Gender balance in Research Group Leadership at UiT

The Research group’s Basic Structure and Leadership roles

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7557/7.5924

Keywords:

Gender Balance, Research Leadership, Research Groups, Diversity, Kjønnsbalanse, Forskningsledelse, Forskningsgrupper, Mangfold

Abstract

UiT The Arctic University of Norway has a decade-long tradition of channelling research through formally accredited research groups. These research groups have dynamic structures and networks, unlimited duration, a defined leader, and gather academics of all levels to pursue research on a common topic of interest. The formalisation of research groups at the institution followed strategies aimed at supporting the creation of more robust and resilient research communities and boost cutting-edge research produced at the university.

Ten years after initiating the formalisation process, UiT has around 196 research groups distributed fairly evenly across faculties by their size. HELSE and HSL are the largest faculties and also the ones with the largest number of research groups. As of June 2020, 57% of these research groups were led by men. This shows that gender balance has been achieved in research group leadership at the university level in terms of numerical parity. While the formalisation of the research groups may have contributed to achieving this balance, data collected for this study represents an inaugural attempt to map gender-disaggregated research group leadership at UiT.

This report shows that the gender distribution in research group leadership across faculties and departments or centres follows the remaining disparities existing in top academic positions (professor and docent) as they were observed in former studies conducted by the Prestige Project. This result is consistent since 93% of all research groups at UiT are led either by associate professors or professors. BFE, HELSE, and HSL are the most gender-balanced faculties, while IVT and NT are the least balanced. At IVT and NT faculties, 80% of the research groups are led by men. At the faculties that follow a level system for research groups (HSL and JUR), women currently lead more top-level groups than men.

Despite the achievement of gender balance in research group leadership functions at UiT, a survey conducted by the Prestige Project that complements the dataset showed that gender shapes relevant differences regarding the basic structure of research groups and their leadership roles. Highlights of these differences can be systematised as follows:

(1) The average size of research groups at UiT is 12.6 members. Men tend to lead smaller groups with a higher proportion of members holding 50% or more research contracts. (2) Most of the research groups at UiT follows a “stjerneklubb” structure, in which leaders are one of the several key researchers within the group. Three times more men than women reported leading a group with a “rakett” structure, in which the leader is the group’s key researcher. (3) Concerning the reported activity level following each groups evaluated potential from the leader’s perspective, men reported a higher maximal achievement of the group’s potential. At the same time, women indicated greater room for improvement. (4) Finally, regarding leadership and leadership roles, men have been more often appointed as leaders by the head of departments or centres, while women have more often been chosen by the group members. Furthermore, while both men and women in leadership roles engage equally in managerial tasks in their functions as research group leaders, men reported performing more of the tasks associated with a leadership role. Twice as many men reported that they set the group's research agenda and control the workflow of delegated tasks.

We do not claim that these differences are necessarily negative since they can also be seen as a sign that gender balance increases the diversity of approaches in leadership at the university, which is a desirable aim in fostering excellence. The meaning of these differences has to be investigated further in future research.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Melina Duarte, UiT The Arctic University of Norway

Melina Duarte is an internationally educated analytical philosopher with expertise in moral and political philosophy. Her research interests center on diversity integration and inclusion of minorities, focusing on migration and gender. Duarte is Associate Professor of Ethics at the Department of Philosophy and Researcher at the Centre for Women’s and Gender Research at UiT The Arctic University of Norway. She coordinates the Prestige Project. 

Adrianna Kochanska, UiT The Arctic University of Norway

Adrianna Kochanska is the work package leader on quantitative research in the Prestige Project and a Researcher at BRIDGE research group at UiT The Arctic University of Norway. Kochanska’s background is in economics and international fisheries management with research interests in sustainable production and utilization of marine resources and expertise in data analysis and R-coding.

Malin Rönnblom, Karlstad University

Malin Rönnblom is a Professor in Political Science at Karlstad University, Sweden, and Professor II in Gender Studies at UiT The Arctic University of Norway. She has vast experience in critical policy studies, especially regarding gender equality policy, regional policy and rural policy, and a strong interest in feminist political theory. Her ongoing research focuses on new forms of governing concerning the economization and marketisation of politics, with a particular focus on the implementation of AI systems in the public sector.

References

Andersson, S. & Amundsdotter, E. (2013) Genusmedvetet akademiskt ledarskap. En redovisning av projektet Genusmedvetna chefer ett villkor för ett genusmedvetet universi¬tet. Stockholm: Universitets- och högskolerådet.

Det helsevitenskapelig fakultet (09/3474-3) (2010) Rammer for Forskningsgrupper og Forskningsgruppeledere.

Duarte, M., Kochanska, A., & T. Nustad. (2020) Gender distribution beyond coarse measurements: Balancing gender distribution in professor positions at the UiT from 2020 onwards. Septentrio Reports 01/2020: https://doi.org/10.7557/sr.2020.8

Dyrstad J. M., Hvistendahl R. & Røiseland A. (2014). Evaluering av forskninsgruppene ved Fakultet for humaniora, samfunnsvitenskap og læreutdanning, Universitetet i Tromsø. Rapport fra evalueringspanelet. Available at: http://docplayer.me/46594823-Evaluering-av-forskningsgruppene-ved-fakultet-for-humaniora-samfunnsvitenskap-og-laererutdanning-universitetet-i-tromso.html

Grimsgaard S., Pedersen, M. & Guttvik G. (2015) Kartlegging av forskningsgrupper ved Helsefak. Arkivref: 2015/4677/KKV010.

Grimsgaard, S., Federhofer, M. T., Davidsen G. & Tobiassen A. K. (2016) (Refr. 2016/810 (gml sak 2015/5059)). Veileder for forskningsgrupper ved UiT: Rapport fra fokusgruppa for foskningsgrupper med forslag til veileder for forskningsgrupper.

Haustein S., Larivière V. (2015) The Use of Bibliometrics for Assessing Research: Possibilities, Limitations and Adverse Effects. In: Welpe I., Wollersheim J., Ringelhan S., Osterloh M. (eds) Incentives and Performance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09785-5_8

Höök, P. (2001) Stridspiloter i vida kjolar. Om ledarutveckling och jämställdhet. Stockholm: EFI.

Kochanska, A. & M. Duarte. (2020) Gender Distribution in Leader Roles at UiT. Factsheet 01/2021. Prestige Project (RCN 281862): Gender Balance in Research Leadership. Available for download at: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.13661297.v2

Liphazi, M., C. O, Aigbavboa W.D. Thwala. 2017. A Theoretical Perspective on the Difference between Leadership and Management. Procedia Engineering. 196: 478-482 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.07.227

Meld. St. nr 18 (2014-2015). Available at https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/meld.-st.-18-2014-2015/id2402377/?ch=1

Mittner, L. & Mittner, M. (2020) UiT Balancinator for Organizations. URL: http://en.uit.no/resources/balancinator (Accessed 25.05.2021).

Mohr, S. et al. (2019) ”Indledning. Køn og akademia”, Kvinder, køn & forskning, No. 1-2. https://doi.org/10.7146/kkf.v28i1-2.116113

Moss-Racusin, C. et al. (2012) “Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students”, PNAS, vol 109, no. 41. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1211286109

Morey, R. (2020) Diverging Pips Graphs – R Code. https://github.com/richarddmorey/divergingPips (Accessed 25.05.2021).

Norges forskningsrådet. 2019. Oppfølging av evaluering av humanistisk forskning i Norge. Available at: https://www.forskningsradet.no/contentassets/8aa89cf713f2430e90e4e9a4a6aa1e88/rapport-fra-oppfolgingsutvalget-etter-humeval.pdf

Olsen, S. & Larsen F. (2019) SAK FS-26/2019. Forskningsgruppeordningen ved HSL-fakultetet. Til: Fakultetsstyret HSL Møtedato: 13. juni 2019, 1-4. Available at: https://docplayer.me/154864212-Sak-fs-26-2019-forskningsgruppeordningen-ved-hsl-fakultetet-til-fakultetsstyret-hsl-motedato-13-juni-2019.html

Rasmussen, S. B. 2014. Potentiale Ledelse Potentialeledelse: om strategisk ledelse i fagprofessionelle organisationer. Barlebo Forlag.

Rees, T. (2004) ‘Measuring excellence in scientific research: The UK Research Assessment Exercise’ in Gender and Excellence in the Making. EUR 21222. Brussels: DG-research, European Commission. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/ce10dfeb-4e36-49ed-a9ec-b2182c8b986f

Rönnblom, M. et.al (2014) Hållbar strukturell förändring – möjlighet eller utopi? Slutrapport från ett projekt finansierat av Delegationen för jämställdhet i högskolan, Umeå universitet. Available at: https://www.uhr.se/globalassets/_uhr.se/lika-mojligheter/dj-projektredovisningar-och-rapporter2/hallbar-strukturell-forandring.pdf

van den Brink M, Benschop Y, Jansen W. (2010) Transparency in Academic Recruitment: A Problematic Tool for Gender Equality? Organization Studies. 31(11):1459-1483. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840610380812

Wahl, A. et. al. (2018) Det ordnar sig: Teorier om organisation och kön, Lund: Studentlitteratur, 3e upplagan.

Ziegler, B. (2001) ‘Some remarks on gender equality in higher education in Switzerland’. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 21/1-2: 44-49. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443330110789556

Downloads

Published

2021-08-25