research work on gender equality

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Twenty years of gender equality research: A scoping review based on a new semantic indicator

Contributed equally to this work with: Paola Belingheri, Filippo Chiarello, Andrea Fronzetti Colladon, Paola Rovelli

Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell’Energia, dei Sistemi, del Territorio e delle Costruzioni, Università degli Studi di Pisa, Largo L. Lazzarino, Pisa, Italy

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliations Department of Engineering, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy, Department of Management, Kozminski University, Warsaw, Poland

Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Faculty of Economics and Management, Centre for Family Business Management, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Bozen-Bolzano, Italy

• Paola Belingheri, 
• Filippo Chiarello, 
• Andrea Fronzetti Colladon, 
• Paola Rovelli

• Published: September 21, 2021
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474
• Reader Comments

9 Nov 2021: The PLOS ONE Staff (2021) Correction: Twenty years of gender equality research: A scoping review based on a new semantic indicator. PLOS ONE 16(11): e0259930. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259930 View correction

Gender equality is a major problem that places women at a disadvantage thereby stymieing economic growth and societal advancement. In the last two decades, extensive research has been conducted on gender related issues, studying both their antecedents and consequences. However, existing literature reviews fail to provide a comprehensive and clear picture of what has been studied so far, which could guide scholars in their future research. Our paper offers a scoping review of a large portion of the research that has been published over the last 22 years, on gender equality and related issues, with a specific focus on business and economics studies. Combining innovative methods drawn from both network analysis and text mining, we provide a synthesis of 15,465 scientific articles. We identify 27 main research topics, we measure their relevance from a semantic point of view and the relationships among them, highlighting the importance of each topic in the overall gender discourse. We find that prominent research topics mostly relate to women in the workforce–e.g., concerning compensation, role, education, decision-making and career progression. However, some of them are losing momentum, and some other research trends–for example related to female entrepreneurship, leadership and participation in the board of directors–are on the rise. Besides introducing a novel methodology to review broad literature streams, our paper offers a map of the main gender-research trends and presents the most popular and the emerging themes, as well as their intersections, outlining important avenues for future research.

Citation: Belingheri P, Chiarello F, Fronzetti Colladon A, Rovelli P (2021) Twenty years of gender equality research: A scoping review based on a new semantic indicator. PLoS ONE 16(9): e0256474. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474

Editor: Elisa Ughetto, Politecnico di Torino, ITALY

Received: June 25, 2021; Accepted: August 6, 2021; Published: September 21, 2021

Copyright: © 2021 Belingheri et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its supporting information files. The only exception is the text of the abstracts (over 15,000) that we have downloaded from Scopus. These abstracts can be retrieved from Scopus, but we do not have permission to redistribute them.

Funding: P.B and F.C.: Grant of the Department of Energy, Systems, Territory and Construction of the University of Pisa (DESTEC) for the project “Measuring Gender Bias with Semantic Analysis: The Development of an Assessment Tool and its Application in the European Space Industry. P.B., F.C., A.F.C., P.R.: Grant of the Italian Association of Management Engineering (AiIG), “Misure di sostegno ai soci giovani AiIG” 2020, for the project “Gender Equality Through Data Intelligence (GEDI)”. F.C.: EU project ASSETs+ Project (Alliance for Strategic Skills addressing Emerging Technologies in Defence) EAC/A03/2018 - Erasmus+ programme, Sector Skills Alliances, Lot 3: Sector Skills Alliance for implementing a new strategic approach (Blueprint) to sectoral cooperation on skills G.A. NUMBER: 612678-EPP-1-2019-1-IT-EPPKA2-SSA-B.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

The persistent gender inequalities that currently exist across the developed and developing world are receiving increasing attention from economists, policymakers, and the general public [e.g., 1 – 3 ]. Economic studies have indicated that women’s education and entry into the workforce contributes to social and economic well-being [e.g., 4 , 5 ], while their exclusion from the labor market and from managerial positions has an impact on overall labor productivity and income per capita [ 6 , 7 ]. The United Nations selected gender equality, with an emphasis on female education, as part of the Millennium Development Goals [ 8 ], and gender equality at-large as one of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to be achieved by 2030 [ 9 ]. These latter objectives involve not only developing nations, but rather all countries, to achieve economic, social and environmental well-being.

As is the case with many SDGs, gender equality is still far from being achieved and persists across education, access to opportunities, or presence in decision-making positions [ 7 , 10 , 11 ]. As we enter the last decade for the SDGs’ implementation, and while we are battling a global health pandemic, effective and efficient action becomes paramount to reach this ambitious goal.

Scholars have dedicated a massive effort towards understanding gender equality, its determinants, its consequences for women and society, and the appropriate actions and policies to advance women’s equality. Many topics have been covered, ranging from women’s education and human capital [ 12 , 13 ] and their role in society [e.g., 14 , 15 ], to their appointment in firms’ top ranked positions [e.g., 16 , 17 ] and performance implications [e.g., 18 , 19 ]. Despite some attempts, extant literature reviews provide a narrow view on these issues, restricted to specific topics–e.g., female students’ presence in STEM fields [ 20 ], educational gender inequality [ 5 ], the gender pay gap [ 21 ], the glass ceiling effect [ 22 ], leadership [ 23 ], entrepreneurship [ 24 ], women’s presence on the board of directors [ 25 , 26 ], diversity management [ 27 ], gender stereotypes in advertisement [ 28 ], or specific professions [ 29 ]. A comprehensive view on gender-related research, taking stock of key findings and under-studied topics is thus lacking.

Extant literature has also highlighted that gender issues, and their economic and social ramifications, are complex topics that involve a large number of possible antecedents and outcomes [ 7 ]. Indeed, gender equality actions are most effective when implemented in unison with other SDGs (e.g., with SDG 8, see [ 30 ]) in a synergetic perspective [ 10 ]. Many bodies of literature (e.g., business, economics, development studies, sociology and psychology) approach the problem of achieving gender equality from different perspectives–often addressing specific and narrow aspects. This sometimes leads to a lack of clarity about how different issues, circumstances, and solutions may be related in precipitating or mitigating gender inequality or its effects. As the number of papers grows at an increasing pace, this issue is exacerbated and there is a need to step back and survey the body of gender equality literature as a whole. There is also a need to examine synergies between different topics and approaches, as well as gaps in our understanding of how different problems and solutions work together. Considering the important topic of women’s economic and social empowerment, this paper aims to fill this gap by answering the following research question: what are the most relevant findings in the literature on gender equality and how do they relate to each other ?

To do so, we conduct a scoping review [ 31 ], providing a synthesis of 15,465 articles dealing with gender equity related issues published in the last twenty-two years, covering both the periods of the MDGs and the SDGs (i.e., 2000 to mid 2021) in all the journals indexed in the Academic Journal Guide’s 2018 ranking of business and economics journals. Given the huge amount of research conducted on the topic, we adopt an innovative methodology, which relies on social network analysis and text mining. These techniques are increasingly adopted when surveying large bodies of text. Recently, they were applied to perform analysis of online gender communication differences [ 32 ] and gender behaviors in online technology communities [ 33 ], to identify and classify sexual harassment instances in academia [ 34 ], and to evaluate the gender inclusivity of disaster management policies [ 35 ].

Applied to the title, abstracts and keywords of the articles in our sample, this methodology allows us to identify a set of 27 recurrent topics within which we automatically classify the papers. Introducing additional novelty, by means of the Semantic Brand Score (SBS) indicator [ 36 ] and the SBS BI app [ 37 ], we assess the importance of each topic in the overall gender equality discourse and its relationships with the other topics, as well as trends over time, with a more accurate description than that offered by traditional literature reviews relying solely on the number of papers presented in each topic.

This methodology, applied to gender equality research spanning the past twenty-two years, enables two key contributions. First, we extract the main message that each document is conveying and how this is connected to other themes in literature, providing a rich picture of the topics that are at the center of the discourse, as well as of the emerging topics. Second, by examining the semantic relationship between topics and how tightly their discourses are linked, we can identify the key relationships and connections between different topics. This semi-automatic methodology is also highly reproducible with minimum effort.

This literature review is organized as follows. In the next section, we present how we selected relevant papers and how we analyzed them through text mining and social network analysis. We then illustrate the importance of 27 selected research topics, measured by means of the SBS indicator. In the results section, we present an overview of the literature based on the SBS results–followed by an in-depth narrative analysis of the top 10 topics (i.e., those with the highest SBS) and their connections. Subsequently, we highlight a series of under-studied connections between the topics where there is potential for future research. Through this analysis, we build a map of the main gender-research trends in the last twenty-two years–presenting the most popular themes. We conclude by highlighting key areas on which research should focused in the future.

Our aim is to map a broad topic, gender equality research, that has been approached through a host of different angles and through different disciplines. Scoping reviews are the most appropriate as they provide the freedom to map different themes and identify literature gaps, thereby guiding the recommendation of new research agendas [ 38 ].

Several practical approaches have been proposed to identify and assess the underlying topics of a specific field using big data [ 39 – 41 ], but many of them fail without proper paper retrieval and text preprocessing. This is specifically true for a research field such as the gender-related one, which comprises the work of scholars from different backgrounds. In this section, we illustrate a novel approach for the analysis of scientific (gender-related) papers that relies on methods and tools of social network analysis and text mining. Our procedure has four main steps: (1) data collection, (2) text preprocessing, (3) keywords extraction and classification, and (4) evaluation of semantic importance and image.

Data collection

In this study, we analyze 22 years of literature on gender-related research. Following established practice for scoping reviews [ 42 ], our data collection consisted of two main steps, which we summarize here below.

Firstly, we retrieved from the Scopus database all the articles written in English that contained the term “gender” in their title, abstract or keywords and were published in a journal listed in the Academic Journal Guide 2018 ranking of the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS) ( https://charteredabs.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/AJG2018-Methodology.pdf ), considering the time period from Jan 2000 to May 2021. We used this information considering that abstracts, titles and keywords represent the most informative part of a paper, while using the full-text would increase the signal-to-noise ratio for information extraction. Indeed, these textual elements already demonstrated to be reliable sources of information for the task of domain lexicon extraction [ 43 , 44 ]. We chose Scopus as source of literature because of its popularity, its update rate, and because it offers an API to ease the querying process. Indeed, while it does not allow to retrieve the full text of scientific articles, the Scopus API offers access to titles, abstracts, citation information and metadata for all its indexed scholarly journals. Moreover, we decided to focus on the journals listed in the AJG 2018 ranking because we were interested in reviewing business and economics related gender studies only. The AJG is indeed widely used by universities and business schools as a reference point for journal and research rigor and quality. This first step, executed in June 2021, returned more than 55,000 papers.

In the second step–because a look at the papers showed very sparse results, many of which were not in line with the topic of this literature review (e.g., papers dealing with health care or medical issues, where the word gender indicates the gender of the patients)–we applied further inclusion criteria to make the sample more focused on the topic of this literature review (i.e., women’s gender equality issues). Specifically, we only retained those papers mentioning, in their title and/or abstract, both gender-related keywords (e.g., daughter, female, mother) and keywords referring to bias and equality issues (e.g., equality, bias, diversity, inclusion). After text pre-processing (see next section), keywords were first identified from a frequency-weighted list of words found in the titles, abstracts and keywords in the initial list of papers, extracted through text mining (following the same approach as [ 43 ]). They were selected by two of the co-authors independently, following respectively a bottom up and a top-down approach. The bottom-up approach consisted of examining the words found in the frequency-weighted list and classifying those related to gender and equality. The top-down approach consisted in searching in the word list for notable gender and equality-related words. Table 1 reports the sets of keywords we considered, together with some examples of words that were used to search for their presence in the dataset (a full list is provided in the S1 Text ). At end of this second step, we obtained a final sample of 15,465 relevant papers.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.t001

Text processing and keyword extraction

Text preprocessing aims at structuring text into a form that can be analyzed by statistical models. In the present section, we describe the preprocessing steps we applied to paper titles and abstracts, which, as explained below, partially follow a standard text preprocessing pipeline [ 45 ]. These activities have been performed using the R package udpipe [ 46 ].

The first step is n-gram extraction (i.e., a sequence of words from a given text sample) to identify which n-grams are important in the analysis, since domain-specific lexicons are often composed by bi-grams and tri-grams [ 47 ]. Multi-word extraction is usually implemented with statistics and linguistic rules, thus using the statistical properties of n-grams or machine learning approaches [ 48 ]. However, for the present paper, we used Scopus metadata in order to have a more effective and efficient n-grams collection approach [ 49 ]. We used the keywords of each paper in order to tag n-grams with their associated keywords automatically. Using this greedy approach, it was possible to collect all the keywords listed by the authors of the papers. From this list, we extracted only keywords composed by two, three and four words, we removed all the acronyms and rare keywords (i.e., appearing in less than 1% of papers), and we clustered keywords showing a high orthographic similarity–measured using a Levenshtein distance [ 50 ] lower than 2, considering these groups of keywords as representing same concepts, but expressed with different spelling. After tagging the n-grams in the abstracts, we followed a common data preparation pipeline that consists of the following steps: (i) tokenization, that splits the text into tokens (i.e., single words and previously tagged multi-words); (ii) removal of stop-words (i.e. those words that add little meaning to the text, usually being very common and short functional words–such as “and”, “or”, or “of”); (iii) parts-of-speech tagging, that is providing information concerning the morphological role of a word and its morphosyntactic context (e.g., if the token is a determiner, the next token is a noun or an adjective with very high confidence, [ 51 ]); and (iv) lemmatization, which consists in substituting each word with its dictionary form (or lemma). The output of the latter step allows grouping together the inflected forms of a word. For example, the verbs “am”, “are”, and “is” have the shared lemma “be”, or the nouns “cat” and “cats” both share the lemma “cat”. We preferred lemmatization over stemming [ 52 ] in order to obtain more interpretable results.

In addition, we identified a further set of keywords (with respect to those listed in the “keywords” field) by applying a series of automatic words unification and removal steps, as suggested in past research [ 53 , 54 ]. We removed: sparse terms (i.e., occurring in less than 0.1% of all documents), common terms (i.e., occurring in more than 10% of all documents) and retained only nouns and adjectives. It is relevant to notice that no document was lost due to these steps. We then used the TF-IDF function [ 55 ] to produce a new list of keywords. We additionally tested other approaches for the identification and clustering of keywords–such as TextRank [ 56 ] or Latent Dirichlet Allocation [ 57 ]–without obtaining more informative results.

Classification of research topics

To guide the literature analysis, two experts met regularly to examine the sample of collected papers and to identify the main topics and trends in gender research. Initially, they conducted brainstorming sessions on the topics they expected to find, due to their knowledge of the literature. This led to an initial list of topics. Subsequently, the experts worked independently, also supported by the keywords in paper titles and abstracts extracted with the procedure described above.

Considering all this information, each expert identified and clustered relevant keywords into topics. At the end of the process, the two assignments were compared and exhibited a 92% agreement. Another meeting was held to discuss discordant cases and reach a consensus. This resulted in a list of 27 topics, briefly introduced in Table 2 and subsequently detailed in the following sections.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.t002

Evaluation of semantic importance

Working on the lemmatized corpus of the 15,465 papers included in our sample, we proceeded with the evaluation of semantic importance trends for each topic and with the analysis of their connections and prevalent textual associations. To this aim, we used the Semantic Brand Score indicator [ 36 ], calculated through the SBS BI webapp [ 37 ] that also produced a brand image report for each topic. For this study we relied on the computing resources of the ENEA/CRESCO infrastructure [ 58 ].

The Semantic Brand Score (SBS) is a measure of semantic importance that combines methods of social network analysis and text mining. It is usually applied for the analysis of (big) textual data to evaluate the importance of one or more brands, names, words, or sets of keywords [ 36 ]. Indeed, the concept of “brand” is intended in a flexible way and goes beyond products or commercial brands. In this study, we evaluate the SBS time-trends of the keywords defining the research topics discussed in the previous section. Semantic importance comprises the three dimensions of topic prevalence, diversity and connectivity. Prevalence measures how frequently a research topic is used in the discourse. The more a topic is mentioned by scientific articles, the more the research community will be aware of it, with possible increase of future studies; this construct is partly related to that of brand awareness [ 59 ]. This effect is even stronger, considering that we are analyzing the title, abstract and keywords of the papers, i.e. the parts that have the highest visibility. A very important characteristic of the SBS is that it considers the relationships among words in a text. Topic importance is not just a matter of how frequently a topic is mentioned, but also of the associations a topic has in the text. Specifically, texts are transformed into networks of co-occurring words, and relationships are studied through social network analysis [ 60 ]. This step is necessary to calculate the other two dimensions of our semantic importance indicator. Accordingly, a social network of words is generated for each time period considered in the analysis–i.e., a graph made of n nodes (words) and E edges weighted by co-occurrence frequency, with W being the set of edge weights. The keywords representing each topic were clustered into single nodes.

The construct of diversity relates to that of brand image [ 59 ], in the sense that it considers the richness and distinctiveness of textual (topic) associations. Considering the above-mentioned networks, we calculated diversity using the distinctiveness centrality metric–as in the formula presented by Fronzetti Colladon and Naldi [ 61 ].

Lastly, connectivity was measured as the weighted betweenness centrality [ 62 , 63 ] of each research topic node. We used the formula presented by Wasserman and Faust [ 60 ]. The dimension of connectivity represents the “brokerage power” of each research topic–i.e., how much it can serve as a bridge to connect other terms (and ultimately topics) in the discourse [ 36 ].

The SBS is the final composite indicator obtained by summing the standardized scores of prevalence, diversity and connectivity. Standardization was carried out considering all the words in the corpus, for each specific timeframe.

This methodology, applied to a large and heterogeneous body of text, enables to automatically identify two important sets of information that add value to the literature review. Firstly, the relevance of each topic in literature is measured through a composite indicator of semantic importance, rather than simply looking at word frequencies. This provides a much richer picture of the topics that are at the center of the discourse, as well as of the topics that are emerging in the literature. Secondly, it enables to examine the extent of the semantic relationship between topics, looking at how tightly their discourses are linked. In a field such as gender equality, where many topics are closely linked to each other and present overlaps in issues and solutions, this methodology offers a novel perspective with respect to traditional literature reviews. In addition, it ensures reproducibility over time and the possibility to semi-automatically update the analysis, as new papers become available.

Overview of main topics

In terms of descriptive textual statistics, our corpus is made of 15,465 text documents, consisting of a total of 2,685,893 lemmatized tokens (words) and 32,279 types. As a result, the type-token ratio is 1.2%. The number of hapaxes is 12,141, with a hapax-token ratio of 37.61%.

Fig 1 shows the list of 27 topics by decreasing SBS. The most researched topic is compensation , exceeding all others in prevalence, diversity, and connectivity. This means it is not only mentioned more often than other topics, but it is also connected to a greater number of other topics and is central to the discourse on gender equality. The next four topics are, in order of SBS, role , education , decision-making , and career progression . These topics, except for education , all concern women in the workforce. Between these first five topics and the following ones there is a clear drop in SBS scores. In particular, the topics that follow have a lower connectivity than the first five. They are hiring , performance , behavior , organization , and human capital . Again, except for behavior and human capital , the other three topics are purely related to women in the workforce. After another drop-off, the following topics deal prevalently with women in society. This trend highlights that research on gender in business journals has so far mainly paid attention to the conditions that women experience in business contexts, while also devoting some attention to women in society.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.g001

Fig 2 shows the SBS time series of the top 10 topics. While there has been a general increase in the number of Scopus-indexed publications in the last decade, we notice that some SBS trends remain steady, or even decrease. In particular, we observe that the main topic of the last twenty-two years, compensation , is losing momentum. Since 2016, it has been surpassed by decision-making , education and role , which may indicate that literature is increasingly attempting to identify root causes of compensation inequalities. Moreover, in the last two years, the topics of hiring , performance , and organization are experiencing the largest importance increase.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.g002

Fig 3 shows the SBS time trends of the remaining 17 topics (i.e., those not in the top 10). As we can see from the graph, there are some that maintain a steady trend–such as reputation , management , networks and governance , which also seem to have little importance. More relevant topics with average stationary trends (except for the last two years) are culture , family , and parenting . The feminine topic is among the most important here, and one of those that exhibit the larger variations over time (similarly to leadership ). On the other hand, the are some topics that, even if not among the most important, show increasing SBS trends; therefore, they could be considered as emerging topics and could become popular in the near future. These are entrepreneurship , leadership , board of directors , and sustainability . These emerging topics are also interesting to anticipate future trends in gender equality research that are conducive to overall equality in society.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.g003

In addition to the SBS score of the different topics, the network of terms they are associated to enables to gauge the extent to which their images (textual associations) overlap or differ ( Fig 4 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.g004

There is a central cluster of topics with high similarity, which are all connected with women in the workforce. The cluster includes topics such as organization , decision-making , performance , hiring , human capital , education and compensation . In addition, the topic of well-being is found within this cluster, suggesting that women’s equality in the workforce is associated to well-being considerations. The emerging topics of entrepreneurship and leadership are also closely connected with each other, possibly implying that leadership is a much-researched quality in female entrepreneurship. Topics that are relatively more distant include personality , politics , feminine , empowerment , management , board of directors , reputation , governance , parenting , masculine and network .

The following sections describe the top 10 topics and their main associations in literature (see Table 3 ), while providing a brief overview of the emerging topics.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.t003

Compensation.

The topic of compensation is related to the topics of role , hiring , education and career progression , however, also sees a very high association with the words gap and inequality . Indeed, a well-known debate in degrowth economics centers around whether and how to adequately compensate women for their childbearing, childrearing, caregiver and household work [e.g., 30 ].

Even in paid work, women continue being offered lower compensations than their male counterparts who have the same job or cover the same role [ 64 – 67 ]. This severe inequality has been widely studied by scholars over the last twenty-two years. Dealing with this topic, some specific roles have been addressed. Specifically, research highlighted differences in compensation between female and male CEOs [e.g., 68 ], top executives [e.g., 69 ], and boards’ directors [e.g., 70 ]. Scholars investigated the determinants of these gaps, such as the gender composition of the board [e.g., 71 – 73 ] or women’s individual characteristics [e.g., 71 , 74 ].

Among these individual characteristics, education plays a relevant role [ 75 ]. Education is indeed presented as the solution for women, not only to achieve top executive roles, but also to reduce wage inequality [e.g., 76 , 77 ]. Past research has highlighted education influences on gender wage gaps, specifically referring to gender differences in skills [e.g., 78 ], college majors [e.g., 79 ], and college selectivity [e.g., 80 ].

Finally, the wage gap issue is strictly interrelated with hiring –e.g., looking at whether being a mother affects hiring and compensation [e.g., 65 , 81 ] or relating compensation to unemployment [e.g., 82 ]–and career progression –for instance looking at meritocracy [ 83 , 84 ] or the characteristics of the boss for whom women work [e.g., 85 ].

The roles covered by women have been deeply investigated. Scholars have focused on the role of women in their families and the society as a whole [e.g., 14 , 15 ], and, more widely, in business contexts [e.g., 18 , 81 ]. Indeed, despite still lagging behind their male counterparts [e.g., 86 , 87 ], in the last decade there has been an increase in top ranked positions achieved by women [e.g., 88 , 89 ]. Following this phenomenon, scholars have posed greater attention towards the presence of women in the board of directors [e.g., 16 , 18 , 90 , 91 ], given the increasing pressure to appoint female directors that firms, especially listed ones, have experienced. Other scholars have focused on the presence of women covering the role of CEO [e.g., 17 , 92 ] or being part of the top management team [e.g., 93 ]. Irrespectively of the level of analysis, all these studies tried to uncover the antecedents of women’s presence among top managers [e.g., 92 , 94 ] and the consequences of having a them involved in the firm’s decision-making –e.g., on performance [e.g., 19 , 95 , 96 ], risk [e.g., 97 , 98 ], and corporate social responsibility [e.g., 99 , 100 ].

Besides studying the difficulties and discriminations faced by women in getting a job [ 81 , 101 ], and, more specifically in the hiring , appointment, or career progression to these apical roles [e.g., 70 , 83 ], the majority of research of women’s roles dealt with compensation issues. Specifically, scholars highlight the pay-gap that still exists between women and men, both in general [e.g., 64 , 65 ], as well as referring to boards’ directors [e.g., 70 , 102 ], CEOs and executives [e.g., 69 , 103 , 104 ].

Finally, other scholars focused on the behavior of women when dealing with business. In this sense, particular attention has been paid to leadership and entrepreneurial behaviors. The former quite overlaps with dealing with the roles mentioned above, but also includes aspects such as leaders being stereotyped as masculine [e.g., 105 ], the need for greater exposure to female leaders to reduce biases [e.g., 106 ], or female leaders acting as queen bees [e.g., 107 ]. Regarding entrepreneurship , scholars mainly investigated women’s entrepreneurial entry [e.g., 108 , 109 ], differences between female and male entrepreneurs in the evaluations and funding received from investors [e.g., 110 , 111 ], and their performance gap [e.g., 112 , 113 ].

Education has long been recognized as key to social advancement and economic stability [ 114 ], for job progression and also a barrier to gender equality, especially in STEM-related fields. Research on education and gender equality is mostly linked with the topics of compensation , human capital , career progression , hiring , parenting and decision-making .

Education contributes to a higher human capital [ 115 ] and constitutes an investment on the part of women towards their future. In this context, literature points to the gender gap in educational attainment, and the consequences for women from a social, economic, personal and professional standpoint. Women are found to have less access to formal education and information, especially in emerging countries, which in turn may cause them to lose social and economic opportunities [e.g., 12 , 116 – 119 ]. Education in local and rural communities is also paramount to communicate the benefits of female empowerment , contributing to overall societal well-being [e.g., 120 ].

Once women access education, the image they have of the world and their place in society (i.e., habitus) affects their education performance [ 13 ] and is passed on to their children. These situations reinforce gender stereotypes, which become self-fulfilling prophecies that may negatively affect female students’ performance by lowering their confidence and heightening their anxiety [ 121 , 122 ]. Besides formal education, also the information that women are exposed to on a daily basis contributes to their human capital . Digital inequalities, for instance, stems from men spending more time online and acquiring higher digital skills than women [ 123 ].

Education is also a factor that should boost employability of candidates and thus hiring , career progression and compensation , however the relationship between these factors is not straightforward [ 115 ]. First, educational choices ( decision-making ) are influenced by variables such as self-efficacy and the presence of barriers, irrespectively of the career opportunities they offer, especially in STEM [ 124 ]. This brings additional difficulties to women’s enrollment and persistence in scientific and technical fields of study due to stereotypes and biases [ 125 , 126 ]. Moreover, access to education does not automatically translate into job opportunities for women and minority groups [ 127 , 128 ] or into female access to managerial positions [ 129 ].

Finally, parenting is reported as an antecedent of education [e.g., 130 ], with much of the literature focusing on the role of parents’ education on the opportunities afforded to children to enroll in education [ 131 – 134 ] and the role of parenting in their offspring’s perception of study fields and attitudes towards learning [ 135 – 138 ]. Parental education is also a predictor of the other related topics, namely human capital and compensation [ 139 ].

Decision-making.

This literature mainly points to the fact that women are thought to make decisions differently than men. Women have indeed different priorities, such as they care more about people’s well-being, working with people or helping others, rather than maximizing their personal (or their firm’s) gain [ 140 ]. In other words, women typically present more communal than agentic behaviors, which are instead more frequent among men [ 141 ]. These different attitude, behavior and preferences in turn affect the decisions they make [e.g., 142 ] and the decision-making of the firm in which they work [e.g., 143 ].

At the individual level, gender affects, for instance, career aspirations [e.g., 144 ] and choices [e.g., 142 , 145 ], or the decision of creating a venture [e.g., 108 , 109 , 146 ]. Moreover, in everyday life, women and men make different decisions regarding partners [e.g., 147 ], childcare [e.g., 148 ], education [e.g., 149 ], attention to the environment [e.g., 150 ] and politics [e.g., 151 ].

At the firm level, scholars highlighted, for example, how the presence of women in the board affects corporate decisions [e.g., 152 , 153 ], that female CEOs are more conservative in accounting decisions [e.g., 154 ], or that female CFOs tend to make more conservative decisions regarding the firm’s financial reporting [e.g., 155 ]. Nevertheless, firm level research also investigated decisions that, influenced by gender bias, affect women, such as those pertaining hiring [e.g., 156 , 157 ], compensation [e.g., 73 , 158 ], or the empowerment of women once appointed [ 159 ].

Career progression.

Once women have entered the workforce, the key aspect to achieve gender equality becomes career progression , including efforts toward overcoming the glass ceiling. Indeed, according to the SBS analysis, career progression is highly related to words such as work, social issues and equality. The topic with which it has the highest semantic overlap is role , followed by decision-making , hiring , education , compensation , leadership , human capital , and family .

Career progression implies an advancement in the hierarchical ladder of the firm, assigning managerial roles to women. Coherently, much of the literature has focused on identifying rationales for a greater female participation in the top management team and board of directors [e.g., 95 ] as well as the best criteria to ensure that the decision-makers promote the most valuable employees irrespectively of their individual characteristics, such as gender [e.g., 84 ]. The link between career progression , role and compensation is often provided in practice by performance appraisal exercises, frequently rooted in a culture of meritocracy that guides bonuses, salary increases and promotions. However, performance appraisals can actually mask gender-biased decisions where women are held to higher standards than their male colleagues [e.g., 83 , 84 , 95 , 160 , 161 ]. Women often have less opportunities to gain leadership experience and are less visible than their male colleagues, which constitute barriers to career advancement [e.g., 162 ]. Therefore, transparency and accountability, together with procedures that discourage discretionary choices, are paramount to achieve a fair career progression [e.g., 84 ], together with the relaxation of strict job boundaries in favor of cross-functional and self-directed tasks [e.g., 163 ].

In addition, a series of stereotypes about the type of leadership characteristics that are required for top management positions, which fit better with typical male and agentic attributes, are another key barrier to career advancement for women [e.g., 92 , 160 ].

Hiring is the entrance gateway for women into the workforce. Therefore, it is related to other workforce topics such as compensation , role , career progression , decision-making , human capital , performance , organization and education .

A first stream of literature focuses on the process leading up to candidates’ job applications, demonstrating that bias exists before positions are even opened, and it is perpetuated both by men and women through networking and gatekeeping practices [e.g., 164 , 165 ].

The hiring process itself is also subject to biases [ 166 ], for example gender-congruity bias that leads to men being preferred candidates in male-dominated sectors [e.g., 167 ], women being hired in positions with higher risk of failure [e.g., 168 ] and limited transparency and accountability afforded by written processes and procedures [e.g., 164 ] that all contribute to ascriptive inequality. In addition, providing incentives for evaluators to hire women may actually work to this end; however, this is not the case when supporting female candidates endangers higher-ranking male ones [ 169 ].

Another interesting perspective, instead, looks at top management teams’ composition and the effects on hiring practices, indicating that firms with more women in top management are less likely to lay off staff [e.g., 152 ].

Performance.

Several scholars posed their attention towards women’s performance, its consequences [e.g., 170 , 171 ] and the implications of having women in decision-making positions [e.g., 18 , 19 ].

At the individual level, research focused on differences in educational and academic performance between women and men, especially referring to the gender gap in STEM fields [e.g., 171 ]. The presence of stereotype threats–that is the expectation that the members of a social group (e.g., women) “must deal with the possibility of being judged or treated stereotypically, or of doing something that would confirm the stereotype” [ 172 ]–affects women’s interested in STEM [e.g., 173 ], as well as their cognitive ability tests, penalizing them [e.g., 174 ]. A stronger gender identification enhances this gap [e.g., 175 ], whereas mentoring and role models can be used as solutions to this problem [e.g., 121 ]. Despite the negative effect of stereotype threats on girls’ performance [ 176 ], female and male students perform equally in mathematics and related subjects [e.g., 177 ]. Moreover, while individuals’ performance at school and university generally affects their achievements and the field in which they end up working, evidence reveals that performance in math or other scientific subjects does not explain why fewer women enter STEM working fields; rather this gap depends on other aspects, such as culture, past working experiences, or self-efficacy [e.g., 170 ]. Finally, scholars have highlighted the penalization that women face for their positive performance, for instance when they succeed in traditionally male areas [e.g., 178 ]. This penalization is explained by the violation of gender-stereotypic prescriptions [e.g., 179 , 180 ], that is having women well performing in agentic areas, which are typical associated to men. Performance penalization can thus be overcome by clearly conveying communal characteristics and behaviors [ 178 ].

Evidence has been provided on how the involvement of women in boards of directors and decision-making positions affects firms’ performance. Nevertheless, results are mixed, with some studies showing positive effects on financial [ 19 , 181 , 182 ] and corporate social performance [ 99 , 182 , 183 ]. Other studies maintain a negative association [e.g., 18 ], and other again mixed [e.g., 184 ] or non-significant association [e.g., 185 ]. Also with respect to the presence of a female CEO, mixed results emerged so far, with some researches demonstrating a positive effect on firm’s performance [e.g., 96 , 186 ], while other obtaining only a limited evidence of this relationship [e.g., 103 ] or a negative one [e.g., 187 ].

Finally, some studies have investigated whether and how women’s performance affects their hiring [e.g., 101 ] and career progression [e.g., 83 , 160 ]. For instance, academic performance leads to different returns in hiring for women and men. Specifically, high-achieving men are called back significantly more often than high-achieving women, which are penalized when they have a major in mathematics; this result depends on employers’ gendered standards for applicants [e.g., 101 ]. Once appointed, performance ratings are more strongly related to promotions for women than men, and promoted women typically show higher past performance ratings than those of promoted men. This suggesting that women are subject to stricter standards for promotion [e.g., 160 ].

Behavioral aspects related to gender follow two main streams of literature. The first examines female personality and behavior in the workplace, and their alignment with cultural expectations or stereotypes [e.g., 188 ] as well as their impacts on equality. There is a common bias that depicts women as less agentic than males. Certain characteristics, such as those more congruent with male behaviors–e.g., self-promotion [e.g., 189 ], negotiation skills [e.g., 190 ] and general agentic behavior [e.g., 191 ]–, are less accepted in women. However, characteristics such as individualism in women have been found to promote greater gender equality in society [ 192 ]. In addition, behaviors such as display of emotions [e.g., 193 ], which are stereotypically female, work against women’s acceptance in the workplace, requiring women to carefully moderate their behavior to avoid exclusion. A counter-intuitive result is that women and minorities, which are more marginalized in the workplace, tend to be better problem-solvers in innovation competitions due to their different knowledge bases [ 194 ].

The other side of the coin is examined in a parallel literature stream on behavior towards women in the workplace. As a result of biases, prejudices and stereotypes, women may experience adverse behavior from their colleagues, such as incivility and harassment, which undermine their well-being [e.g., 195 , 196 ]. Biases that go beyond gender, such as for overweight people, are also more strongly applied to women [ 197 ].

Organization.

The role of women and gender bias in organizations has been studied from different perspectives, which mirror those presented in detail in the following sections. Specifically, most research highlighted the stereotypical view of leaders [e.g., 105 ] and the roles played by women within firms, for instance referring to presence in the board of directors [e.g., 18 , 90 , 91 ], appointment as CEOs [e.g., 16 ], or top executives [e.g., 93 ].

Scholars have investigated antecedents and consequences of the presence of women in these apical roles. On the one side they looked at hiring and career progression [e.g., 83 , 92 , 160 , 168 , 198 ], finding women typically disadvantaged with respect to their male counterparts. On the other side, they studied women’s leadership styles and influence on the firm’s decision-making [e.g., 152 , 154 , 155 , 199 ], with implications for performance [e.g., 18 , 19 , 96 ].

Human capital.

Human capital is a transverse topic that touches upon many different aspects of female gender equality. As such, it has the most associations with other topics, starting with education as mentioned above, with career-related topics such as role , decision-making , hiring , career progression , performance , compensation , leadership and organization . Another topic with which there is a close connection is behavior . In general, human capital is approached both from the education standpoint but also from the perspective of social capital.

The behavioral aspect in human capital comprises research related to gender differences for example in cultural and religious beliefs that influence women’s attitudes and perceptions towards STEM subjects [ 142 , 200 – 202 ], towards employment [ 203 ] or towards environmental issues [ 150 , 204 ]. These cultural differences also emerge in the context of globalization which may accelerate gender equality in the workforce [ 205 , 206 ]. Gender differences also appear in behaviors such as motivation [ 207 ], and in negotiation [ 190 ], and have repercussions on women’s decision-making related to their careers. The so-called gender equality paradox sees women in countries with lower gender equality more likely to pursue studies and careers in STEM fields, whereas the gap in STEM enrollment widens as countries achieve greater equality in society [ 171 ].

Career progression is modeled by literature as a choice-process where personal preferences, culture and decision-making affect the chosen path and the outcomes. Some literature highlights how women tend to self-select into different professions than men, often due to stereotypes rather than actual ability to perform in these professions [ 142 , 144 ]. These stereotypes also affect the perceptions of female performance or the amount of human capital required to equal male performance [ 110 , 193 , 208 ], particularly for mothers [ 81 ]. It is therefore often assumed that women are better suited to less visible and less leadership -oriented roles [ 209 ]. Women also express differing preferences towards work-family balance, which affect whether and how they pursue human capital gains [ 210 ], and ultimately their career progression and salary .

On the other hand, men are often unaware of gendered processes and behaviors that they carry forward in their interactions and decision-making [ 211 , 212 ]. Therefore, initiatives aimed at increasing managers’ human capital –by raising awareness of gender disparities in their organizations and engaging them in diversity promotion–are essential steps to counter gender bias and segregation [ 213 ].

Emerging topics: Leadership and entrepreneurship

Among the emerging topics, the most pervasive one is women reaching leadership positions in the workforce and in society. This is still a rare occurrence for two main types of factors, on the one hand, bias and discrimination make it harder for women to access leadership positions [e.g., 214 – 216 ], on the other hand, the competitive nature and high pressure associated with leadership positions, coupled with the lack of women currently represented, reduce women’s desire to achieve them [e.g., 209 , 217 ]. Women are more effective leaders when they have access to education, resources and a diverse environment with representation [e.g., 218 , 219 ].

One sector where there is potential for women to carve out a leadership role is entrepreneurship . Although at the start of the millennium the discourse on entrepreneurship was found to be “discriminatory, gender-biased, ethnocentrically determined and ideologically controlled” [ 220 ], an increasing body of literature is studying how to stimulate female entrepreneurship as an alternative pathway to wealth, leadership and empowerment [e.g., 221 ]. Many barriers exist for women to access entrepreneurship, including the institutional and legal environment, social and cultural factors, access to knowledge and resources, and individual behavior [e.g., 222 , 223 ]. Education has been found to raise women’s entrepreneurial intentions [e.g., 224 ], although this effect is smaller than for men [e.g., 109 ]. In addition, increasing self-efficacy and risk-taking behavior constitute important success factors [e.g., 225 ].

Finally, the topic of sustainability is worth mentioning, as it is the primary objective of the SDGs and is closely associated with societal well-being. As society grapples with the effects of climate change and increasing depletion of natural resources, a narrative has emerged on women and their greater link to the environment [ 226 ]. Studies in developed countries have found some support for women leaders’ attention to sustainability issues in firms [e.g., 227 – 229 ], and smaller resource consumption by women [ 230 ]. At the same time, women will likely be more affected by the consequences of climate change [e.g., 230 ] but often lack the decision-making power to influence local decision-making on resource management and environmental policies [e.g., 231 ].

Research gaps and conclusions

Research on gender equality has advanced rapidly in the past decades, with a steady increase in publications, both in mainstream topics related to women in education and the workforce, and in emerging topics. Through a novel approach combining methods of text mining and social network analysis, we examined a comprehensive body of literature comprising 15,465 papers published between 2000 and mid 2021 on topics related to gender equality. We identified a set of 27 topics addressed by the literature and examined their connections.

At the highest level of abstraction, it is worth noting that papers abound on the identification of issues related to gender inequalities and imbalances in the workforce and in society. Literature has thoroughly examined the (unconscious) biases, barriers, stereotypes, and discriminatory behaviors that women are facing as a result of their gender. Instead, there are much fewer papers that discuss or demonstrate effective solutions to overcome gender bias [e.g., 121 , 143 , 145 , 163 , 194 , 213 , 232 ]. This is partly due to the relative ease in studying the status quo, as opposed to studying changes in the status quo. However, we observed a shift in the more recent years towards solution seeking in this domain, which we strongly encourage future researchers to focus on. In the future, we may focus on collecting and mapping pro-active contributions to gender studies, using additional Natural Language Processing techniques, able to measure the sentiment of scientific papers [ 43 ].

All of the mainstream topics identified in our literature review are closely related, and there is a wealth of insights looking at the intersection between issues such as education and career progression or human capital and role . However, emerging topics are worthy of being furtherly explored. It would be interesting to see more work on the topic of female entrepreneurship , exploring aspects such as education , personality , governance , management and leadership . For instance, how can education support female entrepreneurship? How can self-efficacy and risk-taking behaviors be taught or enhanced? What are the differences in managerial and governance styles of female entrepreneurs? Which personality traits are associated with successful entrepreneurs? Which traits are preferred by venture capitalists and funding bodies?

The emerging topic of sustainability also deserves further attention, as our society struggles with climate change and its consequences. It would be interesting to see more research on the intersection between sustainability and entrepreneurship , looking at how female entrepreneurs are tackling sustainability issues, examining both their business models and their company governance . In addition, scholars are suggested to dig deeper into the relationship between family values and behaviors.

Moreover, it would be relevant to understand how women’s networks (social capital), or the composition and structure of social networks involving both women and men, enable them to increase their remuneration and reach top corporate positions, participate in key decision-making bodies, and have a voice in communities. Furthermore, the achievement of gender equality might significantly change firm networks and ecosystems, with important implications for their performance and survival.

Similarly, research at the nexus of (corporate) governance , career progression , compensation and female empowerment could yield useful insights–for example discussing how enterprises, institutions and countries are managed and the impact for women and other minorities. Are there specific governance structures that favor diversity and inclusion?

Lastly, we foresee an emerging stream of research pertaining how the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic challenged women, especially in the workforce, by making gender biases more evident.

For our analysis, we considered a set of 15,465 articles downloaded from the Scopus database (which is the largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature). As we were interested in reviewing business and economics related gender studies, we only considered those papers published in journals listed in the Academic Journal Guide (AJG) 2018 ranking of the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS). All the journals listed in this ranking are also indexed by Scopus. Therefore, looking at a single database (i.e., Scopus) should not be considered a limitation of our study. However, future research could consider different databases and inclusion criteria.

With our literature review, we offer researchers a comprehensive map of major gender-related research trends over the past twenty-two years. This can serve as a lens to look to the future, contributing to the achievement of SDG5. Researchers may use our study as a starting point to identify key themes addressed in the literature. In addition, our methodological approach–based on the use of the Semantic Brand Score and its webapp–could support scholars interested in reviewing other areas of research.

Supporting information

S1 text. keywords used for paper selection..

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256474.s001

Acknowledgments

The computing resources and the related technical support used for this work have been provided by CRESCO/ENEAGRID High Performance Computing infrastructure and its staff. CRESCO/ENEAGRID High Performance Computing infrastructure is funded by ENEA, the Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development and by Italian and European research programmes (see http://www.cresco.enea.it/english for information).

• View Article
• PubMed/NCBI
• Google Scholar
• 9. UN. Transforming our world: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. General Assembley 70 Session; 2015.
• 11. Nature. Get the Sustainable Development Goals back on track. Nature. 2020;577(January 2):7–8
• 37. Fronzetti Colladon A, Grippa F. Brand intelligence analytics. In: Przegalinska A, Grippa F, Gloor PA, editors. Digital Transformation of Collaboration. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature Switzerland; 2020. p. 125–41. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233276 pmid:32442196
• 39. Griffiths TL, Steyvers M, editors. Finding scientific topics. National academy of Sciences; 2004.
• 40. Mimno D, Wallach H, Talley E, Leenders M, McCallum A, editors. Optimizing semantic coherence in topic models. 2011 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing; 2011.
• 41. Wang C, Blei DM, editors. Collaborative topic modeling for recommending scientific articles. 17th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining 2011.
• 46. Straka M, Straková J, editors. Tokenizing, pos tagging, lemmatizing and parsing ud 2.0 with udpipe. CoNLL 2017 Shared Task: Multilingual Parsing from Raw Text to Universal Dependencies; 2017.
• 49. Lu Y, Li, R., Wen K, Lu Z, editors. Automatic keyword extraction for scientific literatures using references. 2014 IEEE International Conference on Innovative Design and Manufacturing (ICIDM); 2014.
• 55. Roelleke T, Wang J, editors. TF-IDF uncovered. 31st Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval—SIGIR ‘08; 2008.
• 56. Mihalcea R, Tarau P, editors. TextRank: Bringing order into text. 2004 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing; 2004.
• 58. Iannone F, Ambrosino F, Bracco G, De Rosa M, Funel A, Guarnieri G, et al., editors. CRESCO ENEA HPC clusters: A working example of a multifabric GPFS Spectrum Scale layout. 2019 International Conference on High Performance Computing & Simulation (HPCS); 2019.
• 60. Wasserman S, Faust K. Social network analysis: Methods and applications: Cambridge University Press; 1994.
• 141. Williams JE, Best DL. Measuring sex stereotypes: A multination study, Rev: Sage Publications, Inc; 1990.
• 172. Steele CM, Aronson J. Stereotype threat and the test performance of academically successful African Americans. In: Jencks C, Phillips M, editors. The Black–White test score gap. Washington, DC: Brookings; 1998. p. 401–27

Articles on Gender equality at work

Displaying 1 - 20 of 31 articles.

Companies vying for government contracts could soon have to meet gender targets. Will we finally see real progress?

Leonora Risse , University of Canberra

Women still face gender inequalities at work  post-pandemic

Claudine Mangen , Concordia University

How gender inequality is hindering Japan’s economic growth

Sarah Parsons , SOAS, University of London

How men can become role models for gender inclusivity in the workplace

Elisabeth Kelan , University of Essex

The pandemic deepened gender inequality in dual-career households

Tina Sharifi , York University, Canada and Ayesha Tabassum , York University, Canada

The UK government may have rejected menopause protections – but workplaces are more supportive than ever

Jo Brewis , The Open University

Gender diversity on corporate boards can improve organizational performance

Hanen Khemakhem , Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM) ; Manel Maalej , Université de Sfax , and Richard Fontaine , Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM)

Women are struggling to regain lost ground in the workforce after  COVID-19

Gender inequality is still rampant in the maritime longshore profession

Meena Andiappan , University of Toronto and Lucas Dufour , Toronto Metropolitan University

Why are there fewer young women in entrepreneurship than young men?

Julie Tixier , Université Gustave Eiffel ; Katia Richomme-Huet , Kedge Business School ; Mathieu Dunes , Université de Picardie Jules Verne (UPJV) ; Najoua Boufaden , ISG International Business School ; Nathalie Lameta , IAE Corse ; Paola Duperray , Université catholique de l’Ouest ; Renaud Redien-Collot , ISC Paris Business School , and Typhaine Lebègue

Why women need male allies in the workplace – and why fighting everyday sexism enriches men too

Meg Warren , Western Washington University

Research: gender pay gap exists in Indonesia, especially for women under 30

Erwin Bramana Karnadi , Universitas Katolik Indonesia Atma Jaya

Pensions ruling against women fails to recognise the reality of their economic disadvantage

Kathleen Riach , University of Glasgow

Hollywood’s million dollar gender pay gap – revealed

Sofia Izquierdo Sanchez , University of Huddersfield

Why we still struggle with work-home conflict in women and men

Kate O'Brien , The University of Queensland

The culture of silence that allows sexual harassment in the workplace to continue

Dulini Fernando , Warwick Business School, University of Warwick

Four big lessons from the UK’s new gender pay gap reporting rules

Jana Javornik , University of Leeds

Banning zero hours contracts would help reduce the gender pay gap

Ernestine Gheyoh Ndzi , University of Hertfordshire

Email culture to blame for workplace failure on #MeToo

Hannah Piterman , Deakin University

Closing the gender pay gap: should men take a pay cut?

Scott Taylor , University of Birmingham

Related Topics

• Gender equality
• Gender inequality
• Gender pay gap
• United Kingdom (UK)

Top contributors

RBC Professor in Responsible Organizations and Full Professor, Concordia University

Associate Professor of Organisation and HRM, Warwick Business School, University of Warwick

Adjunct Associate Professor, Monash University

Adjunct Professor, Macquarie University

Director, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre, and Bankwest Research Chair in Economic Policy, Curtin University

Professor in Management,, University of Glasgow

Professor of Planetary and Space Sciences, The Open University

ARC Future Fellow & Professor of Economics, Curtin University

Associate Professor, Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre, Curtin University

Associate Professor Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds

Lecturer, The University of Melbourne

Interim Pro Dean, Associate Dean of Research & Professor in Management, Macquarie Graduate School of Management

Professor, Australian National University

Professor of Work and Organisation, University of Nottingham

Professor of Law, The University of Melbourne

• X (Twitter)
• Unfollow topic Follow topic

Advertisement

Flexible Working, Work–Life Balance, and Gender Equality: Introduction

• Open access
• Published: 26 November 2018
• Volume 151 , pages 365–381, ( 2020 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Heejung Chung   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6422-6119 1 &
• Tanja van der Lippe 2  

154k Accesses

216 Citations

184 Altmetric

32 Mentions

Explore all metrics

This special brings together innovative and multidisciplinary research (sociology, economics, and social work) using data from across Europe and the US to examine the potential flexible working has on the gender division of labour and workers’ work–life balance. Despite numerous studies on the gendered outcomes of flexible working, it is limited in that the majority is based on qualitative studies based in the US. The papers of this special issue overcome some of the limitations by examining the importance of context, namely, family, organisational and country context, examining the intersection between gender and class, and finally examining the outcomes for different types of flexible working arrangements. The introduction to this special issue provides a review of the existing literature on the gendered outcomes of flexible working on work life balance and other work and family outcomes, before presenting the key findings of the articles of this special issue. The results of the studies show that gender matters in understanding the outcomes of flexible working, but also it matters differently in different contexts. The introduction further provides policy implications drawn from the conclusions of the studies and some thoughts for future studies to consider.

Similar content being viewed by others

Work-Life Balance and Gender: Challenging Assumptions and Unravelling Complexity

Work-Life Balance Challenges and Family-Friendly Policies: Evidence from Qatar

Work–Family Conflict and Well-Being Across Europe: The Role of Gender Context

Emma Hagqvist, Katja Gillander Gådin & Mikael Nordenmark

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Flexible working, that is worker’s control over when and where they work, has increased substantially over the years across most industrialised countries. Furthermore there is increasing demand for more flexibility in the workplace especially from the younger generation. Recent reports note that the majority of millennials would like the opportunity to work from home and/or have flexitime (Finn and Donovan 2013 ; Deloitte 2018 ). It is highly likely that in the future, flexible working will become the norm rather than the exception in many jobs. The question this special issue aims to examine concerns the gender discrepancies in the outcomes of flexible working for the division of labour and workers’ work–life balance. Flexible working can be used as a positive capability spanning resource useful for workers, especially women, to adapt their work to family demands (Singley and Hynes 2005 ). Previous studies have shown that flexible working allows mothers to maintain their working hours after childbirth (Chung and Van der Horst 2018b ), and to remain in human-capital-intensive jobs in times of high family demand (Fuller and Hirsh 2018 ). This ability may increase women’s satisfaction with work–life balance by allowing women to maintain both. In this sense, flexible working can be a useful tool to further enhance gender equality in our societies. However, due to our society’s pre-existing views on gender roles and the gender normative views we have towards men and women’s roles and responsibilities, flexible working can potentially traditionalise gender roles in the labour market and the household (Lott and Chung 2016 ; Sullivan and Lewis 2001 ). Men use and are expected to use flexible working for performance enhancing purposes, increase their work intensity/working hours, and are rewarded more through income premiums (Lott and Chung 2016 ), which can increase their work–family conflict through the expansion of work. Women (are expected to) increase their responsibility within the family when working flexibly (Hilbrecht et al. 2008 ), which can also potentially increase their work–family conflict, but unlike men not rewarded due to the different expectations.

Although some studies already examine such gendered nature of flexible working, most are based on qualitative case studies predominately based on professional workers in the US (for example, Cech and Blair-Loy 2014 ). Thus we need more evidence based on large scale data, on a more representative sample from a wide range of countries and from different contexts. Country contexts matter in determining who gets access to flexible working arrangements (Chung 2017 , 2018a ) and in shaping the nature of flexible working (Lott 2015 ). National contexts can thus be expected to shape how flexible working relates to gender equality and workers’ work–life balance. Similarly, organisational contexts matter in shaping flexible working, yet is often ignored. We also need more empirical evidence encompassing larger groups of workers beyond professionals. By looking at large scale data we are able to examine how gender, class, and household structures intersect when we talk about varying outcomes of flexible working. Finally, we need to be more critical about the definitions of flexible working. Many studies conflate different types of flexible working as one, which may deter our understanding of exactly why flexible working may or may not be a useful tool in eliminating gender inequalities in the labour market.

This special issue aims to overcome these limits by bringing together innovative and multidisciplinary research (from sociology, economics, and social work) using data from across Europe and the US to address the issue of the potential flexible working has on the gender division of labour and workers’ work–life balance.

In the next section, we provide a brief overview of the existing literature to come to some of their limitations, especially in light of providing a comprehensive outlook on what flexible working can mean for gender equality. Next, we introduce the articles in the special issue and how they overcome many of the limitations mentioned previously. The introduction of this special issue finishes with a discussion, policy implications on what we can learn from these studies to ensure a better use of flexible working arrangements, and finally some notes on what is still left for us to uncover to enhance our understanding of flexible working on worker’s work-life balance and gender equality.

2 Summary of Existing Literature and Their Limitations

2.1 what is flexible working and the prevalence of flexible working in europe.

Flexible working can entail employee’s control over when or where they work (Kelly et al. 2011 ; Glass and Estes 1997 ). More specifically, flexitime is having control over the timing of one’s work. This can entail worker’s ability to change the timing of their work (that is, to alternate the starting and ending times), and/or to change the numbers of hours worked per day or week—which can then be banked to take days off in certain circumstances. Working time autonomy, which is used in two of the papers of this special issue, is when workers have larger freedom to control their work schedule and their working hours. The biggest difference between flexitime and working time autonomy is that some constraints still remain in flexitime, in terms of adhering to core hours (e.g., 10 to 4 pm), and/or the number of hours workers can work in a day or a week (e.g. 37 h per week), unlike working time autonomy where such restrictions in many cases do not exist. Flexiplace, i.e., tele- or homework, allows workers to work outside of their normal work premises, e.g., working from home. In addition to this, flexible working can also entail workers having control over the number of hours they work, mainly referring to the reduction of hours of work (temporarily) to meet family demands. This includes part-time working, term-time only working, job sharing and temporary reduction of hours. The majority of the papers in this special issue will focus on flexitime and flexiplace, although some compare the outcomes of flexitime and flexiplace for full- and part-time workers.

Figures  1 and 2 provide us with the data on the extent to which flexible working is being used in Europe in 2015 based on the most recent European Working Conditions Survey. Schedule control includes workers who can adapt their working hours within certain limits (flexitime) and those with working time autonomy—i.e., where your working hours are entirely determined by yourself. Those who work from home are defined here as those who have worked in their home several times a month in the past 12 months. As we can see, about a quarter of workers had access to flexible schedules across 30 European countries and about 12% did paid work from home several times a month in the past year. There are large variations in both, where the Northern European countries are those where both schedule control and working from home are prevalent, while this is not the case in Southern and Eastern European countries. We can also see some gender differences in access/use of flexible working. At the European average the gap between men and women is not as noticeable for both schedule control and home working, although on average, men have slightly more access to schedule control while women are more likely to have worked from home. A number of countries where workers generally have more access to schedule control, it was men who were especially more likely to have access—namely, Norway, Finland, Austria, and Switzerland. However, the gender gap favourable towards men were also observed in countries with low access in general, such as Portugal, Slovakia, and Lithuania. There were only few countries where women had better access to schedule control, the Netherlands, Malta, and Hungary being some of them. For home working, with the exception of countries such as Norway, Ireland and Czech Republic, women were more likely to have worked from home regularly, or there were no discernible gender gap.

Proportion of dependent employed with schedule control across 30 European countries in 2015 ( Source : EWCS 2015). Note : weighted averages/sorted by women’s %

Proportion of dependent employed who work from home at least several times a month in the past 12 months across 30 European countries in 2015 ( Source : EWCS 2015). Note : weighted averages/sorted by women’s %

2.2 Flexible Working and Work–Family Conflict and Gender

The relation between flexible working and work–family conflict is not as self-evident as one may expect. Of course there are several theoretical arguments to relate flexible working to less work–family conflict, and therewith higher well-being since conflict and well-being are clearly related (Back-Wiklund et al. 2011 ). Schedule control, that is workers’ control over when they work, provides workers with the flexibility but also control over the time boundaries between work and family spheres, enabling them to shift the time borders between work and family/care time, allowing for less conflict between the two (Clark 2000 ). Especially given the fact that normal fixed working hours (e.g., 9 a.m. till 5 p.m.) and family schedules/demands (e.g., school pick up times at 3 p.m.) are not necessarily compatible, control over the borders of work and home may help workers resolve some of the conflict arising from this incompatibility. Working from home allows workers to address family demands by providing a possibility to integrate the work and family domains, allowing parents to potentially combine childcare with paid work at the same time, e.g., taking care of a sick child whilst working from home. In addition, employees with long commutes are argued to have more time for childcare and/or work when they do not need to travel when they can work from home (Peters et al. 2004 ).

However, there is not a consistent empirical relation between flexible working and work–family conflict, and even less when gender is taken into account. Many studies show that working from home actually leads to more work–family conflict (Golden et al. 2006 ; Duxbury et al. 1994 ; Allen et al. 2013 ). Control over when to work in addition to working from home is also only partly related to less work–family conflict (Michel et al. 2011 ).

Still, there are studies that provide evidence that flexible working relieves work-to-family conflict (e.g., Allen et al. 2013 ; Kelly et al. 2014 ; Michel et al. 2011 ) especially during the transition into parenthood (Erickson et al. 2010 ). Ten Brummelhuis and Van der Lippe ( 2010 ) reported that employees’ family situation matters, and that working from home and flexible work schedules were only effective in relieving work–family conflict for singles and not for employees with a partner and/or children. Demerouti et al. ( 2014 ) argue in their overview study on the impact of new ways of working, including working from home and flexible schedules, that these mixed findings for work–family balance and conflict are not surprising. Due to the fact that the permeability of boundaries between work and nonwork domains increases when workers work flexibly, as physical boundaries between the two environments are eliminated. Instead of facilitating balance, flexible working can thus also lead to increased multitasking and boundary blurring (Schieman and Young 2010 ; Glavin and Schieman 2012 ).

The relationship between flexible working and work–family conflict have different outcomes for men and women, as women are often still more responsible for housework and childcare and spend more time on these chores (Van der Lippe et al. 2018 ; and also see the next section). The effect of work role ambiguity on work–family conflict is also different for men and women (Michel et al. 2011 ). Moreover, different arrangements may have different outcomes for men and women. Peters et al. ( 2009 ) showed that female workers gained better work life balance from more control over their work schedule leading to a better work–family balance. However, home-based teleworking|women did not experience a better work–life balance than employees not working from home. Nevertheless, there are only a few studies where, in a systematic and rigorous way, the differences between men and women are studied, and most results rely on qualitative studies (Emslie and Hunt 2009 ). Most studies are also constrained by the gender neutral assumption of work–life balance (see for an excellent overview, Lewis et al. 2007 ). The next section explores further why this is the case.

2.3 Flexible Working and the Expansion of Work and Domestic Spheres and Gender

One of the reasons why flexible working may not reduce work–family conflict of workers is because it is likely to lead to an expansion of work and/or increase the domestic burden upon workers.

Unlike what many studies that look at flexible working as a family-friendly arrangement would assume, flexible working have been shown to result in the expansion of the work sphere rather than the contraction of it, resulting in paid work encroaching on family life (Glass and Noonan 2016 ; Lott and Chung 2016 ; Kelliher and Anderson 2010 ; Schieman and Young 2010 ). Several theories can explain why such expansion occur (see for more detailed theories, Kelliher and Anderson 2010 ; Chung and Van der Horst 2018a ; Lott 2018 ) but this can be summarised into gift exchange—workers feeling a need to reciprocate for the gift of flexibility back to employers; enabled intensification—blurring of boundaries allowing workers to work harder/longer than they otherwise would have; or enforced intensification where employers may increase workload alongside providing workers more flexibility over their work.

Clark ( 2000 ) argues that the flexibility between the borders of the work and home domain will result in different outcomes, for example, expansion of one sphere and the contraction of others, depending on the strength of the border, the domain the individual identifies with most, and the priority each domain takes in one’s life. In other words, for those who prioritise paid work above home and other aspects of their life, the flexibility in the border is more likely to result in the expansion of paid work, while for those whose priorities lie in the home spheres, flexibility may result in the expansion of domestic activities, such as housework and care giving. One important point to raise here, is that it isn’t necessarily an individual’s choice to prioritise paid work or home spheres, and external demands and social norms shape one’s capacities to do so.

The ability to prioritise work and adhere to the ideal worker culture, that is a worker that has no other obligation outside of work and privileges work above everything else, is gendered (Acker 1990 ; Williams 1999 ; Blair-Loy 2009 ). Although there have been some developments, men still do and are expect to take on the breadwinning role especially after childbirth (Miani and Hoorens 2014 ; Knight and Brinton 2017 ; Scott and Clery 2013 ) and women are thus left to and are expected to take the bulk of caregiving for both children and ill relatives as well as housework (Hochschild and Machung 2003 ; Bianchi et al. 2012 ; Hook 2006 ; Dotti Sani and Treas 2016 ). Such gendered divisions of labour and social normative views about women and men, and more specifically mothers’ and fathers’ roles shape how flexible working is performed and viewed by society, including employers but also colleagues, friends, families etc., and consequently on the outcomes of flexible working.

It is true that previous studies that examined the gender discrepancies in the expansion of working hours, more specifically overtime hours, due to flexible working find that men are more likely to expand their working hours than women (Glass and Noonan 2016 ; Lott and Chung 2016 ).

On the other hand, flexible working is likely to be used by women for caregiving purposes (Singley and Hynes 2005 ) and those who do work flexibly are likely to expand their care/housework (Sullivan and Lewis 2001 ; Hilbrecht et al. 2013 ). Clawson and Gerstel ( 2014 ) argue that, flexible working allows workers—especially middle class workers, to ‘do gender’ (West and Zimmerman 1987 ) in that they are able to fulfil the social normative roles prescribed within societies. This then feeds into what people believe flexible working will result in for men and women. For example, qualitative studies have shown that when women take up flexible working arrangement, for example working from home, those around them expect women to carry out domestic work simultaneously whilst working (Sullivan and Lewis 2001 ; Hilbrecht et al. 2013 ; Shaw et al. 2003 ). This consequently shapes how people provide and reward/stigmatise flexible working of men and women. Lott and Chung ( 2016 ) using longitudinal data from Germany show how even when women work longer overtime when taking up flexible schedules, they are still less likely compared to men to gain any financial premiums. Furthermore, mothers seem to be exchanging the opportunity to work flexibly with longer overtime, i.e. not even gaining an ‘overtime premium’ for the additional hours worked. Similarly, several recent experimental studies based in the US have shown that women, especially mothers, are less likely to gain access to flexible working arrangements, even when not used for care purposes, and more likely to be stigmatised for its use compared to men (Brescoll et al. 2013 ; Munsch 2016 ). For fathers, on the other hand, there seems to be a “progressive badge of merit” (Gerstel and Clawson 2018 ) where they are generally looked favourably upon for using flexible working arrangements for care purposes. Again this is largely down to the expectations people hold regarding how men and women will use their flexibility. In other words, in countries where traditional gender norms are prevalent, even when fathers take up flexible working for care purposes, there is a general expectation that the fathers will still maintain their work devotion/protect their work spheres and prioritise it over family time/care roles. On the other hand, for mothers, people expect them to use their control over their work for care purposes, even when it is explicitly requested for other more performance enhancing purposes. This can explain why flexible working arrangements that provide workers more control over their work are less likely to be provided in female dominated workplaces (Chung 2018a , c ).

Such preconceived notions of where worker’s priority lies and how they will use the increased control over their work will naturally shape the consequences of flexible working for one’s career. Leslie et al. ( 2012 ) show how flexible working for performance enhancing purposes is likely to be rewarded, while that for family-friendly purposes will not. Williams et al. ( 2013 ) provide evidence on how flexible working for family purposes can actually lead to negative career consequences, again largely due to the fact that  flexible working for family purposes makes workers deviate away from the ideal worker image. In this sense, flexible working can potentially increase gender inequalities in the labour market, due to the preconceived notion people will make about women’s flexible working. However, this is not always the case. Several studies have shown that flexible working may allow women to work longer hours than they would have otherwise after childbirth (Chung and Van der Horst 2018b ) and stay in relatively stressful yet high paying occupations (Fuller and Hirsh 2018 ) and workplaces with flexible working arrangements are those where the gender wage gap is smaller (Van der Lippe et al. 2018 ). Thus the picture is rather complex in terms of what flexible working can mean for gender equality.

3 About the Special Issue: Addressing the Gaps in the Literature

Despite the large number of studies that deal with flexible working and the nuanced gendered ways in which it may mean different things for men and women, there are some limitations which the papers of this special issue will try to overcome.

One of the biggest limitations of previous studies on this topic is that they are mostly based on qualitative data—mostly interviews and observations. In addition, many of the studies also focus on professionals. Although there have been some studies using quantitative time use data (Craig and Powell 2011 , 2012 ; Wight et al. 2008 ) most have been using data from Anglo-Saxon countries, namely US, UK and Australia. Given that work cultures as well as gender norms are expected to heavily shape the way in which people perceive how workers will use flexibility in their work, and how workers perform flexibility, we need more evidence from a broader range of countries to be able to understand how flexible working can lead to different outcomes for men and women.

3.1 Role of Contexts

Investigating the role of contexts is the core of the contribution from Kurowska ( 2018 ). Here the main aim is to examine the gender differences in how working from home deters or enhances one’s work life balance comparing dual earner couples in Sweden and Poland, two very different countries in terms of their gender relations and family policy support. Sweden is well known to be a country with gender egalitarian norms, generous family policies including ear-marked paternity leaves that promote fathers’ involvement in childcare. Poland is known as a typical conservative/traditional care regime, where mothers (are expected to) take on the bulk of care roles of children. Another unique contribution of this paper is its use of the theoretical concept, ‘total burden of responsibilities’ to capture the engagement in both unpaid domestic work responsibilities in addition to one’s time spent on paid work, to provide the capability of an individual to balance work with leisure. She finds that men in both countries have higher capabilities to balance work with leisure than women, but the difference between genders is smaller in Sweden than in Poland. She further finds that working from home is related to lower capability to balance work with leisure for mothers in both countries, while this is not the case for fathers in Poland. The results of this study show how gender norms of the country, and the respective expectations towards mothers and fathers shape the extent to which flexible working can lead to increasing or decreasing the gender gap in domestic work.

The importance of context does not only lie at the country level. One main area most studies fail to incorporate is the extent to which organisational level contexts matter in shaping how flexible working relate to different work–family outcomes for men and women. Van der Lippe and Lippényi’s ( 2018 ) paper aims to tackle this issue in more depth. Their main contribution is to examine how organisational culture and context can play a role in the way working from home may reduce or exacerbate one’s work-to-family conflict for men and women. Here organisational contexts include supportive and family-friendly organisational culture as well as the normalisation of flexible working, as indicated by the number of colleagues working from home. These organisational contexts are expected to moderate the relation between working from home and work–family conflict. Using the unique dataset European Sustainable Workforce Survey, they are able to compare workers from across 883 teams, in 259 organisations, across nine countries (Bulgaria, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, UK). Results show that working from home leads to more work–family conflict, especially when workers perceive an ideal worker culture at their workplace and less so when there are more colleagues working from home. The influence of culture seems to be more important for women than men, for whom work culture matters less.

These studies shine an important light on how the importance of the context in which flexible working is used matters in determining not only its outcome but also the gender discrepancy in the outcomes.

3.2 Defining Flexible Working, Discrepancies Between Arrangements

Another limitation of previous research is the way flexible working is operationalised. Many studies do not distinguish between different types of flexible working, in the extent to which control is given, and for which purpose.

Lott ( 2018 ) aims to tackle this issue by distinguishing between the different types of flexible schedules to see how they relate to work-to-home spill-over for men and women. Using the German Socio-Economic Panel Study in 2011 and 2012, she distinguishes between three different types of working time arrangements. Namely, she distinguishes between flexitime—i.e., a certain degree of self-determination of daily working hours within a working time account, and working-time autonomy—no formally fixed working hours and where workers choose their own working hours, and for the lack of control, fixed schedules against employer-oriented flexible schedules—namely, working hours fixed by employer, which may vary from day to day. She finds that employees experience the most work-to-home spillover with working-time autonomy and employer-oriented schedules, and the least with flexitime and fixed schedules. However, she also finds gender differences. Working-time autonomy’s association with higher cognitive work-to-home spillover only holds for men, and mainly due to the increased overtime hours men work when having working-time autonomy. Another unique contribution of this paper is the inclusion of employer-oriented flexible schedule—i.e. how unpredictability and unreliable schedules influence work–life balance. Here she finds that such unpredictability and unreliability is especially problematic for women; only women seem to suffer from higher spillover with employer-oriented schedules. This relationship holds above and beyond job pressure and overtime hours. Lott argues that the main cause for this is due to women’s position as the main person responsible for the day to day management of the household, for which such unpredictability of working hours can be extremely problematic. For similar reasons women seem to suffer less with flexitime—in that they have more control over their schedules.

Chung and Van der Horst’s ( 2018a ) study also aims to distinguish between different types of flexible working arrangements—namely schedule control, flexitime, and teleworking. One of the main contribution of their study is to distinguish between workers’ control over their working hours, but for different purposes—namely those primarily used for family-friendly goals (flexitime), against those provided mostly for performance enhancing goals (here for convenience referred to as “schedule control”). They examine how these different types of workers’ control over their work are associated with an increase in unpaid overtime hours of workers for men and women in the UK using the Understanding Society data from 2010 to 2015 and fixed effects panel regression models. Results show that flexitime and teleworking do not increase unpaid overtime hours significantly. On the other hand, the more performance enhancing schedule control increases unpaid overtime hours, but with variations across different populations. Unsurprisingly, mothers, especially those working full-time, appear to be less able to increase their unpaid overtime as much as other groups of the population. This can be mostly explained through the fact that many mothers working full time would not have any more time to give to their companies, unlike many men, including fathers, and women without children. On the other hand, part-time working mothers increased their unpaid overtime hours significantly when using schedule control. This discrepancy in the ability to work longer hours can potentially increase gender inequality in the labour market due to overtime being seen as one of the most explicit forms of commitment towards the company. Yet in the case of part-time working mothers, it is unlikely that these increased hours will result in additional career premiums as evidenced in another contribution of the special issue (Chung 2018c ).

Chung (2018c) distinguishes between flexitime, working from home, and part-time work when examining workers’ experiences with flexibility stigma, that is the negative perception towards those who work flexibly, using the 4th wave of the Work–Life Balance Survey conducted in 2011 in the UK. She finds that men are more likely to agree with the statement that those who work flexibly generate more work for others, and say that they themselves have experienced negative outcomes due to co-workers working flexibly. On the other hand, women and especially mothers are likely to agree that those who work flexibly have lower chances for promotion and say they experienced negative career consequences due to themselves working flexibly. One reason behind mother’s experience with flexibility stigma is due to the fact that most mothers use some sort of working time reducing arrangement, e.g. part-time work. On the other hand, men and fathers are more likely to use flexitime and teleworking, which are less likely to lead to negative career outcomes. Chung further argues that it might be simplistic to completely attribute the differences found between men and women in the negative career outcomes experienced when working flexibly, only to the types of arrangements they use. In other words, the negative career outcomes experienced by part-time workers may partly have to do with the fact that it is widely used by mothers to balance work with family life (see also, Lewis and Humbert 2010 ). Thus, the stigma towards part-time workers’ commitment towards work and productivity may be better understood as a reflection of the stigma towards mothers’ commitment towards work and their productivity.

Kim ( 2018 ) examines how flexible working policies increase parental involvement with children and also distinguishes between different types of flexible working policies, namely access to flexitime/flexible schedules, ability to work at home, and working part-time. Using the longitudinal data from the US Early Childhood Longitudinal Survey-Birth Cohort (ECLS-B), he finds that working from home was associated with more frequent enrichment parent–child interactions, but only for mothers, echoing what was found in Poland by Kurowska ( 2018 ). Part-time working for mothers was also associated with more frequent enrichment parent–child interactions, and for father’s access to flexitime were associated with greater daily routine interactions. The result of increased routine care of fathers through flexitime is most likely due to tag-team parenting (Craig and Powell 2012 ) where parents use flexible schedules to increase the time both parents spend with children. By enabling men to take up a larger share of routine care of children flexitime of male partners can help women build their careers—which explains why men’s flexitime has been shown to increase women’s career perspectives (Langner 2018 ).

These studies provide us with evidence that we need to look at the intersection between gender and different types of flexible working to better understand how flexible working leads to different outcomes. Furthermore, they enable a better understanding of how different types of flexible working may result in different outcomes for gender equality. Working from home, working time autonomy/schedule control for performance purposes may not necessarily provide much benefit to even out the playing fields for men and women. On the other hand, flexitime—especially with a more defined/clear working hours boundaries, seems to be a better option if we are to ensure flexible working does not lead to further traditionalisation of gender roles.

3.3 Incorporation of Class

Another contribution the papers in this special issue is to examine the intersection between gender and class when examining the outcomes of flexible working. Many of the existing studies on flexible working focus on professionals (e.g., Cech and Blair-Loy 2014 ), which to some extent relate to the access these groups have towards flexible working arrangements and control over their work (Chung 2018a ). However, the intersection between gender and class has been shown to be of great importance in understanding how flexible working enables workers to do or undo gender (Clawson and Gerstel 2014 ; Deutsch 2007 ). The articles in this special issue also try to engage in the analysis of class, to see how there may be distinctions between classes in the way flexible working relate to gendered outcomes.

Kim ( 2018 ) in his analysis of how flexible working may lead to different levels of parent–child interactions, incorporates household structures and income as well as gender. The results indicate that the positive impacts of flexible working vary depending on income levels and for single/dual earner households. For example, the positive association between working from home and parent–child interactions was more pronounced among low-income mothers than mid- and high-income mothers. Part-time working only increased enrichment interactions with children for mothers in two-parent families, perhaps reflecting the limited capacity of single-mothers to expand their time on such activities. Part-time working increases parent–child interactions only for fathers from dual-earner households and not for those from single-earner households. This finding reflects the results found in previous studies regarding gender division of labour within households of female-breadwinner families (Bittman et al. 2003 ).

By examining the lack of schedule control, Lott ( 2018 ) also focussed on the less privileged, mostly non-professional, lower-class workers whose work schedule are more often determined by the employer and changed on a daily basis. She found that work–life spill-over is highest for these workers, especially women. Women of the lower working class have fewer financial resources in order to cope with unpredictable and unreliable work hours, for example to pay for public or private childcare. They alone carry the double burden of balancing paid and unpaid work.

Chung and Van der Horst ( 2018a ) examine the differences between different occupational groups in their analysis of how flexible working leads to increased unpaid overtime hours for men and women, parents and non-parents. They find that the increase in unpaid overtime hours when workers have control over their schedule was largely driven by the professionals in the model, especially for men. In closer inspection, there seems to be a division within professionals in terms of gender when we consider parenthood. Professional men with and without children seem to increase their unpaid overtime hours especially when they have a lot of schedule control, while professional women with children do not. On the other hand, professional women without children increase their overtime hours similar to that of men, yet again it is questionable whether they will benefit from the same career premium from it (Lott and Chung 2016 ).

4 Discussion, and Policy Implications and Future Challenges

The results of the papers in this special issue point to one conclusion; flexible working can be useful in enabling a better work–life balance and family functioning, yet we need to be aware of the potential gendered ways in which it is being/and is expected to be used. In other words gender matters when it comes to understanding the consequences of flexible working. Men and women use flexible working in different ways that leads to different outcomes for wellbeing, work–life balance and work intensification. A recurring finding is that women are more likely to (or expected to) carry out more domestic responsibilities whilst working flexibly, while men are more likely to (or are expected to) prioritise and expand their work spheres. Consequently, it is women who will fear and are more likely to face negative career outcomes due to flexible working as Chung (2018c) shows. However, we need to be careful about understanding such patterns as a matter of choice. As Lott ( 2018 ) has argued, family and domestic responsibilities may be understood more as a constraint under which women need to navigate and negotiate their work spheres.

Furthermore, we must also conclude that gender is a too general distinction to gain insight in the consequences of flexible working on work–life balance outcomes. A common thread found in all articles in this special issue is that gender must be studied in context; in the organisational, country, family, as well as class context. First of all, the culture of the organisation matters, such as the prevalence of flexible working in the organisation as well as supervisory support etc., yet perhaps more for women as Van der Lippe and Lippényi ( 2018 ) show. Second, country contexts matter in that flexible working allows workers to “do gender” in a more traditional gender cultures such as Poland, and where a more gender egalitarian culture exists, such as in Sweden, the gender discrepancies due to flexible working may not be as evident, as Kurowska ( 2018 ) shows. Third, the household structures appears to be important in the outcomes of flexible working. There are differences in single versus dual earners, as well as low- versus higher income families for both men and women as Kim ( 2018 ) shows us. The occupation of the worker also matters, where the gender discrepancies in the negative spill-over effects, namely working long unpaid overtime hours, of schedule control depend on the occupation you look at as Chung and Van der Horst ( 2018a ) show. Overall, the findings in this special issue seem to indicate that especially in contexts where traditional norms on gender roles are prevalent and where ideal worker culture exists, flexible working may promote a more traditionalised division of labour resulting in hindering rather than supporting gender equality. This is likely because in such contexts, flexible working can lead to women being able to (but also having to) expand their household burdens, while men expand their work loads. This may reinforce the (unconscious) biases employers and co-workers have towards flexible working of men and women, and more female oriented and male oriented flexible working arrangements, which can increase the wage gap between the genders as Chung’s (2018c) work indicates.

So what can be done to prevent such increase in traditionalisation through flexible working? At the macro level, there needs to be changes in our gender norms and ideal working culture. In other words, flexible working is not used in a vacuum and as long as our gender normative views about mothers and fathers roles do not change, the way people perceive flexible working will be used by men and women is unlikely to change and will feed into how they will in fact be used. Attention is required, for example via the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) at the European level, but also other national level bodies for promotion of gender equality in Europe and its member states through delivering expertise and knowledge, and enhancing policies to change normative views of gender roles. Policy changes, such as increase in well paid ear-marked paternity leaves, such as the ones found in Sweden, has been shown to increase father’s involvement in childcare and domestic work not only in the period during the leave but many years after (Nepomnyaschy and Waldfogel 2007 ). Thus it can be used as a useful tool to help reduce the gender division in childcare and household tasks, and consequently help shift the gender norms of the country. Consequently such policies can also be useful in ensuring that flexible working is not used as a tool to enforce traditional gender roles. Providing better protective mechanisms for workers to ensure that flexible working and blurring of boundaries do not lead to encroachment of family life would also be important policies to be implemented at the national level. Current labour laws, which is based on a more traditional 9 to 5 job done in the office, may not be sufficient to ensure such protections.

One key finding of our research was that when flexible working becomes more of a norm, rather than the exception, this may help workers use flexible working arrangements for work–life balance purposes. Changing the right to request flexible working legislations to ensure that flexible working is more of a right from day 1 on the job, that flexible working is more of a default rather than an exception would be useful in ensuring that it does not lead to stigma or work–life conflict.

At the mezzo and micro level, we need to make sure both workers and managers are aware of the risks of flexible working. For companies, providing good role models of senior managers, especially male senior managers, taking up flexible working for family-purposes and without work spilling over to other spheres of life will be important to show how best to utilise flexible working. The notion of ‘the healthy organisation’ might be helpful here. Healthy organisations take into account the wellbeing and work family balance of employees, as well as workplace effectiveness (Lewis et al. 2011 ). Building better collective practices of flexible working, where work is not done everywhere and all the time, is crucial. It implies that organisations implement flexible work options under the condition that it is rewarding (in a material and unmaterial way) for employees and such that it commensurate with it success (Lewis et al. 2011 ). Workers themselves should also be reflective of how some of their own expectations in how flexible working should and can be used is shaped by our prevailing gender norms and assumptions on whose job it is to care/do the breadwinning. To question some of the gendered assumption would be important.

One of the challenges is how to take the family situation better into account when implementing work flexibility in such a way that it enhances work–life balance. One of the ways could be to relieve work and household burden, often a double burden for women when they also have a paid job (Hochschild and Machung 2003 ). Arrangements for example regulating working hours and applying flexible time-management models suited to the needs of the employee and his or her family. Other options are a professional network of family support services, including public childcare, elderly care services, different forms of leaves, as well as arrangements to outsource housework (De Ruijter and Van der Lippe 2007 ). Of course a discussion is needed who is responsible for these arrangements and to what extent. Is it the individual employee, the country individuals live in, or the organisation of the employee? Most likely this will be a combination of all three, also partly dependent on the welfare regime of the country, and the sector the organisation of the employee belongs to. Public policies and interventions are for example deeply embedded in Scandinavian culture. They may fit less with the cultures, habits and structures of other European welfare states, but organisations might take the lead more in these welfare states.

There are some issues that this special issue has not been able to address. Firstly, we still know very little about how flexible working relate to informal care capacities. Majority existing studies, including the ones in this special issue, deal with flexible working for childcare purposes. More research is thus needed to see how flexible working is gendered (or not) in increasing workers’ care capacities in times when informal care demands arise, or how it allows workers to combine work with informal care demands. Secondly, longer career consequences of flexible working, especially relating to flexitime and tele/home working, would be useful to investigate, especially in order to understand how flexible working relate to gender wage gaps. Some of the studies here and  other previous studies have shown that flexible working can increase men's working hours/overtime hours and other commitment towards work which may increase their wage premiums, and consequently the gender wage gap between men and women. On the other hand, flexible working also helps women reduce work family conflict and allow them to work longer than they would've otherwise. In this sense, exactly how these two rather conflicting dynamics add up in the longer run would be important to examine. Thirdly, more analysis is needed to fully understand the importance of context in not only shaping the outcomes of flexible working, but also how it shapes the gendered nature of flexible working. Our studies have shown that gender norms and long hours cultures have been shown to be important contexts that shape such outcomes. Examining these and other contextual factors, such as the strength of the legal right to flexible working, its prevelance, and workers’ negotiation power, both at the national and organisational levels will help us find out more about under which context can we expect a better use of flexible working so that it enhances both workers' work life balance and gender equality. We hope that this special issue has provide some useful steps in the right direction to find these answers out, and that it helps pave the way for future scholars to follow. Flexible working is likely to become more common in the future as demands for flexible working increases among both new and older generations of workers for diverse reasons. It provides us with great opportunities to tackle some of societies’ most pressing challenges. However, as this special issue has shown, this will only be the case if it used in the right way. 

Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender & Society, 4 (2), 139–158.

Google Scholar  

Allen, T. D., Johnson, R. C., Kiburz, K. M., & Shockley, K. M. (2013). Work–family conflict and flexible work arrangements: Deconstructing flexibility. Personnel Psychology, 66 (2), 345–376.

Back-Wiklund, M., Van der Lippe, T., Den Dulk, L., & Doorne-Huiskes, A. (2011). Quality of life and work in Europe . London: Springer.

Bianchi, S. M., Sayer, L. C., Milkie, M. A., & Robinson, J. P. (2012). Housework: Who did, does or will do it, and how much does it matter? Social Forces, 91 (1), 55–63.

Bittman, M., England, P., Sayer, L., Folbre, N., & Matheson, G. (2003). When does gender trump money? Bargaining and time in household work. American Journal of Sociology, 109 (1), 186–214.

Blair-Loy, M. (2009). Competing devotions: Career and family among women executives . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Brescoll, V. L., Glass, J., & Sedlovskaya, A. (2013). Ask and Ye shall receive? The dynamics of employer-provided flexible work options and the need for public policy. Journal of Social Issues, 69 (2), 367–388.

Cech, E. A., & Blair-Loy, M. (2014). Consequences of flexibility stigma among academic scientists and engineers. Work and Occupations, 41 (1), 86–110.

Chung, H. (2017). National-level family policies and the access to schedule control in a European comparative perspective: crowding out or in, and for whom? Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis . https://doi.org/10.1080/13876988.2017.1353745 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Chung, H. (2018a). Dualization and the access to occupational family-friendly working-time arrangements across Europe. Social Policy and Administration, 52 (2), 491–507. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12379 .

Chung, H. (2018b). Gender, flexibility stigma, and the perceived negative consequences of flexible working in the UK. Social Indicators Research . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2036-7 .

Chung, H. (2018c). Women’s work penalty’ in the access to flexible working arrangements across Europe. European Journal of Industrial Relations . https://doi.org/10.1177/0959680117752829 .

Chung, H., & Van der Horst, M. (2018a). Flexible working and unpaid overtime in the UK: The role of gender, parental and occupational status. Social Indicators Research . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2028-7 .

Chung, H., & Van der Horst, M. (2018b). Women’s employment patterns after childbirth and the perceived access to and use of flexitime and teleworking. Human Relations, 71 (1), 47–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726717713828 .

Clark, S. C. (2000). Work/family border theory: A new theory of work/family balance. Human Relations, 53 (6), 747–770.

Clawson, D., & Gerstel, N. (2014). Unequal time: Gender, class, and family in employment schedules . New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Craig, L., & Powell, A. (2011). Non-standard work schedules, work–family balance and the gendered division of childcare. Work, Employment & Society, 25 (2), 274–291.

Craig, L., & Powell, A. (2012). Dual-earner parents’ work–family time: The effects of atypical work patterns and non-parental childcare. Journal of Population Research, 29 (3), 229–247.

De Ruijter, E., & Van der Lippe, T. (2007). Effects of job features on domestic outsourcing as a strategy for combining paid and domestic work. Work and Occupations, 34 (2), 205–230.

Deloitte. (2018). Deloitte millennial survey . Accessed October 24, 2018. https://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/about-deloitte/articles/millennialsurvey.html .

Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., & Leiter, M. (2014). Burnout and job performance: The moderating role of selection, optimization, and compensation strategies. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 19 (1), 96.

Deutsch, F. M. (2007). Undoing gender. Gender & Society, 21 (1), 106–127.

Dotti Sani, G. M., & Treas, J. (2016). Educational gradients in parents’ child-care time across countries, 1965–2012. Journal of Marriage and Family, 78 (4), 1083–1096.

Duxbury, L., Higgins, C., & Lee, C. (1994). Work–family conflict. Journal of Family Issues, 15 (3), 449–466.

Emslie, C., & Hunt, K. (2009). ‘Live to work’ or ‘work to live’? A qualitative study of gender and work–life balance among men and women in mid-life. Gender, Work & Organization, 16 (1), 151–172.

Erickson, J. J., Martinengo, G., & Hill, E. J. (2010). Putting work and family experiences in context: Differences by family life stage. Human Relations, 63 (7), 955–979.

Finn, D., & Donovan, A. (2013). PwC’s NextGen: A global generational study. Evoloving talent strategy to match the new worforce reality. Accessed 29 June, 2017. (pp. 1–16). Price Waterhouse Coopers.

Fuller, S., & Hirsh, C. E. (2018). “Family-friendly” jobs and motherhood pay penalties: The impact of flexible work arrangements across the educational spectrum. Work and Occupations . https://doi.org/10.1177/0730888418771116 .

Gerstel, N., & Clawson, D. (2018). Control over time: Employers, workers, and families shaping work schedules. Annual Review of Sociology, 44, 77–97.

Glass, J. L., & Estes, S. B. (1997). The family responsive workplace. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 289–313.

Glass, J. L., & Noonan, M. C. (2016). Telecommuting and earnings trajectories among American women and men 1989–2008. Social Forces, 95 (1), 217–250.

Glavin, P., & Schieman, S. (2012). Work–family role blurring and work–family conflict: The moderating influence of job resources and job demands. Work and Occupations, 39 (1), 71–98.

Golden, T. D., Veiga, J. F., & Simsek, Z. (2006). Telecommuting’s differential impact on work–family conflict: Is there no place like home? Journal of Applied Psychology, 91 (6), 1340–1350.

Hilbrecht, M., Shaw, S. M., Johnson, L. C., & Andrey, J. (2008). ‘I’m home for the kids’: contradictory implications for work–life balance of teleworking mothers. Gender, Work & Organization, 15 (5), 454–476.

Hilbrecht, M., Shaw, S. M., Johnson, L. C., & Andrey, J. (2013). Remixing work, family and leisure: Teleworkers’ experiences of everyday life. New Technology, Work and Employment, 28 (2), 130–144.

Hochschild, A. R., & Machung, A. (2003). The second shift . London: Penguin Books.

Hook, J. L. (2006). Care in context: Men’s unpaid work in 20 countries, 1965–2003. American Sociological Review, 71 (4), 639–660.

Kelliher, C., & Anderson, D. (2010). Doing more with less? Flexible working practices and the intensification of work. Human Relations, 63 (1), 83–106.

Kelly, E. L., Moen, P., Oakes, J. M., Fan, W., Okechukwu, C., Davis, K. D., et al. (2014). Changing work and work–family conflict: Evidence from the work, family, and health network. American Sociological Review, 79 (3), 485–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122414531435 .

Kelly, E. L., Moen, P., & Tranby, E. (2011). Changing workplaces to reduce work–family conflict schedule control in a white-collar organization. American Sociological Review, 76 (2), 265–290.

Kim, J. (2018). Workplace flexibility and parent–child interactions among working parents in the U.S. Social Indicators Research .  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2032-y .

Knight, C. R., & Brinton, M. C. (2017). One egalitarianism or several? Two decades of gender-role attitude change in Europe. American Journal of Sociology, 122 (5), 1485–1532.

Kurowska, A. (2018). Gendered effects of home-based work on parents’ capability to balance work with nonwork. Two countries with different models of division of labour compared. Social Indicators Research .  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2034-9 .

Langner, L. A. (2018). Flexible men and successful women: The effects of flexible working hours on German couples’ wages. Work, Employment & Society, 32 (4), 687–706.

Leslie, L. M., Manchester, C. F., Park, T.-Y., & Mehng, S. A. (2012). Flexible work practices: A source of career premiums or penalties? Academy of Management Journal, 55 (6), 1407–1428.

Lewis, S., Doorne-Huiskes, A., Redai, D., & Barroso, M. (2011). Healthy Organisations. In M. Back-Wiklund, T. Van der Lippe, & L. Den Dulk (Eds.), Quality of life and work in Europe . London: Springer.

Lewis, S., Gambles, R., & Rapoport, R. (2007). The constraints of a ‘work–life balance’approach: An international perspective. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18 (3), 360–373.

Lewis, S., & Humbert, A. L. (2010). Discourse or reality? “Work-life balance”, flexible working policies and the gendered organization. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal , 29 (3), 239–254.

Lott, Y. (2015). Working-time flexibility and autonomy: A European perspective on time adequacy. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 21 (3), 259–274.

Lott, Y. (2018). Does flexibility help employees switch off from work? Flexible working-time arrangements and cognitive work-to-home spillover for women and men in Germany. Social Indicators Research .  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2031-z .

Lott, Y., & Chung, H. (2016). Gender discrepancies in the outcomes of schedule control on overtime hours and income in Germany. European Sociological Review, 32 (6), 752–765.

Miani, C., & Hoorens, S. (2014). Parents at work: Men and women participating in the labour force. Short statistical report No. 2 Prepared for the European Commission Directorate General - Justice and Fundamental Rights : RAND Europe.

Michel, J. S., Kotrba, L. M., Mitchelson, J. K., Clark, M. A., & Baltes, B. B. (2011). Antecedents of work–family conflict: A meta analytic review. Journal of organizational behavior, 32 (5), 689–725.

Munsch, C. L. (2016). Flexible work, flexible penalties: The effect of gender, childcare, and type of request on the flexibility bias. Social Forces, 94 (4), 1567–1591.

Nepomnyaschy, L., & Waldfogel, J. (2007). Paternity leave and fathers' involvement with their young children: Evidence from the American Ecls–B. Community, Work and Family , 10 (4), 427–453.

Peters, P., Den Dulk, L., & Van der Lippe, T. (2009). The effects of time-spatial flexibility and new working conditions on employees’ work–life balance: The Dutch case. Community, Work & Family, 12 (3), 279–297.

Peters, P., Tijdens, K. G., & Wetzels, C. (2004). Employees’ opportunities, preferences, and practices in telecommuting adoption. Information & Management, 41 (4), 469–482.

Schieman, S., & Young, M. (2010). Is there a downside to schedule control for the work–family interface? Journal of Family Issues, 31 (10), 1391–1414.

Scott, J., & Clery, E. (2013). Gender roles: An incomplete revolution? British Social Attitude 30 . London: NatCen.

Shaw, S. M., Andrey, J., & Johnson, L. C. (2003). The struggle for life balance: Work, family, and leisure in the lives of women teleworkers. World Leisure Journal, 45 (4), 15–29.

Singley, S. G., & Hynes, K. (2005). Transitions to parenthood work–family policies, gender, and the couple context. Gender & Society, 19 (3), 376–397.

Sullivan, C., & Lewis, S. (2001). Home-based telework, gender, and the synchronization of work and family: Perspectives of teleworkers and their co-residents. Gender, Work & Organization, 8 (2), 123–145.

Ten Brummelhuis, L. L., & Van der Lippe, T. (2010). Effective work–life balance support for various household structures. Human Resource Management, 49 (2), 173–193.

Van der Lippe, T., & Lippényi, Z. (2018). Beyond formal access: organizational context, working from home, and work–family conflict of men and women in European workplaces. Social Indicators Research .  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-1993-1 .

Van der Lippe, T., Van Breeschoten, L., & Van Hek, M. (2018). Organizational work–life policies and the gender wage gap in European workplaces. Work and Occupations . https://doi.org/10.1177/0730888418791652 .

West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender & Society, 1 (2), 125–151.

Wight, V. R., Raley, S. B., & Bianchi, S. M. (2008). Time for children, one’s spouse and oneself among parents who work nonstandard hours. Social Forces, 87 (1), 243–271.

Williams, J. (1999). Unbending gender: Why family and work conflict and what to do about it . New York: Oxford University Press.

Williams, J., Blair-Loy, M., & Berdahl, J. L. (2013). Cultural schemas, social class, and the flexibility stigma. Journal of Social Issues, 69 (2), 209–234.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful for the funding provided by the Economic & Social Research Council Future Research Leader funding (ES/K009699/1) and the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007-2013) / ERC Grant Agreement n. 340045. The authors would also like to thank the contributors of this special issue who have provided high quality, excellent, and interesting contributions for the issue, and have provided useful feedback on this introduction. They are namely, Mariska van der Horst, Yvonne Lott, Anna Kurowska, Jaeseung Kim, and Zoltán Lippényi.

UK Economic and Social Research Council Future Research Leader funding—Work Autonomy, Flexibility, and Work-life Balance (ES/K009699/1) and the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007-2013)/ - Project: Sustainable Workforce. ERC Grant Agreement No. 340045.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Social Policy, Sociology and Social Research, Faculty of Social Science, University of Kent, Room 106, Cornwallis Northeast, Canterbury, CT2 7NF, UK

Heejung Chung

Department of Sociology, Social and Behavioural Sciences, Utrecht University, Sjoerd Groenmangebouw Room C2.09, 3584 CH, Utrecht, The Netherlands

Tanja van der Lippe

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Heejung Chung .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Chung, H., van der Lippe, T. Flexible Working, Work–Life Balance, and Gender Equality: Introduction. Soc Indic Res 151 , 365–381 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2025-x

Download citation

Accepted : 31 October 2018

Published : 26 November 2018

Issue Date : September 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-2025-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Flexible working
• Work–life balance
• Gender equality
• Organisational
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Research Roundup: How Women Experience the Workplace Today

• Dagny Dukach

New studies on what happens when women reach the top, the barriers they still face, and the (sometimes hidden) stresses they deal with.

What will it take to make gender equity in the workplace a reality? It’s a complicated question, with no easy answers — but research from a wide array of academic disciplines aims to expand our understanding of the unique challenges and opportunities women face today. In this research roundup, we share highlights from several new and forthcoming studies that explore the many facets of gender at work.

In 2021, the gender gap in U.S. workforce participation hit an all-time low . But of course, substantial gender disparities persist in pay, leadership representation, access to resources, and many other key metrics. How can we make sense of all these different dimensions of gender equity in the workplace?

• Dagny Dukach is a former associate editor at Harvard Business Review.

Partner Center

Gender equality in research: papers and projects by Highly Cited Researchers

Strategic Alliances and Engagement Manager

Empowering women and girls is a critical target of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In this installment of our blog series about Highly Cited Researchers contributing to the UN SDGs, we focus on SDG 5: Gender Equality. We discuss the research that Highly Cited Researchers have published and the trends we’re seeing emerge.

Gender equality is a fundamental human right and yet women have just three quarters of the legal rights of men today. While the speed of progress differs across regions, laws, policies, budgets and institutions must all be strengthened on an international scale to grant women equal rights as men.

The socioeconomic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and high-profile policy changes like the overturning of Roe v. Wade have shown how much work needs to be done. The COVID-19 pandemic caused many women to leave the workforce and amplified challenges related to child and elder care, with women shouldering much of the burden. This can disproportionately affect girls’ educational prospects and, as is often the case in stressful environments and during times of crisis, puts women at increased risk of domestic violence .

While some high-profile issues related to women’s rights and safety make the news cycle, gender inequalities are firmly entrenched in every society, impacting the daily lives of women and girls in ways that are rarely reported on. As Kamala Harris, Vice President of the United States, once said , “from the economy to climate change to criminal justice reform to national security, all issues are women’s issues.”

Women’s issues are interconnected with all the SDGs, as we touched on in our recent post in this series, which explored the research centered around SDG 16: Peaceful, just and strong institutions . In that post we found that sexual, domestic and intimate partner abuse and violence against women are the most published topics related to SDG 16.

In this post, we look at Highly Cited Researchers who focus specifically on SDG 5 and issues of equality and gender .

What is SDG 5: Gender equality?

SDG 5: Gender Equality is intended to address the serious inequalities and threats faced by women around the globe. The targets related to this goal include:

• End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere.
• Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation.
• Ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making in political, economic and public life.

There has been an increase in articles and reviews related to this SDG since the establishment of the SDGs in 2015. This trend graph from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics ™, using Web of Science Core Collection ™ data, shows growth from 86,000 papers in 2015 to 152,000 in 2021. That’s a 77% increase in six years.

Growth in academic papers related to SDG 5: Gender Equality

Source: Incites Benchmarking & Analytics. Dataset: articles and reviews related to SDG 5: Gender Equality published between 2015-2021.

The top ten countries publishing on SDG 5: Gender Equality during this period are shown below, with the U.S. producing roughly one third of all papers.

Countries producing the most papers related to SDG 5: Gender Equality

We explore these angles from research published between 2010 and 2020 in more detail, below.

Inequalities in the treatment of women during childbirth

Özge Tunçalp , a Highly Cited Researcher from the World Health Organization (WHO), wrote a systematic review in 2015 about the mistreatment of women globally during childbirth. This paper, coauthored with Johns Hopkins University, McGill University, University of Sao Paulo and PSI (a global nonprofit working in healthcare), has been cited more than 590 times to date in the Web of Science Core Collection. Tunçalp’s paper provides further information about the type and degree of mistreatment in childbirth, which supports the development of measurement tools, programs and interventions in this area.

Tunçalp authored another open access paper on this topic in 2019 , which followed women in four low-income and middle-income countries to study their experiences during childbirth. Unfortunately, more than one third of the women in the study experienced mistreatment during childbirth, a critical time in their lives, with younger and less educated women found to be most at risk. Beyond showing that mistreatment during childbirth exists, this study demonstrates the inequalities in how some women are treated in comparison to others, which informs the interventions needed.

“Our research showed that mistreatment during childbirth occurs across low-, middle- and high-income countries and good quality of care needs to be respectful as well as safe, no matter where you are in the world.” Dr Özge Tunçalp, World Health Organization

According to Dr. Tunçalp, “Women and families have a right to positive pregnancy, childbirth and postnatal experiences, supported by empowered health workers, majority of whom are women. Improving the experience of care throughout pregnancy and childbirth is essential to help increase the trust in facility-based care – as well as ensuring access to quality postnatal care following birth. Our research showed that mistreatment during childbirth occurs across low-, middle- and high-income countries and good quality of care needs to be respectful as well as safe, no matter where you are in the world. It was critical to ensure that these findings were translated into WHO global recommendations to inform country policy and programmes .”

Autism spectrum disorder and the gender bias in diagnosis

William Mandy, a Highly Cited Researcher in Psychiatry and Psychology, looks at gender differences related to autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Mandy, from University College London, and his co-authors found that the male-to-female ratio of children with ASD is closer to 3:1, not the often assumed 4:1 . With an apparent gender bias in diagnosis, girls who meet the criteria for ASD are at risk of being misdiagnosed or not diagnosed at all. This can cause confusion and challenges with social interactions growing up, and can put women and girls at greater risk of traumatic experiences. Mandy et al’s paper has been cited more than 830 times to date.

“The reason for this diagnostic bias is that sex and gender influence how autism presents, such that the presentations of autistic girls and women often do not fit well with current conceptualisations of the condition, which were largely based on mainly male samples.” Dr William Mandy, University College London

When asked about the relevance of his research to the clinical community, Dr. Mandy said: “Clinicians have long held the suspicion that there is a diagnostic bias against autistic girls and women – that they are more likely to fly under the diagnostic radar. Our work (Loomes et al., 2017) has helped to provide systematic, empirical evidence that this bias does indeed exist, and to quantify its impact, in terms of how many autistic girls go undiagnosed.

The reason for this diagnostic bias is that sex and gender influence how autism presents, such that the presentations of autistic girls and women often do not fit well with current conceptualisations of the condition, which were largely based on mainly male samples. Therefore, to address the gender bias in autism diagnosis, we need an evidence-based understanding of the characteristics of autistic girls and women. Our study (Bargiela et al, 2016), in which we interviewed late-diagnosed autistic women about their lives, helps do this, revealing distinctive features of autistic women and of their experiences. This knowledge is shaping research and clinical practice.”

Going forward

The above papers are just a few examples of Highly Cited Researchers contributing to SDG 5-Gender Equality. Others focus on depression, Alzheimer’s Disease, cardiovascular disease and ovarian cancer. The fact that biomedical research featured so prominently in these results should not be a surprise. Gender bias has been identified in many areas of healthcare, including patient diagnosis , discrimination against health care workers , and low rates of women in clinical studies to name a few.

The Highly Cited Researchers working on gender equality within their respective fields, which also include social sciences, economics and other areas in addition to medicine, are helping to address the complex issues related to SDG 5. And what’s worthy of note is that many of the researchers mentioned here were named as Highly Cited Researchers in the cross-field category, which identifies researchers who have contributed to Highly Cited Papers across several different fields. This shows that a multifaceted and integrated approach to gender equality research may be playing a significant role in addressing this global issue.

Stay up to date

We discussed the SDG Publishers Compact in the first post in our series and then celebrated the Highly Cited Researchers in SDG 1: No Poverty and SDG 2: Zero Hunger. We then covered SDG 3: Good Health and Well-Being and SDG 4: Quality Education , and then jumped ahead to cover SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions . Alongside this, we also looked at Ukrainian research contributions to the UN Sustainable Development Goals, here , and published an Institute for Scientific Information (ISI)™Insights paper called, Climate change collaboration: Why we need an international approach to research .

In our next post, we will identify Highly Cited Researchers who are working to address SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation.

At Clarivate, sustainability is at the heart of everything we do, and this includes support of human rights, diversity and inclusion, and social justice. Read more about our commitment to driving sustainability worldwide, and see highlights from our 2021 Clarivate Sustainability Report .

Related posts

Unlocking u.k. research excellence: key insights from the research professional news live summit.

For better insights, assess research performance at the department level

Getting the Full Picture: Institutional unification in the Web of Science

Goal 5: Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls

Gender equality is not only a fundamental human right, but a necessary foundation for a peaceful, prosperous and sustainable world. There has been progress over the last decades, but the world is not on track to achieve gender equality by 2030.

Women and girls represent half of the world’s population and therefore also half of its potential. But gender inequality persists everywhere and stagnates social progress. On average, women in the labor market still earn 23 percent less than men globally and women spend about three times as many hours in unpaid domestic and care work as men.

Sexual violence and exploitation, the unequal division of unpaid care and domestic work, and discrimination in public office, all remain huge barriers. All these areas of inequality have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic: there has been a surge in reports of sexual violence, women have taken on more care work due to school closures, and 70% of health and social workers globally are women.

At the current rate, it will take an estimated 300 years to end child marriage, 286 years to close gaps in legal protection and remove discriminatory laws, 140 years for women to be represented equally in positions of power and leadership in the workplace, and 47 years to achieve equal representation in national parliaments.

Political leadership, investments and comprehensive policy reforms are needed to dismantle systemic barriers to achieving Goal 5 Gender equality is a cross-cutting objective and must be a key focus of national policies, budgets and institutions.

How much progress have we made?

International commitments to advance gender equality have brought about improvements in some areas: child marriage and female genital mutilation (FGM) have declined in recent years, and women’s representation in the political arena is higher than ever before. But the promise of a world in which every woman and girl enjoys full gender equality, and where all legal, social and economic barriers to their empowerment have been removed, remains unfulfilled. In fact, that goal is probably even more distant than before, since women and girls are being hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Are they any other gender-related challenges?

Yes. Worldwide, nearly half of married women lack decision-making power over their sexual and reproductive health and rights. 35 per cent of women between 15-49 years of age have experienced physical and/ or sexual intimate partner violence or non-partner sexual violence.1 in 3 girls aged 15-19 have experienced some form of female genital mutilation/cutting in the 30 countries in Africa and the Middle East, where the harmful practice is most common with a high risk of prolonged bleeding, infection (including HIV), childbirth complications, infertility and death.

This type of violence doesn’t just harm individual women and girls; it also undermines their overall quality of life and hinders their active involvement in society.

Why should gender equality matter to me?

Regardless of where you live in, gender equality is a fundamental human right. Advancing gender equality is critical to all areas of a healthy society, from reducing poverty to promoting the health, education, protection and the well-being of girls and boys.

What can we do?

If you are a girl, you can stay in school, help empower your female classmates to do the same and fight for your right to access sexual and reproductive health services. If you are a woman, you can address unconscious biases and implicit associations that form an unintended and often an invisible barrier to equal opportunity.

If you are a man or a boy, you can work alongside women and girls to achieve gender equality and embrace healthy, respectful relationships.

You can fund education campaigns to curb cultural practices like female genital mutilation and change harmful laws that limit the rights of women and girls and prevent them from achieving their full potential.

The Spotlight Initiative is an EU/UN partnership, and a global, multi-year initiative focused on eliminating all forms of violence against women and girls – the world’s largest targeted effort to end all forms of violence against women and girls.

Facts and figures

Goal 5 targets.

• With only seven years remaining, a mere 15.4 per cent of Goal 5 indicators with data are “on track”, 61.5 per cent are at a moderate distance and 23.1 per cent are far or very far off track from 2030 targets.
• In many areas, progress has been too slow. At the current rate, it will take an estimated 300 years to end child marriage, 286 years to close gaps in legal protection and remove discriminatory laws, 140 years for women to be represented equally in positions of power and leadership in the workplace, and 47 years to achieve equal representation in national parliaments.
• Political leadership, investments and comprehensive policy reforms are needed to dismantle systemic barriers to achieving Goal 5. Gender equality is a cross-cutting objective and must be a key focus of national policies, budgets and institutions.
• Around 2.4 billion women of working age are not afforded equal economic opportunity. Nearly 2.4 Billion Women Globally Don’t Have Same Economic Rights as Men  
• 178 countries maintain legal barriers that prevent women’s full economic participation. Nearly 2.4 Billion Women Globally Don’t Have Same Economic Rights as Men
• In 2019, one in five women, aged 20-24 years, were married before the age of 18. Girls | UN Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Violence Against Children

Source: The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2023

5.1 End all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere

5.2 Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation

5.3 Eliminate all harmful practices, such as child, early and forced marriage and female genital mutilation

5.4 Recognize and value unpaid care and domestic work through the provision of public services, infrastructure and social protection policies and the promotion of shared responsibility within the household and the family as nationally appropriate

5.5 Ensure women’s full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decisionmaking in political, economic and public life

5.6 Ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights as agreed in accordance with the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development and the Beijing Platform for Action and the outcome documents of their review conferences

5.A  Undertake reforms to give women equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to ownership and control over land and other forms of property, financial services, inheritance and natural resources, in accordance with national laws

5.B Enhance the use of enabling technology, in particular information and communications technology, to promote the empowerment of women

5.C Adopt and strengthen sound policies and enforceable legislation for the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls at all levels

He for She campaign

United Secretary-General Campaign UNiTE to End Violence Against Women

Every Woman Every Child Initiative

Spotlight Initiative

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)

UN Population Fund: Gender equality

UN Population Fund: Female genital mutilation

UN Population Fund: Child marriage

UN Population Fund: Engaging men & boys

UN Population Fund: Gender-based violence

World Health Organization (WHO)

UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)

UN Education, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO)

UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Gender Statistics

Fast Facts: Gender Equality

Infographic: Gender Equality

The Initiative is so named as it brings focused attention to this issue, moving it into the spotlight and placing it at the centre of efforts to achieve gender equality and women’s empowerment, in line with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

An initial investment in the order of EUR 500 million will be made, with the EU as the main contributor. Other donors and partners will be invited to join the Initiative to broaden its reach and scope. The modality for the delivery will be a UN multi- stakeholder trust fund, administered by the Multi-Partner Trust Fund Office, with the support of core agencies UNDP, UNFPA and UN Women, and overseen by the Executive Office of the UN Secretary-General.

Related news

Press release| the world is failing girls and women, according to new un report.

Yinuo 2023-09-06T19:30:02-04:00 07 Sep 2023 |

The world is failing girls and women, according to new UN report New figure points to the need of an additional $360 billion in investment per year to achieve genderequality and women’s empowerment by 2030. [...]

Liberia, Mexico, Niger, Senegal and Sierra Leone to tackle barriers to the deployment of women in peace operations with the support of the UN Elsie Initiative Fund 

Vesna Blazhevska 2021-04-28T13:20:09-04:00 28 Apr 2021 |

PRESS RELEASE 28 APRIL 2021 MEDIA ENQUIRIES [email protected] Liberia, Mexico, Niger, Senegal and Sierra Leone to tackle barriers to the deployment of women in peace operations with the support of the UN Elsie Initiative [...]

Women’s job market participation stagnating at less than 50% for the past 25 years, finds UN report

Vesna Blazhevska 2020-10-20T15:06:56-04:00 20 Oct 2020 |

New York, 20 October – Less than 50% of working-age women are in the labour market, a figure that has barely changed over the last quarter of a century, according to a new UN report launched today. Unpaid domestic and care work falls disproportionately on women, restraining their economic potential as the COVID-19 pandemic additionally affects women’s jobs and livelihoods, the report warns.

Gender equality in research and innovation

Achieving gender equality in research, how it relates to the European Research Area, networks and news.

The Commission's gender equality strategy

The European Commission is committed to promoting gender equality in research and innovation.

It is part of the European Commission Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025 , which sets out the Commission’s broader commitment to equality across all EU policies.

In addition, the EU has a well-established regulatory framework on gender equality, including binding directives, which apply widely across the labour market including the research sector.

Because of the peculiarities of the research and innovation sector, specific action is needed to overcome persisting gender gaps and inequalities. Many structural barriers to gender equality in research and innovation persist.

The European Commission addresses these barriers through:

• the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation: Horizon Europe (2021-2027) and previously  Horizon 2020 (2014-2020)
• within the European Research Area in collaboration with Member States, associated countries and research stakeholders

Gender equality in Horizon Europe

With Horizon Europe , the Commission reaffirms its commitment to gender equality in research and innovation making it a cross-cutting priority and introducing strengthened provisions. 

The goal is to improve the European research and innovation system, create gender-equal working environments where all talents can thrive and better integrate the gender dimension in projects to improve research quality as well as the relevance to society of the knowledge, technologies and innovations produced.

There are 3 main levels at which gender equality is addressed in Horizon Europe:

• Having a Gender Equality Plan (GEP) in place is now an eligibility criterion for certain categories of legal entities from EU countries and non-EU countries associated to Horizon Europe
• The integration of a gender dimension into research and innovation content is a requirement by default, and evaluated under the excellence criterion, unless the topic description explicitly specifies otherwise
• Increasing gender balance throughout the programme is another objective, with a target of 50% women in Horizon Europe related boards, expert groups and evaluation committees, and gender balance among research teams set as a ranking criterion for proposals with the same score

Furthermore, specific funding will be dedicated to:

gender and intersectional research is promoted in different parts of Horizon Europe, in particular under Cluster 2 of the programme Culture, Creativity and Inclusive Society

developing inclusive gender equality policies in support of the new European Research Area, through the Widening Participation and Strengthening the European Research Area programme part,  Reforming and enhancing the European Research and Innovation System

empowering women innovators, in particular through Pillar III of the programme, Innovative Europe, and the European Innovation Council (EIC) (see statement on gender and diversity of the EIC Pilot Board )

The Factsheet on Gender Equality: a strengthened commitment in Horizon Europe summarises the key new provisions and requirements, with a particular focus on the new Gender Equality Plan (GEP) eligibility criterion.

Gender Equality Plans as an eligibility criterion in Horizon Europe

As detailed in the last part of the factsheet Gender Equality: a strengthened commitment in Horizon Europe , for calls with deadlines in 2022 and onwards, having a Gender Equality Plan (GEP) will be an eligibility criterion for all public bodies, higher education institutions and research organisations from EU Member States and associated countries wishing to participate in Horizon Europe.

As also recalled in the General Annexes to Horizon Europe 2021-2022 work programme , to comply with the eligibility criterion, a GEP must meet 4 mandatory process-related requirements or ‘building blocks’.

Mandatory requirements for a GEP

• Be a public document: The GEP should be a formal document signed by the top management, and disseminated within the institution. It should demonstrate a commitment to gender equality, set clear goals and detailed actions and measures to achieve them
• Have dedicated resources: Resources for the design, implementation, and monitoring of GEPs may include funding for specific positions such as Equality Officers or Gender Equality Teams as well as earmarked working time for academic, management and administrative staff
• Include arrangements for data collection and monitoring: GEPs must be evidence-based and founded on sex or gender-disaggregated baseline data collected across all staff categories. This data should inform the GEP’s objectives and targets, indicators, and ongoing evaluation of progress, and be reported on annually
• Be supported by training and capacity-building: Actions should address gender equality and unconscious gender biases, and may include developing gender competence establishing working groups dedicated to specific topics, and raising awareness through workshops and communication activities

In addition to these mandatory process-related requirements, the following 5 thematic areas are recommended for content:

• work-life balance and organisational culture
• gender balance in leadership and decision-making
• gender equality in recruitment and career progression
• integration of the gender dimension into research and teaching content
• measures against gender-based violence including sexual harassment

When in the process is a GEP required?

At first proposal submission stage, a self-declaration is requested through a dedicated questionnaire.

An organisation may not yet have a GEP at proposal submission stage, but it must have a GEP in place at the time of the Grant Agreement signature.

The Model Grant Agreement commits beneficiaries to taking all measures to promote equal opportunities between men and women in the implementation of the action and, where applicable, in line with their GEP.

Guidance document on GEPs

A detailed Guidance document has been developed to support organisations to meet the Horizon Europe GEP eligibility criterion. This Guidance presents each mandatory ‘building block’ and recommended thematic area, explains what these requirements mean in practice when developing and implementing a GEP or reviewing the equivalence of existing plans or policies, and provides concrete practical examples, building on existing materials, good practices and various resources that support gender equality in research and innovation at national and institutional levels.

Training on GEPs

The Commission has been offering in 2021 and 2022 a series of online trainings on Gender Equality Plans targeting mainly organisations established in Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary, Croatia, Italy, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Romania, Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Cyprus.

Webinar on the GEP eligibility criterion

In June 2022, DG Research and Innovation also organised a webinar aimed towards LEARs, but of relevance for all prospective applicants to Horizon Europe. The agenda, speakers, presentations and a link to the webinar recording are available on the  event webpage .

Additional support will be announced on this page.

Gender equality plans: Frequently asked questions

Horizon Europe guidance on gender equality plans

Video: Gender Equality Plans - an Eligibility Criterion for Horizon Europe ( extended version / short version )

EU Award for Gender Equality Champions

A new EU Award for Gender Equality Champions was created under Horizon Europe to recognise and celebrate the outstanding results achieved by some change-driving academic and research organisations in the implementation of GEPs.

Gender equality in the European Research Area (ERA)

Gender equality and gender mainstreaming in research has been a priority of the European Research Area (ERA) since the ERA Communication 2012 framework , in which the European Commission set 3 objectives to work with EU countries and foster an institutional change

• gender equality in careers at all levels
• gender balance in decision making
• integration of the gender dimension into the content of research and innovation

The Council Conclusions on advancing Gender Equality in the European Research Area of 1 December 2015 called for cultural and institutional changes to address gender imbalances in research institutions and decision-making bodies.

EU countries were asked to develop ERA national action plans addressing the gender equality priority, and research performing and funding organisations were encouraged to implement institutional changes, in particular through Gender Equality Plans (GEPs), which had very positive impacts in many research organisations and were a catalyst for change at national level.

The Commission, through FP7 and Horizon 2020, provided funds to research organisations for the implementation of GEPs. Over 200 organisations have been supported in total, through 30 GEP-implementing projects, with a budget of over €72 million.

Despite this, the 2020 ERA for Research and Innovation Staff Working Document and She Figures 2021 show, there are persisting gender inequalities in the research and innovation system across Europe, and discrepancies exist between the adoption and implementation of policies at the EU, national and institutional level.

In addition, gender-based violence, including sexual harassment, remains a prevalent issue in research and innovation organisations (see UniSAFE survey ).

The Commission’s 2020 Communication on the new European Research Area recognised this, as well as the need to address diversity by opening policy to intersections with other social categorisations (e.g. ethnicity, disability and sexual orientation). Other aspects of inclusion, such as geographical inclusiveness, and sectorial inclusiveness between research and the private sector (e.g. innovative businesses, start-ups), also need to be ensured.

As such, the Communication proposed to build on Horizon Europe and develop inclusive gender equality plans and policies with Member States and stakeholders.

ERA Policy Agenda Action 5

At the Competitiveness Council of November 2021, a package was adopted reaffirming gender equality and inclusiveness as core values and principles for European research and innovation.

This includes the ERA Policy Agenda 2022-2024 , with a specific action to “Promote gender equality and foster inclusiveness, taking note of the Ljubljana declaration  (Action 5), which entails 4 interlinked outcome deliverables: 

• Develop a policy coordination mechanism to support all aspects of gender equality through inclusive Gender Equality Plans and policies, and a dedicated EU network on their implementation 
• Strategy to counteract gender-based violence including sexual harassment in the European research and innovation system and to assure gender equality in working environments through institutional change in any research funding or performing organisation 
• A policy approach to strengthen gender equality, that addresses gender mainstreaming to advance the new ERA 
• Develop principles for the integration and evaluation of the gender perspective in research and innovation content in cooperation with national Research Funding Organisations (RFOs)

A subgroup of the ERA Forum dedicated to ERA Action 5 will be leading the way on the achievement of these deliverables. It will follow up on the work of the ERAC Standing Working Group on Gender in Research and Innovation .

Progress on ERA Action 5 is already ongoing, including:

•  A DG Research and Innovation report on Approaches to inclusive gender equality in Research and Innovation , published in September 2022. The report provides an overview of emerging practices and policies in national research and innovation organisations and at the EU level, which support the inclusion and equal opportunities for students, researchers and staff from marginalised backgrounds in European research and innovation systems. See also the factsheet: Towards inclusive gender equality in Research and Innovation.
• The Czech Presidency conference on “Ending gender-based violence in Academia: Toward gender-equal, safe and inclusive research and higher education” organised on 25-26 November 2022 marks a first concrete milestone towards the achievement of Deliverable 3 of ERA Action 5. A core output of this conference was the call for action to end gender-based violence, launched by the Czech Presidency.

The implementation of ERA Action 5 will build on related Horizon 2020 projects funded under the Science-with-and-for-Society work programme and will be supported by related projects funded under the Horizon Europe WIDERA Work programme .

Gender mainstreaming through the integration of the gender dimension in research and innovation content

Horizon 2020 was the first framework programme to set gender as a cross-cutting issue, with one of the underpinning objectives being to integrate the gender dimension into research and innovation content, , leading to an increased number of “gender-flagged” topics across the programme.

Horizon Europe goes further, by making the integration of the gender dimension into research and innovation content a requirement by default, unless the topic description explicitly specifies otherwise. This has set an example at a global level.

The policy report produced in November 2020 by the EU funded Horizon 2020 expert group on Gendered Innovations provides researchers and innovators with methodological tools for sex, gender and intersectional analysis.

It also presents concrete case studies, showcasing projects funded under Horizon 2020 and addressing key research and innovation areas for Horizon Europe clusters, missions and partnerships.

These include areas such as health, artificial intelligence and robotics, energy, transport, marine science and climate change, urban planning, agriculture, fair taxation and venture funding, as well as the COVID-19 pandemic.

• Full report

She Figures report - monitoring gender equality in research and innovation

The She Figures 2021 report, divided into 6 chapters, follows the chronological journey of women, from obtaining a doctoral degree to participating in the labour market and acquiring decision-making roles, while exploring differences in women and men's working conditions and research and innovation output.

Watch the video of Commissioner Gabriel summarising the main outcomes

She Figures 2021 data show that, on average, at Bachelor’s and Master’s levels, women outnumber men as students (54%) and graduates (59%), and there is almost gender balance at Doctoral level (48%). However, disparities between study fields persist. For example, women still represent less than a quarter of Doctoral graduates in the ICT field (22%), while they represent more than 50% in the fields of health & welfare and education (60% and 67%, respectively). Nevertheless, some positive trend can be observed, such as an increase in the proportion of women holding the highest academic positions (26.2%) compared to the last edition (24.1%).

Novelties of the 2021 edition:

• 7 policy briefs are produced for themes in which progress towards gender equality is needed (e.g., tackling gender imbalance in research leadership), or for which comparable data is lacking, such as the impact of COVID-19 on researchers, alongside 27 country profiles that examine the progress of each country through presenting data for key indicators, comparing their performance to the average EU value, and summarising their performance in thematic areas.
• the report extends its data collection to G-20 countries where data are available, going beyond the EU-27, the UK and Associated Countries and includes several new indicators.
• the updated ‘She Figures Handbook’ provides the latest methodological guidance on data collection and calculation of indicators.

Released every 3 years since 2003, the report constitutes a key evidence base for policies in this area. It is recommended reading for policy makers, researchers and anyone with a general interest in these issues. Statistical correspondents from EU countries and Associated Countries contribute to the data collection.

You can also see:

• Interactive report
• Infographic
• Policy briefs

See also:  She Figures 2018

Fostering women’s participation in STEM

The EU is facing a shortage of women in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) fields. While women make up 52% of the European population and the majority of tertiary graduates in the EU, they only account for 2 out of 5 scientists and engineers.

The gender gap widens as seniority levels increase, with women holding only 17.9% of full professorship positions in engineering and technology, while only 10.7% of patent applications were submitted by women between 2015 and 2018, as highlighted in the latest  She Figures  report.  

With the  European Strategy for Universities , adopted in January 2022, the European Commission is committed to strengthening women’s and girls’ participation in STEM studies and careers through a roadmap of activities.

This roadmap entails the following:

• EU Prize for Women Innovators, managed by the European Innovation Council and the SME’s Executive Agency (EISMEA): three prizes of EUR 50 000 each in the Rising Innovator Category awarded to the most promising young innovators under 35
• a range of Horizon 2020 funded projects aimed at strengthening gender equality in STEM fields – see CORDIS leaflet: Bridging the gender gap in STEM
• Research and Innovation Days 2022: Stream the STE(A)M – gender equality 4 studies and careers

Next to this, the Directorate-General for Education and Culture (DG EAC), supports several other activities to advance gender equality in STEM:

• the Girls Go Circular project, a free online learning programme, which has trained over 26 000 14-19 year old girls in 15 countries across Europe since 2020. The initiative holds the annual Women and Girls in STEM Forum
• the ESTEAM Fests offer hybrid workshops, where women and girls come together to improve their digital and entrepreneurial competences
• the MSCA and Citizens initiatives organises the European Researchers’ Night and Researchers at Schools, which foster the exchange between researchers and students and stimulate the interest of youngsters, particularly girls and women in research careers and STEM topics
• several projects, funded under the Erasmus+ Programme , to promote gender-inclusive STE(A)M education at schools and higher education institutions

Manifesto for gender-inclusive STE(A)M education and careers

One specific objective of the roadmap of activities is the creation of a “Manifesto for gender-inclusive STE(A)M education and careers”, which requires the commitment of various education, research and innovation actors.  

The Commission held a public survey from October – November 2022 and a participatory workshop in December to consult stakeholders on the scope of the manifesto, which will be developed and implemented through a dedicated Coordination and Support Action in Horizon Europe.

The principles and suggested actions for stakeholders, which emerged from this consultation, are presented in the  factsheet  EU support to strengthen gender equality in STEM .

Gender equality and COVID-19

There has been increasing scientific attention dedicated to the differential impacts of the pandemic on women and men due to the pandemic, highlighted early on in this  March 2020 article published in The Lancet , and also documented by the  European Institute for Gender Equality .

Key supported initiatives and projects related to gender equality and coronavirus

Case study on the sex and gender impact of the pandemic 

Different measures are underway to address these sex and gender aspects of the crisis, including a  case study on the sex and gender impact of the COVID-19 pandemic  developed by the European Commission’s  Expert Group on Gendered Innovations . 

It builds on the latest scientific literature, as well as on Horizon 2020 projects, to document issues such as sex differences in immune responses, dosing and sex-specific side effects of vaccines and therapeutics, gender-specific risk factors, gender-sensitive prevention campaigns and gender-specific socioeconomic burden of public safety measures.

Factsheet based on this case study

Expert Group on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gender equality in Research and Innovation

A new report by the Commission expert group on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on gender equality in EU R&I, released on 5 May 2023, argues that the pandemic has exacerbated inequalities in research and innovation. The report illustrates how closed-down research facilities, reduced networking opportunities, suspension of international mobility, and blurred boundaries between work and private life exposed critical issues and gender inequalities in the R&I system. The COVID-19 pandemic affected particularly women and groups that were already less visible in research careers prior to the pandemic. Several published studies show a decrease in academic productivity for women researchers, and particularly those in their early career stages. Additionally, a disproportionate amount of care responsibilities for women led to less time to conduct research, compared to those without care responsibilities. The report offers a concrete set of recommendations and urges R&I stakeholders and policymakers to mitigate the gendered effects of the pandemic, including through targeted research funding schemes and the redefinition of research assessment criteria.

Factsheet based on this report

Networking – at trans-national level, and at institutional level among practitioners, with professional associations, platforms of women scientists, and other networks – also plays a key role. The Commission has been funding several important initiatives which aim to support networking.

GENDER-NET Plus is the first European Research Area Network (ERA-NET) Cofund scheme to be dedicated to the promotion of gender equality in research and innovation. It gathers 16 national funding organisations coming from 13 countries (Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Ireland, Italy, Israel, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and Canada) committed to strengthening transnational collaborations and joint funding towards a common goal: advancing gender equality in research institutions and the integration of the gender dimension into research and innovation contents and programmes.

GENDERACTION Plus  is a network of representatives from national authorities and national research funding organisations which mobilises national expertise across EU countries with the aim to create innovative policy communities of practice to advance the inclusive gender equality priority in the new European Research Area.

Publications

Factsheets and infographics.

Key findings: Strong representation of women in the energy industry is essential not just as a matter of gender equality, but as a strategic imperative to harness diverse perspectives, skills, and experiences crucial for innovative and effective solutions for the energy transition.

Factsheet with key messages on the report investigating the impact of the lockdown measures on women researchers' productivity and career progression and the policy recommendations on mitigating the negative impact and strengthening gender equality in the ERA in the recovery period.

• EU support to strengthen gender equality in STEM
• Towards inclusive gender equality in research and innovation
• Gender equality: A strengthened commitment in Horizon Europe
• Closing gender gaps in research and innovation
• Gender and Intersectional Bias in Artificial Intelligence
• Coronavirus pandemic impact on gender equality
• Gendered Innovations 2 - How Inclusive Analysis Contributes to Research and Innovation

• Directorate-General for Research and Innovation

COVID-19 impact on gender equality in research and innovation

This report presents the findings of the European Commission’s Expert Group on the COVID-19 impact on gender equality in Research and Innovation (R&I).

• 28 September 2022

Approaches to inclusive gender equality in research and innovation

To promote diversity in R&I and open its gender policy to intersections with other social characteristics, such as ethnicity, disability and sexual orientation. The European Commission supports the development of inclusive gender equality plans (GEPs) and policies

• 24 November 2021

She figures 2021

The She Figures 2021 publication uses the latest available statistics to monitor the state of gender equality R&I across Europe and beyond, through providing comparable data and analysis for approximately 88 indicators (report, infographic, handbook and policy briefs)

• She Figures 2021 interactive report
• Gendered Innovations 2: How Inclusive Analysis Contributes to Research and Innovation (2020)
• Gendered Innovations: How gender analysis contributes to research (2013)
• News article
• 8 March 2024

Gender Balance in the R&I Field to Improve the Role of Women in the Energy Transition

This report assesses gender balance in the energy sector and identifies strategies for inclusivity.

New Expert Group report on the COVID-19 impact on gender equality in Research and Innovation

The Expert Group warns of further set-backs to gender equality in R&I if the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic remains unaddressed

• 8 March 2023

First EU gender equality champions to be awarded

Research and innovation news alert: In recognition of noteworthy strides towards gender equality carried out by academic and research organisations, the European Commission is delighted to announce the winners of the EU Award for Gender Equality Champions

• Conferences and summits

Impact of Gender Equality Plans across the ERA

• Wednesday 15 March 2023, 09:30 - 13:00 (CET)
• Online only

• Competitions and award ceremonies

Empowering Female Entrepreneurs Summit & EU Gender Equality Champions Awards

• Wednesday 8 March 2023, 13:00 - 14:00 (CET)

• Public debates

The 1st EU-Korea Women in Science and Technology Forum

• Tuesday 29 November 2022, 10:00 - 17:00 (CET)

Related links

Gender equality index 2022, gender equality in academia and research (gear tool), expert group on the impact of the covid-19 pandemic on gender equality, gender equality strategy monitoring portal, women innovate.

The Women Innovate campaign celebrates the women behind game-changing innovations. In doing so, the EU seeks to raise awareness of the need for more women innovators, and create role models for women and girls everywhere

Share this page

Women in the Workplace 2023

Women in the Workplace

This is the ninth year of the Women in the Workplace report. Conducted in partnership with LeanIn.Org , this effort is the largest study of women in corporate America and Canada. This year, we collected information from 276 participating organizations employing more than ten million people. At these organizations, we surveyed more than 27,000 employees and 270 senior HR leaders, who shared insights on their policies and practices. The report provides an intersectional look at the specific biases and barriers faced by Asian, Black, Latina, and LGBTQ+ women and women with disabilities.

About the authors

This year’s research reveals some hard-fought gains at the top, with women’s representation in the C-suite at the highest it has ever been. However, with lagging progress in the middle of the pipeline—and a persistent underrepresentation of women of color 1 Women of color include women who are Asian, Black, Latina, Middle Eastern, mixed race, Native American/American Indian/Indigenous/Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander. Due to small sample sizes for other racial and ethnic groups, reported findings on individual racial and ethnic groups are restricted to Asian women, Black women, and Latinas. —true parity remains painfully out of reach.

The survey debunks four myths about women’s workplace experiences and career advancement. A few of these myths cover old ground, but given the notable lack of progress, they warrant repeating. These include women’s career ambitions, the greatest barrier to their ascent to senior leadership, the effect and extent of microaggressions in the workplace, and women’s appetite for flexible work. We hope highlighting these myths will help companies find a path forward that casts aside outdated thinking once and for all and accelerates progress for women.

The rest of this article summarizes the main findings from the Women in the Workplace 2023 report and provides clear solutions that organizations can implement to make meaningful progress toward gender equality.

State of the pipeline

Over the past nine years, women—and especially women of color—have remained underrepresented across the corporate pipeline (Exhibit 1). However, we see a growing bright spot in senior leadership. Since 2015, the number of women in the C-suite has increased from 17 to 28 percent, and the representation of women at the vice president and senior vice president levels has also improved significantly.

These hard-earned gains are encouraging yet fragile: slow progress for women at the manager and director levels—representation has grown only three and four percentage points, respectively—creates a weak middle in the pipeline for employees who represent the vast majority of women in corporate America. And the “Great Breakup” trend we discovered in last year’s survey  continues for women at the director level, the group next in line for senior-leadership positions. That is, director-level women are leaving at a higher rate than in past years—and at a notably higher rate than men at the same level. As a result of these two dynamics, there are fewer women in line for top positions.

To view previous reports, please visit the Women in the Workplace archive

Moreover, progress for women of color is lagging behind their peers’ progress. At nearly every step in the pipeline, the representation of women of color falls relative to White women and men of the same race and ethnicity. Until companies address this inequity head-on, women of color will remain severely underrepresented in leadership positions—and mostly absent from the C-suite.

“It’s disheartening to be part of an organization for as many years as I have been and still not see a person like me in senior leadership. Until I see somebody like me in the C-suite, I’m never going to really feel like I belong.”

—Latina, manager, former executive director

Four myths about the state of women at work

This year’s survey reveals the truth about four common myths related to women in the workplace.

Myth: Women are becoming less ambitious Reality: Women are more ambitious than before the pandemic—and flexibility is fueling that ambition

At every stage of the pipeline, women are as committed to their careers and as interested in being promoted as men. Women and men at the director level—when the C-suite is in closer view—are also equally interested in senior-leadership roles. And young women are especially ambitious. Nine in ten women under the age of 30 want to be promoted to the next level, and three in four aspire to become senior leaders.

Women represent roughly one in four C-suite leaders, and women of color just one in 16.

Moreover, the pandemic and increased flexibility did not dampen women’s ambitions. Roughly 80 percent of women want to be promoted to the next level, compared with 70 percent in 2019. And the same holds true for men. Women of color are even more ambitious than White women: 88 percent want to be promoted to the next level. Flexibility is allowing women to pursue their ambitions: overall, one in five women say flexibility has helped them stay in their job or avoid reducing their hours. A large number of women who work hybrid or remotely point to feeling less fatigued and burned out as a primary benefit. And a majority of women report having more focused time to get their work done when they work remotely.

The pandemic showed women that a new model of balancing work and life was possible. Now, few want to return to the way things were. Most women are taking more steps to prioritize their personal lives—but at no cost to their ambition. They remain just as committed to their careers and just as interested in advancing as women who aren’t taking more steps. These women are defying the outdated notion that work and life are incompatible, and that one comes at the expense of the other.

Myth: The biggest barrier to women’s advancement is the ‘glass ceiling’ Reality: The ‘broken rung’ is the greatest obstacle women face on the path to senior leadership

For the ninth consecutive year, women face their biggest hurdle at the first critical step up to manager. This year, for every 100 men promoted from entry level to manager, 87 women were promoted (Exhibit 2). And this gap is trending the wrong way for women of color: this year, 73 women of color were promoted to manager for every 100 men, down from 82 women of color last year. As a result of this “broken rung,” women fall behind and can’t catch up.

Progress for early-career Black women remains the furthest behind. After rising in 2020 and 2021 to a high of 96 Black women promoted for every 100 men—likely because of heightened focus across corporate America—Black women’s promotion rates have fallen to 2018 levels, with only 54 Black women promoted for every 100 men this year.

While companies are modestly increasing women’s representation at the top, doing so without addressing the broken rung offers only a temporary stopgap. Because of the gender disparity in early promotions, men end up holding 60 percent of manager-level positions in a typical company, while women occupy 40 percent. Since men significantly outnumber women, there are fewer women to promote to senior managers, and the number of women decreases at every subsequent level.

Myth: Microaggressions have a ‘micro’ impact Reality: Microaggressions have a large and lasting impact on women

Microaggressions are a form of everyday discrimination that is often rooted in bias. They include comments and actions—even subtle ones that are not overtly harmful—that demean or dismiss someone based on their gender, race, or other aspects of their identity. They signal disrespect, cause acute stress, and can negatively impact women’s careers and health.

Years of data show that women experience microaggressions at a significantly higher rate than men: they are twice as likely to be mistaken for someone junior and hear comments on their emotional state (Exhibit 3). For women with traditionally marginalized identities, these slights happen more often and are even more demeaning. As just one example, Asian and Black women are seven times more likely than White women to be confused with someone of the same race and ethnicity.

As a result, the workplace is a mental minefield for many women, particularly those with traditionally marginalized identities. Women who experience microaggressions are much less likely to feel psychologically safe, which makes it harder to take risks, propose new ideas, or raise concerns. The stakes feel just too high. On top of this, 78 percent of women who face microaggressions self-shield at work, or adjust the way they look or act in an effort to protect themselves. For example, many women code-switch—or tone down what they say or do—to try to blend in and avoid a negative reaction at work. Black women are more than twice as likely as women overall to code-switch. And LGBTQ+ women are 2.5 times as likely to feel pressure to change their appearance to be perceived as more professional. The stress caused by these dynamics cuts deep.

Women who experience microaggressions—and self-shield to deflect them—are three times more likely to think about quitting their jobs and four times more likely to almost always be burned out. By leaving microaggressions unchecked, companies miss out on everything women have to offer and risk losing talented employees.

“It’s like I have to act extra happy so I’m not looked at as bitter because I’m a Black woman. And a disabled Black woman at that. If someone says something offensive to me, I have to think about how to respond in a way that does not make me seem like an angry Black woman.”

—Black woman with a physical disability, entry-level role

Myth: It’s mostly women who want—and benefit from—flexible work Reality: Men and women see flexibility as a ‘top 3’ employee benefit and critical to their company’s success

Most employees say that opportunities to work remotely and have control over their schedules are top company benefits, second only to healthcare (Exhibit 4). Workplace flexibility even ranks above tried-and-true benefits such as parental leave and childcare.

As workplace flexibility transforms from a nice-to-have for some employees to a crucial benefit for most, women continue to value it more. This is likely because they still carry out a disproportionate amount of childcare and household work. Indeed, 38 percent of mothers with young children say that without workplace flexibility, they would have had to leave their company or reduce their work hours.

But it’s not just women or mothers who benefit: hybrid and remote work are delivering important benefits to most employees. Most women and men point to better work–life balance as a primary benefit of hybrid and remote work, and a majority cite less fatigue and burnout (Exhibit 5). And research shows that good work–life balance and low burnout are key to organizational success. Moreover, 83 percent of employees cite the ability to work more efficiently and productively as a primary benefit of working remotely. However, it’s worth noting companies see this differently: only half of HR leaders say employee productivity is a primary benefit of working remotely.

For women, hybrid or remote work is about a lot more than flexibility. When women work remotely, they face fewer microaggressions and have higher levels of psychological safety.

Employees who work on-site also see tangible benefits. A majority point to an easier time collaborating and a stronger personal connection to coworkers as the biggest benefits of working on-site—two factors central to employee well-being and effectiveness. However, the culture of on-site work may be falling short. While 77 percent of companies believe a strong organizational culture is a key benefit of on-site work, most employees disagree: only 39 percent of men and 34 percent of women who work on-site say a key benefit is feeling more connected to their organization’s culture.

Not to mention that men benefit disproportionately from on-site work: compared with women who work on-site, men are seven to nine percentage points more likely to be “in the know,” receive the mentorship and sponsorships they need, and have their accomplishments noticed and rewarded.

A majority of organizations have started to formalize their return-to-office policies, motivated by the perceived benefits of on-site work (Exhibit 6). As they do so, they will need to work to ensure everyone can equally reap the benefits of on-site work.

Recommendations for companies

As companies work to support and advance women, they should focus on five core areas:

• tracking outcomes for women’s representation
• empowering managers to be effective people leaders
• addressing microaggressions head-on
• unlocking the full potential of flexible work
• fixing the broken rung, once and for all

Sixty percent of companies have increased their financial and staffing investments in diversity, equity, and inclusion over the past year. And nearly three in four HR leaders say DEI is critical to their companies’ future success.

1. Track outcomes to improve women’s experience and progression

Tracking outcomes is critical to any successful business initiative. Most companies do this consistently when it comes to achieving their financial objectives, but few apply the same rigor to women’s advancement. Here are three steps to get started:

Measure employees’ outcomes and experiences—and use the data to fix trouble spots. Outcomes for drivers of women’s advancement include hiring, promotions, and attrition. Visibility into other metrics—such as participation in career development programs, performance ratings, and employee sentiments—that influence career progression is also important, and data should be collected with appropriate data privacy protections in place. Then, it’s critically important that companies mine their data for insights that will improve women’s experiences and create equal opportunities for advancement. Ultimately, data tracking is only valuable if it leads to organizational change.

Take an intersectional approach to outcome tracking. Tracking metrics by race and gender combined should be table stakes. Yet, even now, fewer than half of companies do this, and far fewer track data by other self-reported identifiers, such as LGBTQ+ identity. Without this level of visibility, the experiences and career progression of women with traditionally marginalized identities can go overlooked.

Share internal goals and metrics with employees. Awareness is a valuable tool for driving change—when employees are able to see opportunities and challenges, they’re more invested in being part of the solution. In addition, transparency with diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) goals and metrics can send a powerful signal to employees with traditionally marginalized identities that they are supported within the organization.

2. Support and reward managers as key drivers of organizational change

Managers are on the front lines of employees’ experiences and central to driving organizational change. As companies more deeply invest in the culture of work, managers play an increasingly critical role in fostering DEI, ensuring employee well-being, and navigating the shift to flexible work. These are all important business priorities, but managers do not always get the direction and support they need to deliver on them. Here are three steps to get started:

Clarify managers’ priorities and reward results. Companies need to explicitly communicate to managers what is core to their roles and motivate them to take action. The most effective way to do this is to include responsibilities like career development, DEI, and employee well-being in managers’ job descriptions and performance reviews. Relatively few companies evaluate managers on metrics linked to people management. For example, although 61 percent of companies point to DEI as a top manager capability, only 28 percent of people managers say their company recognizes DEI in performance reviews. This discrepancy may partially explain why not enough employees say their manager treats DEI as a priority.

Equip managers with the skills they need to be successful. To effectively manage the new demands being placed on them, managers need ongoing education. This includes repeated, relevant, and high-quality training and nudges that emphasize specific examples of core concepts, as well as concrete actions that managers can incorporate into their daily practices. Companies should adopt an “often and varied” approach to training and upskilling and create regular opportunities for coaching so that managers can continue to build the awareness and capabilities they need to be effective.

Make sure managers have the time and support to get it right. It requires significant intentionality and follow-through to be a good people and culture leader, and this is particularly true when it comes to fostering DEI. Companies need to make sure their managers have the time and resources to do these aspects of their job well. Additionally, companies should put policies and systems in place to make managers’ jobs easier.

3. Take steps to put an end to microaggressions

Microaggressions are pervasive, harmful to the employees who experience them, and result in missed ideas and lost talent. Companies need to tackle microaggressions head-on. Here are three steps to get started:

Make clear that microaggressions are not acceptable. To raise employee awareness and set the right tone, it’s crucial that senior leaders communicate that microaggressions and disrespectful behavior of any kind are not welcome. Companies can help with this by developing a code of conduct that articulates what supportive and respectful behavior looks like—as well as what’s unacceptable and uncivil behavior.

Teach employees to avoid and challenge microaggressions. Employees often don’t recognize microaggressions, let alone know what to say or do to be helpful. That’s why it’s so important that companies have employees participate in high-quality bias and allyship training and receive periodic refreshers to keep key learnings top of mind.

Create a culture where it’s normal to surface microaggressions. It’s important for companies to foster a culture that encourages employees to speak up when they see microaggressions or other disrespectful behavior. Although these conversations can be difficult, they often lead to valuable learning and growth. Senior leaders can play an important role in modeling that it is safe to surface and discuss these behaviors.

4. Finetune flexible working models

The past few years have seen a transformation in how we work. Flexibility is now the norm in most companies; the next step is unlocking its full potential and bringing out the best of the benefits that different work arrangements have to offer. Here are three steps to get started:

Establish clear expectations and norms around working flexibly. Without this clarity, employees may have very different and conflicting interpretations of what’s expected of them. It starts with redefining the work best done in person, versus remotely, and injecting flexibility into the work model to meet personal demands. As part of this process, companies need to find the right balance between setting organization-wide guidelines and allowing managers to work with their teams to determine an approach that unlocks benefits for men and women equally.

Measure the impact of new initiatives to support flexibility and adjust them as needed. The last thing companies want to do is fly in the dark as they navigate the transition to flexible work. As organizations roll out new working models and programs to support flexibility, they should carefully track what’s working, and what’s not, and adjust their approach accordingly—a test-and-learn mentality and a spirit of co-creation with employees are critical to getting these changes right.

Few companies currently track outcomes across work arrangements. For example, only 30 percent have tracked the impact of their return-to-office policies on key DEI outcomes.

Put safeguards in place to ensure a level playing field across work arrangements. Companies should take steps to ensure that employees aren’t penalized for working flexibly. This includes putting systems in place to make sure that employees are evaluated fairly, such as redesigning performance reviews to focus on results rather than when and where work gets done. Managers should also be equipped to be part of the solution. This requires educating managers on proximity bias. Managers need to ensure their team members get equal recognition for their contributions and equal opportunities to advance regardless of working model.

5. Fix the broken rung for women, with a focus on women of color

Fixing the broken rung is a tangible, achievable goal and will set off a positive chain reaction across the pipeline. After nine years of very little progress, there is no excuse for companies failing to take action. Here are three steps to get started:

Track inputs and outcomes. To uncover inequities in the promotions process, companies need to track who is put up for and who receives promotions—by race and gender combined. Tracking with this intersectional lens enables employers to identify and address the obstacles faced by women of color, and companies can use these data points to identify otherwise invisible gaps and refine their promotion processes.

Work to de-bias performance reviews and promotions. Leaders should put safeguards in place to ensure that evaluation criteria are applied fairly and bias doesn’t creep into decision making. Companies can take these actions:

• Send “bias” reminders before performance evaluations and promotion cycles, explaining how common biases can impact reviewers’ assessments.
• Appoint a “bias monitor” to keep performance evaluations and promotions discussions focused on the core criteria for the job and surface potentially biased decision making.
• Have reviewers explain the rationale behind their performance evaluations and promotion recommendations. When individuals have to justify their decisions, they are less likely to make snap judgments or rely on gut feelings, which are prone to bias.

Invest in career advancement for women of color. Companies should make sure their career development programs address the distinct biases and barriers that women of color experience. Yet only a fraction of companies tailor career program content for women of color. And given that women of color tend to get less career advice and have less access to senior leaders, formal mentorship and sponsorship programs can be particularly impactful. It’s also important that companies track the outcomes of their career development programs with an intersectional lens to ensure they are having the intended impact and not inadvertently perpetuating inequitable outcomes.

Practices of top-performing companies

Companies with strong women’s representation across the pipeline are more likely to have certain practices in place. The following data are based on an analysis of top performers—companies that have a higher representation of women and women of color than their industry peers (Exhibit 7).

This year’s survey brings to light important realities about women’s experience in the workplace today. Women, and particularly women of color, continue to lose the most ground in middle management, and microaggressions have a significant and enduring effect on many women—especially those with traditionally marginalized identities. Even still, women are as ambitious as ever, and flexibility is contributing to this, allowing all workers to be more productive while also achieving more balance in their lives. These insights can provide a backdrop for senior leaders as they plan for the future of their organizations.

Emily Field is a partner in McKinsey’s Seattle office; Alexis Krivkovich and Lareina Yee are senior partners in the Bay Area office, where Nicole Robinson is an associate partner; Sandra Kügele is a consultant in the Washington, D.C., office.

The authors wish to thank Zoha Bharwani, Quentin Bolton, Sara Callander, Katie Cox, Ping Chin, Robyn Freeman, James Gannon, Jenn Gao, Mar Grech, Alexis Howard, Isabelle Hughes, Sara Kaplan, Ananya Karanam, Sophia Lam, Nina Li, Steven Lee, Anthea Lyu, Tess Mandoli, Abena Mensah, Laura Padula, David Pinski, Jane Qu, Charlie Rixey, Sara Samir, Chanel Shum, Sofia Tam, Neha Verma, Monne Williams, Lily Xu, Yaz Yazar, and Shirley Zhao for their contributions to this article.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

Women in the workplace: Breaking up to break through

Women in the Workplace 2022

Read our research on: Abortion | Podcasts | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

Gender & work, women have gained ground in the nation’s highest-paying occupations, but still lag behind men.

Women now make up 35% of workers in the United States’ 10 highest-paying occupations – up from 13% in 1980.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the Workplace

Workplace diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, or DEI, are increasingly becoming part of national political debates. For a majority of employed U.S. adults (56%), focusing on increasing DEI at work is a good thing. But relatively small shares of workers place a lot of importance on diversity at their workplace.

The Enduring Grip of the Gender Pay Gap

The difference between the earnings of men and women has barely closed in the United States in the past two decades. This gap persists even as women today are more likely than men to have graduated from college, suggesting other factors are at play such as parenthood and other family needs.

Gender pay gap in U.S. hasn’t changed much in two decades

In 2022, women earned an average of 82% of what men earned, according to a new analysis of median hourly earnings of full- and part-time workers.

More Than Twice as Many Americans Support Than Oppose the #MeToo Movement

Most say that, compared with five years ago, those who commit sexual harassment or assault at work are more likely to be held responsible and those who report it are more likely to be believed.

Women now outnumber men in the U.S. college-educated labor force

Women have overtaken men and now account for more than half (50.7%) of the college-educated labor force in the United States.

Working moms in the U.S. have faced challenges on multiple fronts during the pandemic

Here is what Center surveys show about American moms’ experiences juggling work and parenting responsibilities during the COVID-19 outbreak.

Some gender disparities widened in the U.S. workforce during the pandemic

Among adults 25 and older who have no education beyond high school, more women have left the labor force than men.

The self-employed are back at work in pre-COVID-19 numbers, but their businesses have smaller payrolls

Hiring by the self-employed has fallen since 2019, with the cutbacks emanating mainly from businesses run by men.

COVID-19 pandemic saw an increase in the share of U.S. mothers who would prefer not to work for pay

The share of mothers who said it would be best for them to work full time dropped from 51% to 44% between 2019 and 2020.

Refine Your Results

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PMC10075448

A qualitative insight into researchers’ perceptions of gender inequality in medical and dental research institutions in Nigeria

Morenike oluwatoyin folayan.

1 Department of Physical Sports, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain

2 Department of Child Dental Health, College of Health Sciences, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria

Adekemi Olowokeere

3 Department of Nursing, College of Health Sciences, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria

Joanne Lusher

4 Provost’s Group, Regent’s University London, London, United Kingdom

Olabisi Aina

5 Department of Sociology, Faculty of Social Science, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria

Guillermo Z. Martínez-Pérez

Associated data.

All relevant data are within the paper.

The aim of the study was to gain a qualitative insight into scientific researchers’ perceptions of gender inequality inside Nigerian research institutions through an investigation of how gender equality is enacted in medical and dental research institutions in Nigeria.

This descriptive and cross-sectional qualitative study probed decision-making around navigating gender inequity and explored opinions about how a supportive environment for female medical and dental researchers could be established. Data were collected through semi-structured telephone interviews with 54 scientific researchers across 17 medical and dental academic institutions in Nigeria between March and July 2022. Data were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic analysis.

Three core themes emerged: institutionalized male dominance in research institutions; changing narratives on gender equalities in research and academic enterprise; and women driving the conscience for change in research institutions. Female medical and dental researchers’ perceived gender equality was challenging mainstream androcentric values in knowledge production within the medical and dental field; and queries the entrenchment of patriarchal values that promote a low number of female medical and dental trainees, fewer female research outputs, and few women in senior/managerial positions in the medical fields.

Despite the general view that change is occurring, a great deal remains to be done to facilitate the creation of a supportive environment for female medical and dental researchers in Nigeria.

Introduction

Gender equality is a visionary pursuit that carries an implication that economic, social, and cultural attributes and opportunities associated with different genders by different society should not confer difference in expectations that debar pursuits and aspirations, can positively influence individual and social development [ 1 ]. Moreover, equality is critical for the socioeconomic stability of countries as it promotes and guarantees peace and social justice. Three areas in which gender equality can foster progress is in science, education, and health [ 2 ]. Medical and dental researchers stand at the fulcrum of social development through their engagement in these three domains [ 3 ]. They also contribute to economic development through their work on understanding disease and promotion of medicine, vaccines, diagnostics, and effective public health messages. The work of scientists in research institutions often requires training others to advance science to support disease eradication and quality of life. This opportunity opened to medical and dental researchers through the promotion of gender equality has yet to be optimized.

In Africa, female researchers face greater challenges in the medical and dental health contexts limiting their ability to make optimal contributions to individuals and society [ 4 ]. For example, in West Africa, medical and dental researchers are faced with gender values and norms that assign women to domestic tasks and responsibilities that reduce the time they can dedicate to research [ 4 ]. This may explain why women spend more time teaching and less time researching, when compared with men [ 5 ]. Additionally, gender-blind organizational culture and institutional policies make it difficult for women to attain leadership positions and place them at risk of low opportunity for participation in science [ 4 , 5 ]. Moreover, female medical and dental health researchers can become distracted from investing in the process of challenging the gender-blind systems by dedicating attention to preserving relationships with their male spouses [ 4 ].

Like many other gender-blind research institutions in and outside of Nigeria, including medical research institutions, men in research have a greater number and quality of research outputs than women who are in research [ 6 – 8 ]; and fewer women are seen in top-office in research institutions [ 9 ]. The tendency for this is high because of the large number of male medical and dental students [ 10 , 11 ]. This is also driven by the high number of male students who pick a pre-college science track in secondary school [ 12 ]. The high number of men in medical and dental research institutions and the high number of men in managerial posts reflects a complex sociological phenomenon that enshrines these patriarchal practices through the use of gender exclusionary strategies that maintain the male monopoly [ 13 , 14 ].

There is limited information on the gender distribution of researchers in Nigeria. The available evidence indicates that the number of women in dental institutions had steadily increased from 36.2% in 2003, to 42.5% in 2013. Thus, the predominance of intake of men remains [ 15 ]. There are clearly gender differences in fields of specialization with a steady increase in the number of women in leadership positions [ 15 ]. However, this increase in female participation in dental academia may not quite reflect medical practice. For example, Ogunbodede [ 16 ] indicated an observed discrepancy in the increase in number of practicing female dentists versus practicing female medical practitioners over a 10-year period. While the number of dentists increased from 15% to 35% between 1981 and 2000, the increase for medical practitioners only shifted from 15% to 19%. Similarly, the number of male doctors in Nigeria is consistent with roughly twice the number between 2017 and 2019 [ 17 ]. Although male dentists do not double the number of female dentists, the number of male dentists (810) outweighs female dentists (555) [ 18 ].

A gender equality gap could not, however, be determined purely on grounds of numbers. This would be time-bound and to the continued detriment of developing an equal society. There is also no guarantee that a reduction in the number-gap would change the current paradigm. Prior studies have indicated that having more women educated in science not will change the status quo of more men holding senior positions [ 19 – 22 ]. The envisioned change in gender representation in the research institutions and research managerial positions needs to be driven by the collective concern and commitment to improving the quality of research outputs for the health and wellbeing of the society through the participation of women [ 23 ].

The theoretical perspective that informed the design of this study therefore, used a feminist institutionalism analytical lens that would enable the exploration of gendered institutions and their gendering effect [ 24 ]. The feminist institutionalism analytical approach enhances the exploration of the gendered dimensions of structures of power and behavior and the role played by institutional informal structures, processes, values, and norms. [ 25 , 26 ]. It enables an analysis of how informal institutions interacts with the formal systems; through roles played by gendered rules, actors, and outcomes, to produce gendered outcomes. Also, the feminist institutionalism analytical approach provides a theoretical lens that allows for gendered power relations and the processes that makes such relations visible [ 25 ].

Despite it being apparent that gender inequality practices exist among professions, little is known about how female medical and dental health researchers use the potentially transformative opportunities that do come their way. Are there career trajectories that make it possible for female medical and dental health researchers to access and maximize their use of these transformative opportunities in education and career development? Does the cultural context of female medical and dental health researchers support the institutionalization of gender inequality in ways that limits their ability to facilitate gender equality in their profession?

The present study aimed to address these research questions in order to provide insight into the career advancements of medical and dental academic health researchers irrespective of their gender. This qualitative study investigated how gender equality is enacted in the medical and dental research field; and explored male and female researchers’ perceptions of gender inequalities in medical and dental research institutions in Nigeria. It probed decision-making around navigating gender inequity within research institutions and explored opinions on how a supportive environment for female medical and dental researchers in Nigeria could be established.

Materials and methods

This study adopted an academic literacies perspective that accounts for context, culture, and genre [ 27 , 28 ]. The theoretical framework applied in this study was the preference theory due to its appropriateness for exploring researchers’ investment in efforts to mainstream gender considerations in institutional processes; whilst recognizing the need for women to simultaneously meet family and work responsibilities [ 29 ].

Study design, study site and study participants

This study formed part of a larger qualitative study that was conducted in Nigeria to determine barriers and ways to resolve gender equality in medical and dental research institutions in Nigeria. Female and male faculty members of 17 universities in Nigeria took part in this research study between March and July 2022. Participants were able to read and communicate in the English language and defined themselves as academics in either the health, medical, or dental education field because they promote, design, conduct and disseminate biomedical, clinical, and socio-epidemiological research in Nigeria. All participants resided in Nigeria, were adult members of academic or research institutions working on health issues and consented to take part in a one-hour interview.

Sample size

It was estimated that three study participants would be recruited from each of the 17 institutions that hosted a medical and dental school in Nigeria. Therefore, 54 interview slots were allocated equitably amongst professors, readers, senior lecturers, and lecturers (the entire spectrum of designations in the academia in Nigeria). The slots were also divided equitably among dentists and medical personnel, and in a proportion of 2:1 for female: male interviewees. These designates were then randomly allocated to each institution as indicated in the S1 Table . This sample size was adjudged to be adequate to generate rich information; and allow for saturation to occur. With a non-response rate of 20%, it was anticipated that the final sample size for the in-depth interview will be 43. Saturation is often reached with a sample size of 12 persons when working with a homogeneous group like that for this study [ 30 ].

Sampling procedure

A purposive and convenience sampling was used to identify potential participants working in a medical and dental health academic institution and conducting research in that institution. The diversity of respondents was ensured by recruiting study participants from all the academic cadres in the medical and dental institutions.

Study participants were recruited through a combination of purposive sampling and snowballing. Peers of the principal investigator in each of the 17 institutions were contacted and asked to identify a possible respondent that fit the profile of respondent to be interviewed in their institution. If the interviewee met the inclusion criteria, the principal investigator contacted her/him by telephone or via Email/WhatsApp. The purpose and objectives of this study was explained, the interviewee was invited to take part in an in-depth interview and a date was scheduled for the interview. Before the scheduled date, written informed consent was sought. When the consent form was filled and sent back, the interviewee was then enrolled as a study participant.

At the end of each interview, participants were asked to share the name of a colleague who may be interested in the interview. That colleague was then contacted and the process for enrolment was repeated until the target number of participants had been reached. Whenever a study participant refused study participation, the participant was replaced by an eligible study participant in the pool of contacted researchers.

Study procedure

An interview schedule was adapted based on a focus group discussion held with a convenience sample of 12 researchers working in medical and dental academic institutions. These were six male and six female researchers from Belgium, Brazil, Malaysia, Iran, Nigeria, United States of America, and Turkey. These researchers had a history of working in the West Africa region. The expert consultation was held via a conference call in June 2021 and aimed to explore perspectives on the scope of intervention carried out by university faculty members on gender equality in education and professional development. Before the discussion took place, participants received a one-page concept note about the main study, which included a brief description of the conceptual framework for the study; the working definitions of gender equality (people of all genders have equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities); and the aim of the discussion. The outcome of this discussion formed the basis of the interview schedule used in the main study.

In-depth interviews were conducted between March and July 2022 during the COVI-19 pandemic. Interviews were conducted using Telegram and WhatsApp video calls to identify interviewees perspectives on observed gender differences in career progression and trajectory of medical and dental researchers in Nigeria; as well as gender-related barriers to opportunities for changing this trajectory for future female researchers. Interviews were conducted between March and July 2022. All interviews were conducted in English and audio-recorded. Interviewees were required to switch on their video to enable the interviewer ensure the interview was being conducted in privacy. Notes were taken during the interview. The time range for the interview was 26 minutes to 71 minutes with a mean time of 55 minutes.

Data analysis

The purpose of data collection was to seek richness of information and to saturate all concepts and categories emerging from the in-depth interviews. After each interview, transcripts were transcribed verbatim, and were read and reread to reveal emergent themes. Table 1 presents ten broad topics that were explored through these interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim into a password protected Microsoft Word document accessible only via a single password protected computer. Anonymized transcripts of the recordings were checked to verify their accuracy and completeness compared to the audio recordings. Personal identifiers and names of places and institution were not transcribed.

Transcribed interview recordings were imported into Atlas.Ti and read and re-read to identify codes and categories using an inductive approach to code, analyze and report on [ 31 , 32 ]. This process helped gain familiarity with the data and achieve new insights by analyzing for recurring themes and issues that represented answers to the questions; and to draw conclusions from the responses.

A codebook was inductively developed from themes that had been generated and from analytical questions intended to elicit a thorough, nuanced exploration of gender equality in medical and dental research. Coding and analysis were led by the first author of this report. A second qualitative researcher was consulted for extra coding to ensure inter-coder reliability during the process. The adoption of this particular approach ensured the identification and description of new codes and subthemes within the transcripts and this procedure continued until the point of saturation was reached.

During this coding process, novel codes that emerged from the data were included to review the initial generated codebook. The transcripts were again re-read using the new codebook. This approach was employed to develop categories, which were then explored and used when discussing the pre-conceived topics. The concepts and categories of analysis were defined using the words of the participants. Data were organized into key themes and subthemes generated by the coding process, and excerpts and illustrative quotes of general insights and of deviant cases from the transcripts were selected to substantiate the presentation of the key findings in this report. The informants’ own words were also used to report the findings. Attention was paid to the researchers’ reflexive journals to ensure that informant biases were not introduced. The Consolidated criteria for Reporting Qualitative research guidelines were considered.

Ethics approval was obtained from the Institute of Public Health, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria (IPH/OAU/12/1617). All informants signed an informed consent form.

Participants’ characteristics

Table 2 presents data on the sociodemographic profile of the 54 female and male medical and dental professionals who participated in the in-depth interviews. The sample presents 48% females and 52% males, with their ages ranging from 33 to 62 years (what of the age mean?). Participants were educated to postgraduate level and most of whom were married. The number of children of interviewees ranged from 1 to 5.

Profile of refusals

An initial 44 (29 medical and 15 dental researchers; 30 females and 14 males) contacts were made. Of these, 12 (7 medical and 5 dental researchers; 10 women and 2 men) did not respond to contact made. One did not meet eligibility criteria, and eight (7 medical and 1 dental researchers; 4 females and 4 males) declined participation. The 21 consented respondents helped reach other participants through the snowballing process

Emergent themes

Three core themes emerged from the data that each reflected participants’ perceptions on how female medical and dental researchers’ make decisions to navigate the constraints within the research institutions in which they work; and how they act to promote a supportive environment for their female peers. These themes were: (1) Ingrained patterns of institutionalized male dominance in research institutions; (2) Hopes for a changing narrative on gender equalities in research; and (3) Women driving the conscience for change. These themes, along with the subthemes and extracts are presented in Table 3 .

Ingrained patterns of institutionalized male dominance in research institutions

Women felt under-represented and men overrepresented in most fields in the medical and dental fields. Women expressed an opinion that the medical and dental fields are male-dominated and that women need to compete more with lower status positions, as one participant expressed:

‘If you go to male -female enrollment in school, you will find out that the percentage is higher for males than females. Then, when you even come to the university, at least I can assert a guess that in my place, if we are like 35 doctors there will be like 7 females’ Dentist_male

Interviewees of both genders perceived that the number of women in the medical and dental profession is increasing, though they remain underrepresented in managerial positions in universities in Nigeria and are less likely to be promoted or elected to managerial positions. Women identified that they had had to put in a lot of effort to demonstrate that they were capable of doing just as well as or even better than men as indicated by the following extract:

It was not a small battle to convince learned people like professors, medical doctors saying a female can do this. Even up until now, we are yet to have our female first Vice Chancellor.’ Basic Sciences_Male

As per the participants’ opinions, gender inequality results in uneven power relations, entitlements, social values, responsibilities, and duties in patriarchal societies. The socialization process also affects how each gender perceives oneself and the power and influence they have. The majority of female researchers observed a male dominant culture in the medical and dental profession, which not only limits the opportunities for selection or nomination into leadership position, but also medical and dental specialization opportunities. As identified, men are perceived by female participants as afraid of women altering the status quo in academic and medical research:

‘Because of socialization the moment you are born, your parents tell you how to conform to gender expectations. Females are socialized not to do things that are tedious. This influences even professional. You see females being discouraged from being a surgeon and encouraged to be things like pediatric dentist, dentist.’ Medicine_Male

Hopes for a changing narrative on gender inequality in research

Participants of both genders voiced increasing public discussions on gender, gender equality, gender bias and discrimination; that is making it possible for a gradual shift in gender-biased practices in the medical and dental fields. These public discussions for change are happening by female professionals who speak up and advocate for evidence-based changes to gendered practice. The active drives for gender equality in the medical and dental fields is resulting in the rising enrolment of women in medical and dental schools, despite enrolment still being largely dominated by men. Participants opined that there is a growing awareness of opportunities for women to pursue careers in medicine and dentistry:

‘I will say that I think we have more of male researchers in medical and dental, but I think the trend is changing, there is also a male dominance in leading research but that is also changing because I think there is a lot of emphasis now on balancing the gender composition of researchers and also gender balance in recruitment. I think people are now thinking in that direction but before most of the research in medical and dental field include more of male than female as researchers and study participants. Dentist Male

There were testimonies of three female medical and dental professionals being the first to hold key managerial positions. For these women, breaking the gender barrier was an effort to create the needed pathway to make it easier for other women to come on board:

‘I was the first female consultant in the department, and the first female professor in the department’. You know most at times, if you are able to cross the first few hurdles, the rest becomes easier. So, maybe I’m the sacrificial lamb of the department. Surgeon_Female

Women driving conscience for change

Participants of both genders identified that the selection criteria for many grant opportunities were biased towards women; a number of male participants felt this skew opportunity for women gave women advantages. These biased opportunities were efforts by the granting agencies to drive gender equality in the medical and dental research fields. Male and female respondents, however, opined that the opportunities were not gender biased, while one female researcher commented that the opportunities open to women are not real opportunities, as women are often not able to make the best of these opportunities:

‘…an organization that gave gender differences in the cut-off age for application of grants–the cut-off age was lower for males than females. This was because the granting agency recognized that females start a lot later than males in their research career trajectory because of their social responsibility of caring for the babies and other unpaid care duties.’ Medicine_Female

Other opportunities for female researchers identified were gender mainstreaming into the composition of research teams not only for gender equality but also to improve the quality of the research outcomes, as diverse perspectives enhance the quality of the design and implementation of research. Gender mainstreaming was identified as important for many reasons, one of which for institutional building. Also, participants identified the need to build the capacity of women to be competitive, and for gender equality advocacy and sensitization of gender-blind research institutions.

To address barriers that prevent women from gaining access to tertiary education, professional research opportunities and promotion at the same rate as men. Few female and male participants identified the need for gender-sensitive policies that mainstream gender considerations in the appointments, recruitments, selection process of female medical and dental professionals into leadership roles; gender considerations in the access to grant opportunities; and opportunities for senior female mentoring of early career (female) researchers. Such policy drives and change can be achieved through the collaborative efforts of female medical and dental professionals. A few participants in this study proposed that gender study centers should be established within medical and dental institutions; and they be saddled to handle gender related issues:

‘The establishment of gender centers will probably promote gender equality generally. They can also generate research-based evidence that can address the ‘why’, ‘how’ and the value added by promoting gender equality.’ Medicine_female

Overall, participants in this study argued for institutional policies that help to drive gender sensitivity. Data pointed to policies needing to promote gender equity at the managerial and administrative levels while focusing on skills and expertise. The opportunities should be open equitably to everybody.

The current study identified a male dominance in the research outputs of medical and dental researchers in research institutions in Nigeria. This male dominance also reflects in the inequitable distribution of managerial positions of the institutions. The gendered operations of medical and dental research institutions is driven by the absorption of the societal patriarchal values. Individuals in this study expressed a paradigm shift driven by individual and collective bodies of women in academia driving a conscience for change. Other opportunities identified to drive the change process included enacting institutional policies that promote gender equality; establishing gender focused units in research institutions dedicated to implementing these policies; continued advocacy and awareness creation for the change to happen; mentorship by women for women and for men; and building the capacity for women to actively engage with others in the research enterprise.

A benefit of these findings is that they provide a contextual and rich foundation of evidence that supports prior research on the inequitable representation of women [ 4 , 33 , 34 ]. Moreover, a focus on medical and dental research institutions has allowed a deeper exploration of contextual professional factors that may promote gender inequality in a research setting.

Indeed, participants in this study perceived gender inequality as enacted through institutionalization of societal patriarchal and androcentric values that may make domestic responsibilities and career breaks for domestic reasons have far more reaching impact on women’s research outputs, and career progression; compared to their male counterparts. It is likely that poor environmental support for research in Nigerian institutions have more impact on women than men who are less able to access sponsored opportunities for capacity development due to the need to stay home even when these opportunities are presented [ 35 ]. For the same reasons, women may be less able to take up research grant opportunities even when grants are biased towards the selection of women, because of the care responsibilities they are encumbered with. These distractions from capacity building and empowerment opportunities during early career development years are challenging to catch up with in later years of a woman’s career, which thereby increases the gender competency gap. The failure to adjudge years of home management as human managerial skills, and poor accounting of home care as work skills continue to make women fall behind in the ratings for skills to handle managerial offices.

Though institutional policies and advocacies can help to bridge these gaps, they are unlikely to be eliminated. Gender equality policies are challenging to implement, but when implemented, significant progress can be made with gender mainstreaming [ 36 ]. Gender-sensitive institutional policies in medical and dental research institutions, implemented by established gender focal units, may help to drive the shift towards gender equality in research outputs and numbers of female appointments into senior cadres. These policies will need to promote a gender sensitive review of assessment criteria for appointment and promotion. Further research is necessary to better understand how home-management skills can be rated, groomed and adapted as administrative skills. Efforts in these directions may help to eliminate the managerial position gender equality gap. This may also facilitate men in taking on home care roles in the knowing that they will not be worse-off for doing so.

Furthermore, participants’ voices pointed to continued advocacy and awareness creation. One of the roles of the Medical Women’s Association of Nigeria is to advocate for favorable policies for women, and they have done so successfully for many issues related to clinical practice [ 37 ]. One of which is for paid maternity leave. They have, however, achieved little in driving equality in the field of research. Women in academia may need to form pressure groups to address the issues peculiar to their needs. Pressure groups also need to partner and engage with men to promote gender equality; and advocate for new masculinities and for human rights. Advocacy seeks to narrow the gap between what is known to be effective, acceptable, and efficient and what is practiced [ 38 ]. It involves a combination of individual and social actions designed to gain political commitment, social acceptance, and system support for a particular goal or program. Though it is an effective strategy for producing policy change, it can be difficult and complex for those with limited power and resources [ 38 ]. Future work is vital for understanding how gender equality in research institutions has contributed to the attainment of the sustainable goal more generally.

While advocacy may bring about change, slowly, the mentorship of women by women and men allies in the gender equality fight could bring about substantial change in the research context [ 39 ]. Female mentors promote aspirations of other females to pursue the same career pathways through a feeling of belonging and confidence. Participants in this study reported views on mentoring actions, though, as such, are unclearly defined. The suggested efforts of reaching out to other women in medical and dental research, by those who explained that they have made it to more senior positions, can be institutionalized by research organizations, or bodies, of female professionals. The mentorship process could also facilitate building the capacity of women to actively engage with others in research enterprise. However, mentorship is a non-formal educational system that should not replicate social norms, dominant values, or drivers that could otherwise entrench inequality and disempowerment of women by reproducing existing hierarchies and exclusions [ 40 ]. Training mentors on gender-sensitive mentorship strategies may help to avoid these possible risks.

One of the strengths of the study was the recruitment of study participants from Northern and Southern Nigeria thereby reflecting the views of male and female researchers from diverse cultural context in Nigeria. The study findings are therefore potentially comparable across research institutions in Nigeria. The study is, however, not without limitations. The data collected were limited to the perception of gender inequality in medical and dental research institutions and the coding and analysis of these data were conducted within this context. Additional themes and perspectives can be derived from the content-rich narratives of the participants; and this warrants further exploration as issues surrounding gender and cultural differences in light of gender equality in medical and dental research institutions are not fully understood. Differences in the perspectives of dental and medical researchers could also be examined separately, as the experiences of these two groups may differ.

Despite these potential limitations, results from the present study do provide insights that support a feminist institutionalist perspective that societal inequality is reproduced in political and social institutions such as higher institutions of learning [ 41 ]. Understanding how context specific institutional rules, processes and norms drives the enactment of gender inequality can help with the reform and improvement of institutional gender equality programs and strategies. This study is the first study to explore how and why gender inequality is enactment in medical and dental schools in Nigeria; and therefore, provides a framework to support possible gender reforms in these institutions.

In conclusion, medical and dental researchers perceive gender inequality as enacted in medical and dental research institutions in Nigeria through the entrenchment of societal, cultural and religious patriarchal values. These patriarchal values promote the low numbers of female medical and dental trainees, lower research outputs for female researchers when compared to that of male researchers, and fewer women in senior managerial positions. A lot still needs to be done to facilitate the creation of a supportive environment for female medical and dental researchers in Nigeria. This includes the development, monitoring and enforcing of newly created norms that assist in creating the needed support for gender equality. There is a necessity to establish a critical mass of gender experts in medical and dental research institutions who can design and promote effective mechanisms to promote gender equality practices in Nigeria.

Supporting information

Acknowledgments.

The authors acknowledge the contributions of the time and efforts of the participants to this study.

Funding Statement

The authors received no specific funding for this work

Data Availability

• PLoS One. 2023; 18(4): e0283756.

Decision Letter 0

PONE-D-22-27154A qualitative insight into researcher’s perceptions of gender inequality in medical and dental research institutions in Nigeria.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Folayan,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Dec 18 2022 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at  gro.solp@enosolp . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

• A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.
• A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.
• An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Claudia Noemi González Brambila, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note that the grant information you provided in the ‘Funding Information’ and ‘Financial Disclosure’ sections do not match. When you resubmit, please ensure that you provide the correct grant numbers for the awards you received for your study in the ‘Funding Information’ section."

3. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure: 

"MOF received funding to conduct the data collection and analysis"

At this time, please address the following queries:

a) Please clarify the sources of funding (financial or material support) for your study. List the grants or organizations that supported your study, including funding received from your institution. 

b) State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

c) If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funders.

d) If you did not receive any funding for this study, please state: “The authors received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript: 

"The authors acknowledge afworo that provided funding support for the data collection and analysis of this piece of work."

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form. 

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows: 

5. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability .

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories . Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions . Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

Reviewer #2: N/A

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: • Add more papers from 2017 to 2022 in the introduction section. It should be motivated for the reader and also add unique contribution.

• Address theoretical background of the study and also add theoretical implication (Support with theories).

• Author can mention objective of the study and research gap separately which enhance quality of paper.

• Add theoretical and managerial implications

• Explain conclusion, limitation and future scope separately.

• The language of the paper needs a careful editing.

• References must follow the style as per journal

Reviewer #2: Paper looks good and I strongly believe that this paper is contributiing to the body of Knowledge. Well done!! It is interesting well organized paper. It was pleasure to review it. Thank you for the opportunity.

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article ( what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool,  https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at  gro.solp@serugif . Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Author response to Decision Letter 0

17 Jan 2023

We will like to thank the reviewers and the editor for the thorough review of this manuscript. It has helped improved the quality of the research.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

Response: this has been checked and revised accordingly

Response: This has been corrected. No grant was received for the study

3. Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure:

a) Please clarify the sources of funding (financial or material support) for your study. List the grants or organizations that supported your study, including funding received from your institution.

Response: This has been corrected. The authors received no specific funding for this work

Response: this has been done

4. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

Response: The data needed for this study can all be found in the study result section

Reviewer #1: • Add more papers from 2017 to 2022 in the introduction section. It should be motivated for the reader and also add unique contribution.

Response: A literature search was carried out prior to this resubmission and this elicited 4 new relevant studies that have been included in the introduction section

Response: Done. The Feminist institutionalism analysis approach was used for this study. See lines 102-110

Response: The final paragraphs have now been dedicated to a focused discussion relating back to the study objectives and research questions

Response: Thank you for raising this useful point. Lines 425 to 442 expand on this issue

Response: We have included two paragraphs that discuss the strengths, limitations, and future scope of the study. See Lines 425 to 442. A paragraph has also been added to the conclusion section

Response: The entire paper has been edited for style and language

Response: The manuscript has been revised to adhere to the style of the journal

Reviewer #2: Paper looks good and I strongly believe that this paper is contributiing to the body of Knowledge. Well done!! It is interesting well organized paper. It was pleasure to review it. Thank you for the opportunity.

Response: thank you for this positive feedback.

Submitted filename: Reviewers response_Plos One 3.0.docx

Decision Letter 1

16 Mar 2023

A qualitative insight into researchers' perceptions of gender inequality in medical and dental research institutions in Nigeria.

PONE-D-22-27154R1

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ , click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at gro.solp@gnillibrohtua .

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact gro.solp@sserpeno .

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

6. Review Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: Good work. I can see you have incorporated all the comments. We can go ahead with the publication now.

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article ( what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .

Reviewer #1:  Yes:  Nishant Agrawal

Reviewer #2:  Yes:  BIBHAV ADHIKARI

Acceptance letter

28 Mar 2023

A qualitative insight into researchers’ perceptions of gender inequality in medical and dental research institutions in Nigeria.

Dear Dr. Folayan:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact gro.solp@sserpeno .

If we can help with anything else, please email us at gro.solp@enosolp .

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Claudia Noemi González Brambila

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 31 March 2024

Organizational commitments to equality change how people view women’s and men’s professional success

• Kristin Kelley 1 , 2 ,
• Lena Hipp 2 , 3 &
• Paula Protsch 2 , 4 , 5  

Scientific Reports volume  14 , Article number:  7609 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

• Human behaviour

To address women’s underrepresentation in high-status positions, many organizations have committed to gender equality. But is women’s professional success viewed less positively when organizations commit to women’s advancement? Do equality commitments have positive effects on evaluations of successful men? We fielded a survey experiment with a national probability sample in Germany (N = 3229) that varied employees’ gender and their organization’s commitment to equality. Respondents read about a recently promoted employee and rated how decisive of a role they thought intelligence and effort played in getting the employee promoted from 1 “Not at all decisive” to 7 “Very decisive” and the fairness of the promotion from 1 “Very unfair” to 7 “Very fair.” When organizations committed to women’s advancement rather than uniform performance standards, people believed intelligence and effort were less decisive in women’s promotions, but that intelligence was more decisive in men’s promotions. People viewed women’s promotions as least fair and men’s as most fair in organizations committed to women’s advancement. However, women’s promotions were still viewed more positively than men’s in all conditions and on all outcomes, suggesting people believed that organizations had double standards for success that required women to be smarter and work harder to be promoted, especially in organizations that did not make equality commitments.

Similar content being viewed by others

A cross-verified database of notable people, 3500BC-2018AD

Morgane Laouenan, Palaash Bhargava, … Etienne Wasmer

Ethics and discrimination in artificial intelligence-enabled recruitment practices

Zhisheng Chen

The process and mechanisms of personality change

Joshua J. Jackson & Amanda J. Wright

Introduction

During the U.S. presidential election campaign in 2020, Vice President Joe Biden promised to select a woman as his vice-presidential running mate. Proponents of this commitment claimed it was an important move toward rectifying women’s underrepresentation in leadership positions, while opponents argued that the announcement would lead people to devalue the not-yet-selected woman’s credentials 1 . Similarly, organizational commitments to gender equality may lead employees and the broader public to question whether the promoted employees are deserving or qualified. In fact, prior research on the effects of diversity values and affirmative action policies suggests that a woman’s performance will be scrutinized when her organization commits to women’s advancement 2 .

Experimental studies have found that people view women beneficiaries of affirmative action as less competent than nonbeneficiaries and believe affirmative action procedures are unfair 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 . Affirmative action had stigmatizing qualities, even when it was unclear whether potential recipients actually benefitted from the policy 4 . When women employees were equally qualified to men, participants’ negative evaluations of women who were hired or promoted under affirmative action or diversity initiatives were weakened but not completely eradicated 3 . Unless there was unambiguous information about the overall competence of the selected woman leader (i.e., a statement that she had performed amongst the top 5% of employees), participants viewed women beneficiaries as less competent and procedures as less fair when women were hired through programs designed to increase diversity 5 . However, unambiguous performance capacity is rarely available to external evaluators 5 .

There are several research gaps that need to be filled to gain a comprehensive understanding of whether and how efforts to foster women’s professional advancement impact evaluations of employees’ promotions. First, several literature reviews revealed that much of the research on perceptions of affirmative action beneficiaries was conducted on small, nonprobability samples in the 1990s and early 2000s 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 . It is unclear whether findings from these studies conducted with student samples can be generalized to the broader public. Additionally, recent studies on gender stereotypes have found that the proportion of people that view women and men as equally competent has increased over time 8 , 9 , suggesting that evaluations of women promoted under diversity initiatives may have also changed.

Second, initiatives to increase women’s advancement today are not just referred to as affirmative-action programs 10 . For example, organizations may state that they are committed to “women’s advancement”, “equal opportunities”, or “diversity”, all of which may be viewed either as statements on nondiscrimination and the importance of merit or as signals that women are given preferential treatment. It is unclear how these subtler, more ambiguous statements influence how people view the success of potential beneficiaries and the fairness of their promotions. In the current study, we randomly assigned respondents to read about one of three organizational types. Our reference condition was an organization that values performance and uniform assessment standards and states that the most qualified employees are selected for leadership positions. There is no reference to gender or equality values. The next organization committed to women’s advancement. This common organizational signal 11 may lead respondents to believe that the organization gives preferential treatment toward women. The final organization committed to equal opportunities. Equal opportunity may signal preferential treatment toward woman to a lesser degree, because the focus is on equality rather than specifically on women.

Third, prior research has compared women in preferential treatment conditions to women and men in non-preferential treatment conditions. However, research has not examined how perceived preferential treatment of women within one organization may affect evaluations of men within that organization. That is, it is unknown whether organizational commitments to gender equality change perceptions of successful male employees. The public may give more favorable evaluations of men who are successful in equality-oriented organizations if they believe equality initiatives make it harder for men to be promoted. With this study, we seek to close these research gaps.

Drawing on data from a survey experiment conducted on a national probability sample in Germany (N = 3229), we examine how perceptions of recently promoted women and men differ depending on whether their organizations were described as committed to performance and uniform assessment standards (hereafter, uniform performance standards), women’s advancement, or equal opportunities. More specifically, we ask: Do people give lower attributions to intelligence and effort and view promotions as less fair when women are promoted in organizations committed to women’s advancement or equal opportunities compared to uniform performance standards? Do organizational equality commitments enhance attributions of men’s success and the perceived fairness of men’s promotions?

Success attributions

To understand how gender and organizational commitments to gender equality may influence the perceived reasons for employees’ promotions, we draw on insights from attribution theory 12 , 13 . Specifically, we consider how the public attributes employees’ promotions to intelligence and effort. Intelligence—sometimes referred to as ability—and effort—sometimes referred to as hard work—are viewed as the most justifiable explanations for professional success in Western societies 14 , 15 . Intelligence and effort are the two core components of professional/work-related competence 15 , 16 . While previous work combined measures of perceived intelligence and effort to capture competence and status 15 , 16 , 17 , it is also important to consider the two measures separately because intelligence and effort may not always align. For example, stereotypes that men’s success is due to greater intelligence and that women’s success is due to effort remain pervasive in some contexts 18 , 19 .

According to attribution theory, people act as “lay psychologists” and attempt to explain why certain events occur 12 . People attribute events to internal factors when they believe the event is a result of an individual’s core character or external factors when they believe that the event was influenced by the situation or other outside forces 12 , 13 . Studies on gender inequalities have used these insights to understand whether women and men are evaluated differently for the same behaviors or achievements 20 , 21 , 22 . For example, a recent study found that respondents were more likely to attribute men’s knowledge to ability 23 .

Attribution theory suggests that people are more likely to form external attributions when events run counter to expectations 13 , 24 . Historically, prevalent stereotypes suggest that women are not well-suited to high-status occupations and leadership roles and therefore people have looked for “an attributional ‘out’ for explaining away the existence of women at high levels” 25 . For example, if a woman is promoted in an organization committed to gender equality, people may presume that she received extra support and attribute her success to that support rather than to intelligence and effort 14 , 15 . In other words, people who do not believe women can be successful on their own merits may attribute women’s professional success to affirmative action programs or diversity initiatives, which they presume give preferential treatment to less qualified women over more qualified men. Prior research has found evidence of these effects 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 . If people perceive that diversity initiatives are responsible for women’s success, they will be less likely to attribute women’s success to factors such as intelligence and effort 15 .

Additionally, the public may believe that equality initiatives make it more challenging for nonbeneficiaries to be successful. When people are professionally successful in spite of perceived constraints, they are given higher attributions to intelligence and effort 26 . Therefore, equality initiatives may make nonbeneficiaries appear very competent when they are promoted or hired 27 . For example, people may view women’s advancement commitments as a barrier to men’s success. Therefore, if men are promoted in organizations with gender equality initiatives, people may believe men had to work harder (i.e., exert more effort) and be smarter (i.e., more intelligent) than they would have in an organization that did not externally commit to gender equity.

In summary, organizational commitments to women’s advancement may backfire through two mechanisms—they may lead people to lower their attributions to women’s intelligence and effort but raise their attributions to men’s intelligence and effort. Specifically, we predict that people will believe intelligence plays a less decisive role in women’s promotions (H1) but a more decisive role in men’s promotions (H2) when organizations commit to women’s advancement rather than uniform performance standards. Likewise, we predict that people will believe effort plays a less decisive role in women’s promotions (H3) but a more decisive role in men’s promotions (H4) when organizations commit to women’s advancement rather than uniform performance standards.

Fairness evaluations

Organizational equality commitments might also impact the perceived fairness of employees’ promotions, given that “cognitive processing about causes or attributions underlies justice assessments” 26 . According to distributive justice theory , the fairness of a situation may be judged based on equality, equity, or needs-based principles 28 . Within societies that value meritocracy, like the United States and Germany, people typically rely on the equity principle to determine fairness 29 . The equity principle states that competitions (e.g., promotion decisions) should be judged based on individuals’ inputs, and that employees with the highest intelligence and effort, should be awarded 26 . Scholars have applied this framework to examine various outcomes, including poverty attributions and perceived fairness 30 . According to procedural justice theory , people consider organizational practices, policies, and procedures when making fairness evaluations 26 , 31 , 32 . Specifically, people rely on procedural information to manage uncertainty and determine fairness in ambiguous situations, like when evaluators have little information regarding the specifics of the hiring process. This robust finding is called the “fair process effect” 33 , 34 .

Because equality commitments may suggest that employees’ sociodemographic characteristics, such as gender, and not just intelligence and effort, are considered in decision-making, we predict that people will believe women’s promotions are less fair when organizations are committed to women’s advancement rather than uniform performance standards (H5). By the same logic, people may believe men’s promotions are fairer when organizations are committed to women’s advancement.

To test our hypotheses, we analyzed data from a preregistered 35 vignette-based survey experiment on a national probability sample in Germany (N = 3229). We randomly varied whether a recently promoted employee was a woman or a man. The hypothetical employees were in their early 30s and lawyers in a large company. We also varied whether the employee’s organization was committed to women’s advancement, equal opportunities, or uniform performance standards. After reading the vignette, respondents rated how decisive they thought “intelligence” and “effort” were in the employee’s promotion from 1 ( not at all decisive ) to 7 ( very decisive ). Respondents also rated the perceived fairness of the promotion from 1 ( very unfair ) to 7 ( very fair ).

Our main analyses test the impact of organizational commitments by employee gender. Therefore, we estimated gender-stratified linear regression models with respondent-level covariates (see Table S3 ). Figures  1 , 2 and 3 display predicted values with 95% confidence intervals based on the gender-stratified models. As a supplement to our main analyses, we also estimated and reported the impact of gender across organizational commitments. Specifically, we report contrasts of the marginal linear predictions estimated based on regressions with an interaction between organizational commitment and employee gender (see Tables S4 , S5 ). There are more details in the “ Materials and methods ” section.

Degree to which promotions were attributed to intelligence from 1 (lowest) to 7 (highest), by employee gender and organizational type. N = 3229 (1613 evaluations of women employees; 1616 evaluations of men employees). Figure displays predicted values with 95% confidence intervals. Organizations committed to uniform performance standards is the reference category. People believed intelligence played a less decisive role in women’s promotions when they were promoted in organizations committed to women’s advancement (β =  − 0.25, p < 0.01, Table S3 ) and equal opportunities (β =  − 0.16, p < 0.1, Table S3 ). People believed intelligence played a more decisive role in men’s promotions when they were promoted in organizations committed to women’s advancement (β = 0.28, p < 0.01, Table S3 ) and equal opportunities (β = 0.18, p < 0.05, Table S3 ).

Degree to which promotions were attributed to effort from 1 (lowest) to 7 (highest), by employee gender and organizational type. N = 3229 (1613 evaluations of women employees; 1616 evaluations of men employees). Figure displays predicted values with 95 percent confidence intervals. Organizations committed to uniform performance standards is the reference category. People believed effort played a less decisive role in women’s promotions when they were promoted in organizations committed to women’s advancement (β =  − 0.40, p < 0.001, Table S3 ) or equal opportunities (β =  − 0.28, p < 0.01, Table S3 ). People did not view the role of effort in men’s promotions differently across organizational types.

Perceived fairness of employees’ promotions from 1 (lowest) to 7 (highest), by employee gender and organizational type. N = 3229 (1613 evaluations of women employees; 1616 evaluations of men employees). Figure displays predicted values with 95 percent confidence intervals. Organizations committed to uniform performance standards is the reference category. People believed women’s promotions were less fair when they were promoted in organizations committed to women’s advancement (β =  − 0.25, p < 0.01, Table S3 ). People did not view the fairness of women’s promotions differently in organizations committed to equal opportunities. People believed men’s promotions were fairer when they were promoted in organizations committed to women’s advancement or equal opportunities (β = 0.25, and β = 0.26, both p < 0.01, Table S3 ).

Intelligence attributions

Figure  1 shows that when women were promoted in organizations committed to women’s advancement, people believed intelligence played a less decisive role than when they were promoted in organizations committed to uniform performance standards (β =  − 0.25, p < 0.01, Table S3 ), supporting our first hypothesis. We observed a somewhat smaller and statistically insignificant decrease in intelligence attributions when women were promoted in organizations committed to equal opportunities (β =  − 0.16, p < 0.1, Table S3 ).

In contrast to ratings of women’s promotions, when men were promoted in organizations committed to women’s advancement, people believed intelligence played a more decisive role than when men were promoted in organizations committed to uniform performance standards (β = 0.28, p < 0.01, Table S3 ), supporting our second hypothesis. People also gave higher intelligence attributions to men promoted in equal opportunity organizations than men in organizations committed to uniform performance standards (β = 0.18, p < 0.05, Table S3 ).

Despite the decreased attributions to women’s intelligence and the increased attributions to men’s intelligence, people rated attributions to women’s intelligence higher than men’s in each organizational type. The largest gender gap in predicted values was in organizations committed to uniform performance standards (0.70, p < 0.001, Table S5 ), followed by organizations committed to equal opportunities (0.37, p < 0.001, Table S5 ), and the smallest was in organizations committed to women’s advancement (0.17, p < 0.1, Table S5 ).

Effort attributions

Figure  2 shows that the pattern of effects for effort attributions is like that for intelligence attributions. When women were promoted in organizations committed to women’s advancement, people believed effort played a less decisive role in their promotions than in organizations committed to uniform performance standards (β =  − 0.40, p < 0.001, Table S3 ), supporting our third hypothesis. This decrease in attributions to women’s effort also occurred when organizations committed to equal opportunities (β =  − 0.28, p < 0.01, Table S3 ). The negative effect of a commitment to women’s advancement, however, was larger than the effect of a commitment to equal opportunities. Contrary to our fourth hypothesis, we did not find that people gave higher effort attributions to men promoted in organizations committed to women’s advancement (or equal opportunities).

As with the intelligence attributions, people rated attributions to women’s effort higher than men’s in each type of organization. Again, the largest gender gap in predicted values was in organizations committed to uniform performance standards (0.60, p < 0.001, Table S5 ), followed by organizations committed to equal opportunities (0.29, p < 0.001, Table S5 ), and the smallest was in organizations committed to women’s advancement (0.13, n.s., Table S5 ).

Figure  3 displays the results for fairness evaluations. People perceived women’s promotions as less fair when they worked in organizations committed to women’s advancement than in organizations committed to uniform performance standards (β =  − 0.25, p < 0.01, Table S3 ), supporting our fifth hypothesis. There was no statistically significant difference in the perceived fairness of women’s promotions between organizations that were committed to equal opportunities and uniform performance standards.

Again, in contrast to evaluations of women’s promotions, men’s promotions were viewed as fairer in organizations committed to women’s advancement and equal opportunities than in organizations committed to uniform performance standards (β = 0.25 and β = 0.26, both p < 0.01, Table S3 ).

As is the case for the attribution outcomes, people viewed women’s promotions as fairer than men’s in each type of organization. The largest gender gap in predicted values was in organizations committed to uniform performance standards (0.93, p < 0.001, Table S5 ), followed by organizations committed to equal opportunities (0.58, p < 0.001, Table S5 ), and the smallest was in organizations committed to women’s advancement (0.45, p < 0.001, Table S5 ).

The current study shows that when organizations commit to women’s advancement, people believe that intelligence and effort play a less decisive role in women’s promotions and that women’s promotions are less fair. In contrast, people believe intelligence plays a more decisive role in men’s promotions and view men’s promotions as fairer when organizations commit to women’s advancement rather than uniform performance standards. Our findings regarding the effects of equality commitments on evaluations of women show that findings from earlier studies based on nonprobability samples are generalizable 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 29 . Additionally, our study generated novel findings regarding how succeeding in organizations that commit to equality positively affects evaluations of men’s promotions. While previous research focused on how perceptions of women’s professional success are affected by organizational commitments to equality, their impact on evaluations of men’s success was unclear.

What mechanisms underlie our findings? Our results suggest that organizational commitments provide clues to how organizations make promotion decisions. That is, evaluators may infer the criteria that organizational decision makers use in promotion processes from organizations’ value statements. Organizational commitments to women’s advancement may signal that women received some form of extra help to get promoted, or that they were evaluated by more lenient standards. This explanation supports our finding that the public believes that intelligence and effort play less of a role in women’s promotions in organizations that commit to women’s advancement. Our results also suggest that evaluators assumed that men were evaluated by more rigorous standards than women when organizations committed to women’s advancement or equal opportunities. In turn, they gave higher ratings to men’s intelligence and effort when men worked for organizations committed to women’s advancement than when men worked for organizations committed to uniform performance standards.

Yet, the findings also showed that people believe intelligence and effort play a more decisive role in women’s promotions and that women’s promotions are fairer than men’s in each organizational type. These gender differences were largest when organizations committed to uniform performance standards and smallest when organizations committed to women’s advancement. Again, these results suggest that the public infers organizations’ decision-making criteria based on organizational commitments, and these inferences shape whether evaluators perceive that intelligence and effort played a large role in promotions. According to justice theory, people give greater attributions to internal factors and perceive greater justice for people who are successful despite facing constraints 26 . Our results suggest that the public believed that organizational decision makers relied on sexist double standards when making promotion decisions 36 . Specifically, they may have thought that women were more likely to have their job performances scrutinized and be held to higher evaluation standards. This explains why the public rated women higher than men on attributions to intelligence and effort and rated women’s promotions as fairer than men’s promotions. In summary, our findings suggest that organizational commitments to uniform performance standards lead the public to think that decision-makers are sexist, and thus, that women must be smarter and work harder than men to be promoted.

The largest gender gaps in evaluations are in organizations committed to uniform performance standards. People may believe these organizations have particularly sexist decision-making processes or structures that create barriers for women. Terms like “performance” and “uniform assessment standards” may signal that organizations value people who are available 24/7 and who meet the “ideal worker” norm 37 . Given that the burdens of caregiving and housework still primarily fall on women, people may believe that it is more difficult for women to succeed in performance-oriented organizations. Moreover, people may expect biases against women to persist, even when organizations commit to seemingly meritocratic principles. This possibility is in line with prior research that found managers were more biased when evaluating employees with meritocratic standards than when asked to evaluate them based on neutral criteria that did not explicitly mention meritocratic values 38 , 39 .

People evaluated employees promoted in organizations committed to equal opportunities and women’s advancement similarly. However, the differences between committing to equal opportunities versus uniform performance standards are smaller than the differences between committing to women’s advancement versus uniform performance standards. This is consistent with prior research, which suggested that any type of equality commitment affects how individuals are viewed, but that the impact is stronger if initiatives give more weight to demographic characteristics 3 , 29 , 40 , 41 . People may have believed that when organizations committed to women’s advancement, decision-makers gave more weight to gender in decision-making processes than when organizations committed to equal opportunities. The results suggest that people believed that employees’ gender was considered in the promotion process in organizations committed to women’s advancement and those committed to equal opportunities, but that they believed gender played a more salient role when organizations explicitly mentioned women.

The findings of our research have important implications for both organizational and political decision-making. Prior research claimed that organizations should exercise caution when seeking to actively increase their demographic diversity 7 . Our findings, however, suggest that the concern that equality commitments backfire through stigmatization of presumed beneficiaries may be unwarranted. We found that evaluations of women’s and men’s promotions were most similar when organizations committed to women’s advancement, suggesting people believe these organizations are successful at eradicating most of the sexism in the promotion process. Therefore, our findings support the implementation of organizational commitments to equality to the extent that these organizations are implementing policies, programs, and practices that actually help women advance and support them on the job, such as social accountability systems and work-life programs 42 . If organizations are outwardly committed to women’s advancement but using different metrics or processes to evaluate women and men, this could be particularly harmful for women’s advancement because the inequalities will be hidden behind seemingly egalitarian values. After all, gender bias is perpetuated most by those who do not believe inequalities exist 10 , 43 . Special consideration should be given to how to frame equality commitments that gain the support of those who are most skeptical.

To extend our collective knowledge on the impacts of equality and diversity initiatives, future research should consider how the effects identified in the current research generalize to other contexts and outcomes. For example, do our results generalize to occupations that are lower status or that have different gender ratios? Additionally, although Germany and the United States share many characteristics, there could be some country-level differences. Scholars may also consider whether alternative framings of equality commitments, such as a “commitment to diversity”, have similar impacts on success attributions and fairness evaluations. In light of the finding that white able-bodied heterosexual men experience better career opportunities than members of various other intersectional groups 44 , future research should consider whether evaluations differ across employees based on their particular constellation of identities. Future studies could also examine the impact of equality commitments on other outcomes, such as hiring and pay raises.

Materials and methods

This experiment was implemented in a survey on work values and attitudes in Germany in early 2023. Using a national probability sampling scheme, 6000 respondents that were 23–65 years old were invited via mail to participate in the online study. Potential respondents were incentivized with a €10 post-hoc payment for study participation. The experimental protocol received ethical approval from the WZB Berlin Social Science Center Ethics Committee prior to collecting the data and informed consent was obtained from all participants. All research was performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines. Following our preregistered analysis plan 35 , we excluded respondents who failed the manipulation check (967 of 4211 respondents). We also dropped data from 15 respondents who were missing data on variables included in the analysis, which led to an analytic sample of 3229 respondents. Older respondents and respondents with higher education were more likely to participate, which is common for survey research 45 , 46 . See Table S1 for the demographic characteristics of the initial and analytic samples.

Germany shares many structural and economic features with other rich democracies, making the findings relevant for many countries. Despite major political advances to promote gender equality, such as the introduction of a Swedish-style parental leave scheme in the early 2000s and a liberalization of public opinion regarding mothers’ employment 47 , Germany is still characterized by a traditional gender division of paid and unpaid work 48 , 49 , as well as high levels of income inequality between women and men 50 . While women’s labor force participation has consistently risen in recent decades, it still lags 8 percentage points behind men’s 51 , and women are still underrepresented in leadership positions. The proportion of women in management positions in Germany is 29%, well below the European average of 35% 51 . A broad array of policy and organizational level measures have been established to close this gender authority gap 52 . For example, in Germany public firms have been mandated to implement policies to foster equality since 1994 and the majority of private sector employees also work in firms with organizational policies that promote gender equality 11 .

Experimental design

Relying on a between-subjects design, we randomly assigned respondents to read one vignette that described an employee who was recently promoted. We varied three dimensions of the vignette. First, we varied the employee’s gender by indicating her/his first name; we selected a typically female and a typically male name from common first names in Germany in the year 1990 (when employees in their early 30s would have been born) 53 . Second, we varied whether the employee’s current employer was committed to “performance and uniform assessment standards”, “women’s advancement”, or “equal opportunities”. Our objective was to signal organizations’ general commitments rather than to specifically state that the employee did or did not benefit from an affirmative action program. This increases external validity because it is unlikely that people would know the exact details behind an employee’s promotion, but the organization’s general position on equality would be common knowledge 4 , 54 . Third, we varied whether the employee’s competitor in the promotion contest was a woman or man, which is indicated by the ending for the German word for competitor (“Bewerberin”/“Bewerber”). The competitor dimension is included in all models, but treated as a covariate rather than an independent variable. With this design, our findings should generalize to same-sex and different-sex promotion contests.

We held the following factors constant in the vignette: target employees’ marital and parental status, age, occupation, and work performance. All employees were described as married with two children, because most employees do have or will have children. We chose lawyer as the occupation because it is one of the few gender-balanced high-status occupations in Germany (52 percent of lawyers were women in 2022) 55 . We described employees’ work performance as “average to good” to ensure maximum variation across outcomes. A vignette with each variation of the manipulated dimensions is shown below:

[Julia/Tobias] Müller, early 30s, married, two children, has been working as a lawyer in a large company for several years and has recently been promoted. [Her/his] work was always rated average to good. [Her/his] employer commits to [performance and uniform assessment standards/women’s advancement/equal opportunities]. [She/he] succeeded in getting the promotion against a similarly qualified [woman/man] competitor.

Dependent variables

After reading the vignette, respondents were asked “How decisive do you think the following factors were in getting [Julia/Tobias] promoted?” for both “intelligence” and “effort”. Answer options ranged from 1 ( not at all decisive ) to 7 ( very decisive ). They were also asked, “How fair do you think it is that [Julia/Tobias] was promoted?” from 1 ( very unfair ) to 7 ( very fair ). The order in which the questions were asked was randomized. See Table S2 for the means and standard deviations of the dependent variables for each of the six conditions.

Statistical analysis

We relied on our preregistration to guide our analyses 35 . We estimated six OLS regression models (one for each outcome variable, stratified by employee gender). As our tests of OLS assumptions revealed that error terms were not homoscedastic across all models, we report results with robust standard errors. We included all manipulated dimensions in the models, as well as the following respondent-level characteristics: gender (woman, man, non-binary), relationship status (married or in a civil partnerships, other), children under 18 in the household (children, no children), age groups by decade (20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s), region of upbringing (East Germany, West Germany, outside Germany), education (tertiary degree, no tertiary degree), and respondents’ subjective assessment of their financial situation (comfortable, getting by, hard or very hard to get by). We used an \(\alpha\) level of 0.05 (two-tailed) for all statistical tests. In our pre-registration, we planned to estimate one-tailed statistical tests for our directed hypotheses, but we present the more conservative two-tailed tests. The results are displayed in Figs.  1 , 2 and 3 . See Table S3 for regression models.

We also examined how the impacts of being a woman employee changed across organizational commitments by estimating OLS regression models with interaction terms for employee gender and organizational commitments and robust standard errors. Following the regression models, we estimated the contrasts of marginal linear predictions of employee gender by the organizational commitment to facilitate the interpretation of the interaction effects. The contrasts of the marginal linear predictions show whether the gender gaps in success attributions and fairness evaluations significantly differ across types of organizational commitment. See Table S4 for the regression coefficients and Table S5 for the contrasts of marginal linear predictions.

Sensitivity analyses

We tested that the results were robust to multiple model specifications. First, we estimated OLS regressions excluding respondent-level covariates and including respondents who failed the manipulation check (Tables S6 – S8 ). Second, we estimated ordered logit regressions and regressions with box-cox transformed dependent variables as alternative ways to address the heteroscedasticity of the errors in some models (Tables S9 , S10 ). Our results were robust to each of these alternative specifications.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Newton-Small, J. Perspective|Biden promised to pick a female VP. That’s not ‘patronizing’. It’s common sense. Washington Post (2020).

Leslie, L. M., Mayer, D. M. & Kravitz, D. A. The stigma of affirmative action: A stereotyping-based theory and meta-analytic test of the consequences for performance. Acad. Manag. J. 57 , 964–989 (2014).

Article   Google Scholar  

Heilman, M. E., Battle, W. S., Keller, C. E. & Lee, R. A. Type of affirmative action policy: A determinant of reactions to sex-based preferential selection? J. Appl. Psychol. 83 , 190–205 (1998).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Heilman, M. E., Block, C. J. & Lucas, J. A. Presumed incompetent? Stigmatization and affirmative action efforts. J. Appl. Psychol. 77 , 536–544 (1992).

Heilman, M. E., Block, C. J. & Stathatos, P. The affirmative action stigma of incompetence: Effects of performance information ambiguity. Acad. Manag. J. 40 , 603–625 (1997).

Heilman, M. E., McCullough, W. F. & Gilbert, D. The other side of affirmative action: Reactions of nonbeneficiaries to sex-based preferential selection. J. Appl. Psychol. 81 , 346–357 (1996).

Heilman, M. E. & Welle, B. Disadvantaged by diversity? The effects of diversity goals on competence perceptions. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 36 , 1291–1319 (2006).

Eagly, A. H., Nater, C., Miller, D. I., Kaufmann, M. & Sczesny, S. Gender stereotypes have changed: A cross-temporal meta-analysis of US public opinion polls from 1946 to 2018. Am. Psychol. 75 , 301–315 (2020).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Sullivan, J., Ciociolo, A. & Moss-Racusin, C. A. Establishing the content of gender stereotypes across development. PLoS ONE 17 , e0263217 (2022).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Scarborough, W. J., Sin, R. & Risman, B. Attitudes and the stalled gender revolution: Egalitarianism, traditionalism, and ambivalence from 1977 through 2016. Gend. Soc. 33 , 173–200 (2019).

Zimmermann, F. & Collischon, M. Do organizational policies narrow gender inequality? Novel evidence from longitudinal employer–employee data. Sociol. Sci. 10 , 47–81 (2023).

Heider, F. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1958).

Book   Google Scholar  

Kelley, H. H. The processes of causal attribution. Am. Psychol. 28 , 107–128 (1973).

Graham, S. An attributional theory of motivation. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 61 , 101861 (2020).

Ridgeway, C. L. & Correll, S. J. Unpacking the gender system: A theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. Gend. Soc. 18 , 510–531 (2004).

Correll, S. J., Benard, S. & Paik, I. Getting a job: Is there a motherhood penalty? Am. J. Sociol. 112 , 1297–1339 (2007).

Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P. & Xu, J. A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 82 , 878–902 (2002).

Munsch, C. L. & Gruys, K. What threatens, defines: Tracing the symbolic boundaries of contemporary masculinity. Sex Roles 79 , 375–392 (2018).

Baltrunaite, A., Casarico, A. & Rizzica, L. Women in economics: The role of gendered references at entry in the profession. CEPR Press Discuss. Pap. (2022).

Brescoll, V. L. & Uhlmann, E. L. Can an angry woman get ahead?: Status conferral, gender, and expression of emotion in the workplace. Psychol. Sci. 19 , 268–275 (2008).

Moss-Racusin, C. A. & Johnson, E. R. Backlash against male elementary educators: Backlash against male educators. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 46 , 379–393 (2016).

Livingston, R. W., Rosette, A. S. & Washington, E. F. Can an agentic black woman get ahead? The impact of race and interpersonal dominance on perceptions of female leaders. Psychol. Sci. 23 , 354–358 (2012).

Disher, N. G., Guerra, A. L. & Haeffel, G. J. Men have ability, women are lucky: A pre-registered experiment examining gender bias in knowledge attribution. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 60 , 808–825 (2021).

Kelley, H. H. & Michela, J. L. Attribution theory and research. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 31 , 457–501 (1980).

Heilman, M. E. Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder. J. Soc. Issues 57 , 657–674 (2001).

Hegtvedt, K. A. Justice frameworks. In Contemporary Social Psychological Theories 2nd edn (ed. Hegtvedt, K. A.) 54–80 (Stanford University Press, 2018).

Google Scholar  

Garcia, L. T., Erskine, N., Hawn, K. & Casmay, S. R. The effect of affirmative action on attributions about minority group members. J. Pers. 49 , 427–437 (1981).

Deutsch, M. Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice? J. Soc. Issues 31 , 137–149 (1975).

Harrison, D. A., Kravitz, D. A., Mayer, D. M., Leslie, L. M. & Lev-Arey, D. Understanding attitudes toward affirmative action programs in employment: Summary and meta-analysis of 35 years of research. J. Appl. Psychol. 91 , 1013–1036 (2006).

Schneider, S. M. & Castillo, J. C. Poverty attributions and the perceived justice of income inequality: A comparison of east and west Germany. Soc. Psychol. Q. 78 , 263–282 (2015).

Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H. & Ng, K. Y. Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. J. Appl. Psychol. 86 , 425–445 (2001).

Mueller, C. W. & Landsman, M. J. Legitimacy and justice perceptions. Soc. Psychol. Q. 67 , 189–202 (2004).

Van den Bos, K., Lind, E. A., Vermunt, R. & Wilke, H. A. M. How do I judge my outcome when I do not know the outcome of others? The psychology of the fair process effect. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 72 , 1034–1046 (1997).

Van den Bos, K. What is responsible for the fair process effect? In Handbook of Organizational Justice (ed. Van den Bos, K.) 273–300 (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 2005).

Gendered success attributions and fairness evaluations (#119102). AsPredicted. https://aspredicted.org/blind.php?x=DRD_XGF .

Foschi, M. Double standards for competence: Theory and research. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 26 , 21–42 (2000).

Williams, J. C. Unbending Gender: Why Family and Work Conflict and What to Do About It (Oxford University Press, 2001).

Castilla, E. J. Gender, race, and meritocracy in organizational careers. Am. J. Sociol. 113 , 48 (2008).

Castilla, E. J. & Benard, S. The paradox of meritocracy in organizations. Adm. Sci. Q. 55 , 543–576 (2010).

Bolzendahl, C. & Coffé, H. Public support for increasing women and minority MPs. Polit. Gend. 16 , 681–710 (2020).

Golden, H., Hinkle, S. & Crosby, F. Reactions to affirmative action: Substance and semantics. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 31 , 73–88 (2001).

Dobbin, F. & Kalev, A. The civil rights revolution at work: What went wrong. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 47 , 281–303 (2021).

Begeny, C. T., Ryan, M. K., Moss-Racusin, C. A. & Ravetz, G. In some professions, women have become well represented, yet gender bias persists—Perpetuated by those who think it is not happening. Sci. Adv. 6 , 7814 (2020).

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Cech, E. A. The intersectional privilege of white able-bodied heterosexual men in STEM. Sci. Adv. 8 , 1558 (2022).

Revilla, M. & Höhne, J. Comparing the participation of Millennials and older age cohorts in the CROss-National Online Survey panel and the German Internet Panel. Surv. Res. Methods 1 , 499–513. https://doi.org/10.18148/SRM/2020.V14I5.7619 (2020).

Reyes, G. Understanding nonresponse rates: Insights from 600,000 opinion surveys. World Bank Econ. Rev. 34 , S98–S102 (2020).

Blome, A. The Politics of Work-Family Policy Reforms in Germany and Italy (Routledge, 2017).

Hipp, L., Bernhardt, J. & Allmendinger, J. Institutions and the prevalence of nonstandard employment. Socio-Econ. Rev. 13 , 351–377 (2015).

Kühhirt, M. Childbirth and the long-term division of labour within couples: How do substitution, bargaining power, and norms affect parents’ time allocation in west Germany? Eur. Sociol. Rev. 28 , 565–582 (2012).

Statistisches Bundesamt. Gender Pay Gap . https://www.destatis.de/EN/Themes/Labour/Earnings/GenderPayGap/_node.html (2023).

Statistisches Bundesamt. Frauen in Führungs­positionen in Der EU . https://www.destatis.de/Europa/DE/Thema/Bevoelkerung-Arbeit-Soziales/Arbeitsmarkt/Qualitaet-der-Arbeit/_dimension-1/08_frauen-fuehrungspositionen.html (2023).

Wright, E. O., Baxter, J. & Birkelund, G. E. The gender gap in workplace authority: A cross-national study. Am. Sociol. Rev. 60 , 407 (1995).

Gesellschaft für deutsche Sprache e. V. Die beliebtesten Vornamen. Gesellschaft für deutsche Sprache e. V. https://gfds.de/vornamen/beliebteste-vornamen/ (2023).

Leslie, L. M. Diversity initiative effectiveness: A typological theory of unintended consequences. Acad. Manag. Rev. 44 , 538–563 (2019).

Bundesagentur für Arbeit Statistik. Berufe auf einen Blick—Statistik der Bundesagentur für Arbeit . https://statistik.arbeitsagentur.de/DE/Navigation/Statistiken/Interaktive-Statistiken/Berufe-auf-einen-Blick/Berufe-auf-einen-Blick-Anwendung-Nav.html (2023).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Jutta Allmendinger, the initiative Chef:innen:sache, Die Zeit, and infas for supporting the data collection for this project, the members of the WZB-HU writing workshop for their valuable comments and feedback on a previous version of the manuscript, as well as Armin Sauermann, Marcel Knobloch, Sandra Leumann, and Corinna Harsch for their help with the survey.

Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. Funding for this project was provided by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research Grant # 01UG1806.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

American Institutes for Research, Arlington, VA, USA

Kristin Kelley

WZB Berlin Social Science Center, Berlin, Germany

Kristin Kelley, Lena Hipp & Paula Protsch

University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany

University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany

Paula Protsch

BIBB Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training, Bonn, Germany

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: LH, KK, PP. Methodology: LH, KK, PP. Visualization: KK. Writing—original draft: KK. Writing—review & editing: LH, KK, PP.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristin Kelley .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary tables., rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Kelley, K., Hipp, L. & Protsch, P. Organizational commitments to equality change how people view women’s and men’s professional success. Sci Rep 14 , 7609 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-56829-1

Download citation

Received : 01 December 2023

Accepted : 12 March 2024

Published : 31 March 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-56829-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Pushing forward for gender equality: CSW68 event showcases strategies for countering pushback and advancing women’s rights around the world

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to LinkedIn
• Share to E-mail

More than 2 billion people, across more than 60 countries, will head to the polls in national and local elections in 2024. Amid concerns that democracy and gender equality are backsliding, these elections represent a watershed for pushing forward for gender equality.

On 20 March 2024, UN Women, in partnership with UNDP, UNFPA, and OHCHR, gathered partners to discuss strategies for advancing gender equality at “Multistakeholder Partnerships and Practices to Push Forward for Gender Equality, Human Rights, and Democracy”, a flagship side event held at UN headquarters and online during the 68th session of the Commission on the Status of Women .

“We, collectively, know that the backlash against gender equality is on the rise”, said Sima Bahous, Executive Director of UN Women, opening the discussion. “Long-established, universal human rights and women’s rights frameworks are being challenged. Hard-won gender equality gains are at risk and already being reversed.” 

“Yet, we are not deterred”, she continued. “Women human rights defenders, youth, civil society, parliamentarians, and public servants at all levels within governments and in multilateral organizations are working to push forward for gender equality in their communities and in their countries. They are working for peace, a planet in balance, and to advance the promises of the Sustainable Development Goals.”

Co-opening the event, Abdallah Al Dardari, UNDP Assistant Secretary-General and Director of the Regional Bureau for Arab States, noted that “any rebound from COVID and the other polycrises in the world today cannot happen with the sliding back of women’s rights” and highlighted the determination of UN agencies to push forward together.

Diene Keita, UNFPA Assistant Secretary-General, Deputy Executive Director (Programme), highlighted “the collective responsibility to provide effective solutions, including setting norms and policies for gender equality, despite growing crises and complex geopolitics”, and spotlighted examples of UNFPA’s commitment to pushing forward for gender equality through partnerships, including working with religious and traditional leaders to challenge harmful norms and stereotypes.

“The feminist movement and movements for women’s rights continue relentlessly and strongly as a significant force for equality, building alliances across sectors and diverse groups”, said Lopa Banerjee, Director of UN Women’s Civil Society Division, who invited speakers to share their examples of work around the world. 

Mgeni Hassan Juma, Deputy Speaker of the Zanzibar House of Representatives, and Anna Kulaya, National Coordinator of Women in Law and Development Africa (WiLDAF), shared insights from their collaboration involving the government, parliamentarians and civil society to prevent violence against women in politics especially ahead of Tanzania’s upcoming elections. 

Mgeni Hassan Juma cited a recent bill passed to categorize attacks on women in politics in Tanzania as election-related offences, calling it “a critical milestone that guarantees women’s safety in the electoral process and therefore promotes their effective participation as candidates, voters, and election administrators.”

The significance of a collective approach was highlighted by Arundhati Sridhar, Research Lead at Gender at Work India. She cited the example of the Feminist Leadership Lab, which brought 25 young leaders from across India to share expertise and collective strategies, including on engaging more meaningfully with electoral politics. A key impact of this approach, as Sridhar highlighted, was that it generated “two of the most precious resources for movement building: solidarity and hope.”

As other speakers shared their experiences, common threads appeared relating to strategies and practices of building trust and consensus and ensuring the voice and experiences of women informed advocacy and policy development. For example, Andy Yentriyani, Chair of Indonesia’s National Commission on Violence Against Women, shared how building coalitions—including survivor’s groups, labour groups, law enforcement, and government officials—and taking careful efforts to enable constructive dialogue was influential in the passage of a 2022 law to provide protection from sexual violence.

Maria Fernanda Espinosa, Executive Director of GWL Voices for Changes and Inclusion, noted that since 1945 women have led the 54 main international organizations only 13 per cent of the time. 

“In 78 years of history, the most representative body of the UN, the General Assembly, has had only four women as its President”, she said. Espinosa advocated for gender equality within leadership positions of the multilateral system, proposing gender rotation for the presidency of the UN General Assembly to address the inequality gap.

Saša Jurečko, Deputy Permanent Representative from Permanent Mission of Slovenia to the UN, called on member states and stakeholders to support the demand for better representation of women in multilateralism and in leadership positions in the UN, noting “effective advocacy and change comes from working together.”

Samira Asghari, member of the International Olympic Committee and former captain of the the Afghan women’s national basketball team, and Isabelle Picco, Permanent Representative of Monaco to the UN and co-chair of the Group of Friends of Sport for Development and Peace, highlighted the transformative power of sport to push forward for gender equality, particularly for young women and girls. 

Throughout the discussion, speakers from diverse backgrounds showcased the importance of collaborative efforts in countering backlash, advocating for legislative reform, and supporting women’s movements. Common threads included the significance of building trust, fostering solidarity, and ensuring women's experiences inform change. 

The event can be watched in full here .

• 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
• Gender equality and inequality
• Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
• Gender equality and women’s empowerment

Related content

Speech: Gender equality – just, prudent, and essential for everything we all aspire to

Speech: We are not deterred – Let us push forward together for gender equality

Speech: Ambitiously proactive – Generation Equality brings hope to stalled progress and financing