, our purp ose is to analyse the

potential contribution of EO and AA programmes on the perceptions of senior

university managers about the roles of top managers (rectors/vice-chancellor’s (VCs)) in

their support for women in senior management in the two coun tries.

The paper presents an overall synthesis of empirical studies developed in different

national contexts of the impact of AA programmes and then provides an overview of

the situation of women in HE in Portugal and Australia. Next it summarises the

methodological strategies used to collect and analyse data and presents an overview of

the findings. Finally, the conclusion summarises the main results and future directions

for the research.

1. AA programmes in context

AA was developed during second wave feminism when discrimination, low-paying

and dead-end jobs moved a large number of working women to collective action, and

often built on and extended EO legislation. Since then there has been ongoing

discussion on the advantages and disadvantages of using AA programmes. It is clear

that they allow gender, race and class to be re-defined by undermining associations

established for more than a century (MacLean and Mohr, 1999). Nevertheless they

are also controversial as they can be perceived by beneficiaries as similar to charity,

welfare benefits or preferential treatment that translates into inferiority (Fraser, 1997)

and at the same time allow the dominant group to consider itself discriminate d against

because such programmes privilege women (Morley, 2006). There has therefore been

some scepticism about AA’s capacity to effectively improve gender equality, especially

when one considers the use of quotas in the political system (Peters, 1996).

Country

Global gender

gap index

Economic participation

and opportunity

(F/M ratio)

Educational

attainment

(F/M ratio)

Health and

survival

(f/m ratio)

Political empowerment

(F/M ratio)

Australia 25 0.76 1 0.97 0.185

Portugal 47 0.68 0.99 0.97 0.183

Source: World Economic Forum, Global Gender Report (2012)

Table I .

Global gender gap index

395

Top university

managers