Kelly Ward
Washington State University
Goals for the Session
 Importance of work/life integration
 Dual career couples
 Facts, figures, policies, practices
 Work/family
 Early career, mid-career, policy, practice
 Diapers, car pools, college, eldercare
 Life course perspectives
 All career and life stages—not just early career
 Recruitment, retention, promotion
Life in the academy…
 Higher Education is in flux
 34% of faculty are part-time
 28% of full time positions are not tenure track
 Academics (future academics) lives are complicated
 Most faculty have partners
 Desire for work-life integration
 Dual career couples increasing/more open
 Institutions of higher education are not altruistic
 Ideal worker norms abound
Why be “family friendly”?
 To recruit, promote and retain best faculty
 Concerns about (under) representation of women and




people of color
To be responsive to underrepresentation of women in
different fields
To have higher morale and greater productivity
To create more equitable work places
Pressure from external sources
More on importance…
• Makes for a good place to work
• Recruitment, retention, and career development
• Mimetic isomorphism
• Millennial faculty
• Dual career couples
• Shared parenting
• New models for families
• People are happier/healthier
What is included?
 Dual career couples (academic and other)
 Parenthood
 Birth and babies (leave and day care)
 Children/family
 Adoption
 Sick care (self and others)
 Elder care
 Same sex couples/families
 Personal health and well being
 All career stages, not just new faculty
 Men and women
A word about gender….
 Work/life concerns tend to be associated with women
 Women and men impacted in different ways
 Important to keep needs of women in mind, but also to
recognize that all people are affected by work/life issues
 True change in society and academic settings will take
place when men and women shift in thinking and action
 Traditional norms are shifting, but still prevail
Gendered Terrain
Facts, Figures, Policy, Practice
Not all couples are the same
 72% of academics are part of a
dual career couple
 36% of professoriate is
partnered to an academic
 36% with non academic
partner
 Women are more likely to have
academic partners
 < 30% of academics are single
or married to stay-at-home
partner
Clayman Institute, Stanford
Types of academic couples
Academic couples can enter faculty jobs in one of three ways:
 Dual hires (10%): Both partners are hired as part of a negotiation. The majority are hired
“sequentially” or as “joint hires.”
 Independent hires (17%): Those who secured employment separately from their couple
status. Often hired without mention of a partner (who also works at the university).
 Solo hires (9%): Academic couples where one partner is hired in a tenure track position
and the other isn’t currently employed in an academic position.
Clayman Institute
Dual career couples and diversity
Nearly one-half of faculty
respondents in same-sex partnerships
have academic partners.
Nearly one-third of
underrepresented racial/ethnic
minority faculty have academic
partners.
Clayman Institute
Dual Career Couples and Gender
• Women are more likely than men to be in an academic partnership
• Dual career hiring higher for women than men
• Men are more likely than women to have stay-at-home partners
• Women are more likely to be single.
Clayman Institute
Gender and dual careers
 50% of men in academic couples and 20% of women view





their career as primary
59% of women in academic couples say careers are equal
Women less likely to accept a job if partner not
accommodated
54% of women and 42% of men perceive loss of mobility as a
result of dual career
Disciplinary endogamy more prevalent for women (83%) than
men (54%) (women more likely to be with other scientists than
men with other scientists)
Dual career couple policies need to be linked to these realities
Dual career policies/practices
Types of “help”
 Ad hoc, decentralized
 Relocation assistance (formal and informal)
 Consortia/networks (Higher Education Recruitment Consortium)
 Campus resource banks for jobs in community
 Shared/split positions
 Bridging positions
 Creation of non-tenure track or tenure track positions
 Resources for all types of couples
Important to have, know, and use policies.
When dual career hiring works
 Serendipity/luck
 Initial hire is really wanted
 Fit of second hire
 Meeting needs of units hiring
 Culture and receptivity of hiring department/campus
 Willingness/needs of second hire
 Availability of resources
 Person-unit fit for both members of couple
Couple considerations…
 Consider shared/split positions (needs to be raised by the




couple)
Know advantages/disadvantages of when to reveal couple status
Investigate campus cultures (provost, human resources, faculty
development websites; hiring packets)
Make contacts on campus to try and assess campus culture
around dual careers
Know what you want in terms of accommodation
 Know each other’s preferences and bottom lines
 Be open to other places of work beyond campus
More advice…
 Be open to possibilities--accommodation can take many
forms
 Know when to compromise
 Stay updated and look for opportunities at “couple
friendly” campuses
 Explore NSF ADVANCE campuses and resources
 Finalize couple hire as part of contract/letter of offer
 Learn from others (FAQ’s, websites)
 Marry well!
When to reveal?
 Assess campus culture via websites, personal contacts,
interview, and materials
 Campuses need to know to provide assistance
 Campuses getting more open about dual careers
 Advantages/disadvantages of each stage for reveal….
 Cover letter (they know BUT if biased could be excluded)
 Interview (talk to department chair if seems prudent)
 The offer (negotiations last chance for accommodation)
 More so than right or wrong answer; know advantages and
disadvantages
Best practices--Department chairs
 Know the policies/resources available on campus
 Keep informed about dual career couples/work-life policies
 Follow hiring procedures as close as possible for second hire
 Faculty involvement
 Tenure track vs. temporary
 Make sure you are getting a person you really want
 Maintain good relationships with other chairs and deans
 Think strategically about departmental directions, not just
immediate needs
 Think of what’s good for institution not just department
 Hire based on merit, don’t stigmatize dual career hire
Best practices--Institutions
 Establish clearly worded, written policy
 Develop policies in cooperation with faculty and







administration
Be mindful of affirmative action policies
Publicize/disseminate policy to all candidates
Educate chairs and deans about policy
Provide centralized funding
Provide clear funding guidelines
Join consortia (HERC) and develop cooperation agreements
Evaluate policy
Research, Policy, Practice
Why pay attention?
 Work and family has been an “either/or” proposition
(especially for women)
 Could wait to have children
 Could opt not to pursue an academic career
 Could opt for a less prestigious position
 How do faculty manage work and family?
Academic motherhood study
 Interviews with 120 women
 Research universities, comprehensive colleges, liberal arts,
community colleges
 All with children, all tenure track
 Variety of fields
 Longitudinal: Interviewed early career (less than five
years) and mid career (5-7 years later)
 Reviewed institutional policies
Early Career Findings
 The joy of professional and personal roles
 Academic work is flexible, but unending
 Having a child makes people efficient, puts things into
perspective
 Buffering—work buffers family; family buffers work
Early Career Findings
 Preoccupation with timing
 The second shift is alive and well
 Significance of supportive culture
 Policies are important (but fear around
use)
Mid Career Findings
 Most were successful and thriving
 Mid Career--more flexibility, less work
stress
 Parental concerns shift
 Not wanting to deal with politics
 Pipeline not a natural progression
Mid Career Findings
 Burnout
 Need for self care
 Mentoring and support
 Served as mentors for new junior faculty and
graduate students – path makers
 Helped to create some institutional policies
 Mentoring mid career drops off yet still in
need of support and professional
development
Work family policies
 Day care – affordable and accessible
 Tenure clock stop policies
 Parental/family leave
 Modified duties
 Flexible tenure clocks
Common myths…
 I’ll never get an academic job if I’m in a couple or
want/have children
 Academic jobs are too complicated
 Having a life and academic careers don’t get along
 Second hires aren’t as good as the primary hire
 Work-life concerns and policies are focused on women
 It’s only possible to get accommodation when first hired
 Dual career couple and work-family policies are only for
early career faculty
Policies
 Have policies
 One size may not fit all
 Creating a culture of use related to work-life and dual
career couple policies
 Professional development for all stages of career
 Mentorship at all stages of the career
 Centralized support and local implementation
 Know thy policy!
Creating environments…
 Think outside the box
 Work-family integration is broad
 Include men and women
 Acknowledge gendered terrain
 Families take many forms
 Career perspectives
 Maintain conversations
Case Study 1
Jules and Taylor met and fell in love while studying biology at
the University of Wisconsin. The had similar interests and the
same major professor. It didn’t take them long to realize that
they had a lot in common and that they were destined to be a
couple. Both Jules and Taylor have impressive C.V’s. They are
both strong students, have research and GA experience and both
want tenure track careers at research universities. They also are
aware of the job market and its difficulties. They figured out a
way to each get separate post-docs and still be in the same
geographic region. Now, they are ready to conquer the tenure
track job market.
Couples perspective:
 What advice do you have for Jules and Taylor about how
they should proceed?
 What are the things that they ought to do?
 How can they maximize the likelihood of being successful
on the job market?
 Are there things they shouldn’t do?
 What are the things they have working for them and
against them in this quest?
Department chair perspective:
 As a senior faculty member or leader in your area, what
would you do if you wanted to hire Jules and Taylor?
 How would you proceed if you wanted to make this
happen?
 What players need to be involved?
 What are the barriers that you face to making this hire
happen?
 What do you have working in your favor to make this
work?
Institutional perspective:
 What institutional policies would facilitate the hiring of
Jules and Taylor?
 What should central administration do to make this
possible?
 In what ways is it in the institutions best interest to hire
both Jules and Taylor?
 What are the concerns that are raised by this issue?
Case Study 2
Margaret and Joe came to University of Texas, San Antonio 5
years ago. Margaret is doing really well in a tenure track job in
Geology and Joe has been working as an adjunct in Engineering.
Initially, Joe did not have his Ph.D. so the adjunct position met
his needs. Having completed his degree, he is now looking for
something more permanent, preferably at UT or within a
commutable distance. Although nothing was formalized (but it
was implied), the initial intent was for Joe to get his degree and
get a tenure track position at UT. The degree took longer to finish
than Joe planned and the number of tenure track jobs in his field
has been limited. Margaret and Joe really want to stay here, but
are not sure what to do.
Couples perspective:
 What advice do you have for Margaret and Joe about how
they should proceed?
 What are the things that they ought to do to facilitate the
likelihood that they can stay together and stay at UT?
 Are there things they shouldn’t do? What are the things
they have working for them and against them in this
quest?
 How is their case different than the first case?
Department chair perspective:
 As a senior faculty member or leader in your area, what
would you do if you wanted to keep Margaret?
 What steps could you take to make this happen? Who
needs to be involved in such a decision?
 What are the barriers that you face to making this hire
happen?
 What do you have working in your favor to make this
work?
 How is this case different from the first case?
Institutional perspective:
 What institutional policies would facilitate the hiring of
Margaret and Joe?
 What should central administration do to make this
possible?
 In what ways is it in the institutions best interest to retain
both Margaret and Joe?
 What are the concerns that are raised by this issue?
Help, advice, suggestions
Resources
 Clayman Institute/Stanford University Dual-Career
Academic Couples: What Universities Need to Know
 Chronicle of Higher Education
 AAUP:
http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/comm/rep/dual.htm
 NSF ADVANCE:
 http://www.portal.advance.vt.edu/index.php/tags/du
al-career
 Books, articles, webinars websites (national/campus)
 HERC-Higher Education Recruitment Consortium
Shameless self promotion…
Rutgers University Press (2013)
Parting thoughts…
 Do good work
 Don’t overthink it…all of it
 Can’t plan for every contingency
 Be your best self
 There are lot of good jobs in the world
 Be open to possibilities
 Follow your bliss
 There are a lot ways to be successful
 Hang loose!!
Questions/Discussion
 Dual careers
 Work-family
 Policies
 Campus perspectives
 Individual perspectives
Questions? contact Kelly Ward kaward@wsu.edu