Search

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine two types of departmental interventions focused on creating healthier and more equitable academic departments as well as enhancing faculty members’ capacity for collective dialogue, goals and work. Both interventions were informed by the “dual-agenda” approach and focused on targeted academic units over a prolonged period.Design/methodology/approachThis paper uses a variety of qualitative and quantitative data (including National Science Foundation (NSF) ADVANCE indicator data) to assess the potential of dual-agenda informed interventions in reducing gendered structures and gendered dynamics.FindingsThe authors outline essential components of a dual-agenda model for maximizing success in creating more gender equitable work organizations and discuss why the authors are more optimistic about the dual-agenda approaches than many past researchers have been in terms of the potential of the dual-agenda model for promoting more equal opportunities in work organizations.Originality/valueMost previous dual-agenda projects referenced in the literature have been carried out in non-academic contexts. The projects examined here, however, were administered in the context of multiple academic departments at two medium-sized, public US universities. Although other NSF ADVANCE institutional transformation institutions have included extensive department-focused transformation efforts (e.g. Brown University, Purdue University and Syracuse University), the long-term benefits of these efforts are not yet fully understood; nor have systematic comparisons been made across institutions.

This study sought to understand predictors of faculty satisfaction with promotion and tenure processes and reasonableness of expectations in the context of a striving institution. The factors we investigated included discipline (high-consensus [science and math] vs. low-consensus [humanities and social sciences]); demographic variables; and institutional support including mentoring, collegiality, work-life integration, and college commitment to faculty members’ fields. High-consensus faculty members were less satisfied with promotion and tenure processes than were low-consensus faculty members (p < .01). Faculty members who were more satisfied with collegiality (p < .001) and with college commitment to their fields (p < .05) were more satisfied with promotion and tenure processes. Faculty members who were more satisfied with work-life integration and mentoring were more satisfied with reasonableness of expectations (p < .05).

Female faculty may experience disproportionate caregiving-type responsibilities in the academy and at home. A web-based survey inquired about the impact of childcare responsibilities on research-related travel. A convenience sample of full-time faculty participated ( n = 127). From the overwhelmingly female faculty respondents (81.3%), results show that childcare issues impact their ability to plan research travel, submit to professional conferences, and travel to give an invited talk. Faculty rank, discipline, and whether their partner was employed at the same university negatively impacted their ability to travel. Work/life travel policies may reduce barriers to travel, hence reducing a type of cumulative disadvantage.

Although there has been a welcome increase in discussion about gender disparities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), broad participation of women from all backgrounds in academic STEM will not be achieved until institutions are transformed. A long-range view is needed to change the rules of the game, such that institutional culture and practices create workplaces where all scientists and engineers want to be. We lay out a six-point plan of what needs to change, who should participate, and how actors outside of the academy should have direct involvement in the process.