PROFESSOR JAN ATKINSON
‘UCL WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT’ PROJECT
FINAL REPORT SEPTEMBER 2010
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
UCL has had many recent successes in moving forward on gender equality across all
constituencies within the college. However, although UCL has almost equal numbers of male and
female students and staff, it has relatively few women in the highest grades of academic
leadership.
This is a summary report of a one-year project led by Professor Jan Atkinson (JA), in conjunction
with UCL-HR, which has been initiated and championed by the Provost. The long term aim of this
project, 'UCL Women in Leadership and Management’ (WLM), is to overcome this underrepresentation and establish gender equality in UCL’s management and leadership roles, so that
these draw on the full range of talents of UCL staff.
The aims of the WLM initiative are:

To find ways of increasing the number of women with the aspiration, knowledge, skills and
experience to apply for a leadership or management post, with a realistic chance of success.
This includes women’s membership of decision-making senior committees and working groups
in UCL.

To identify organisational or procedural barriers to the appointment of women to management
and leadership roles in order that they can be addressed.

To build on the successful Athena SWAN Charter Awards to UCL and its departments in
scientific disciplines and to disseminate ‘good practice’ in terms of gender equality across the
whole of UCL.
Wide consultation has been undertaken across UCL and with outside bodies concerned with
gender equality, on the factors affecting female career progression. In addition a number of
relevant surveys and questionnaires have served as sources of evidence. A short questionnaire,
gauging opinions across UCL on leadership and management initiatives, has been devised,
circulated and analysed by JA. Reference sources consulted, with additional statistical data where
relevant, are listed in the appendix.
Recommendations are listed below based on the work carried out on the project. It is hoped that
these will form part of UCL’s future strategy to achieve gender equality, and will be incorporated
into UCL’s revised Gender Equality Scheme, taking into account changes in the Government
Equality Bill, which unites all equality and diversity matters under one legal requirement.
When looking at the recommendations in this document, it is important to remember that gender
equality should not be regarded as a solely female concern, but should be considered and
understood in terms of the impact these changes in gender balance will have on the lives and
careers of both female and male members of the UCL community.
A Gender Equality Network
A major problem in disseminating good practice on initiatives for gender equality is the need for
effective communication between those working centrally in the UCL HR Equality Team and the
academic and support staff in the faculties. There is a risk that academics lack a sense of
‘ownership’ for taking forward initiatives and policy changes in this area. For this reason, a primary
recommendation of this report is the creation of a permanent faculty-wide network of Gender
Equality Ambassadors, whose remit is to encourage better two-way communication between those
operating centrally and staff in the academic faculties. This network will hopefully engage all
members of UCL in carrying forward new initiatives and policies within their faculties and
departments, so that these become firmly embedded within the culture of UCL.
This network model has already proved successful for Athena initiatives in a number of UCL’s SET
departments. Similar models have proved useful and successful in a number of Russell Group and
leading US Universities.
The proposed UCL Gender Equality Network, ‘UCL GEN’, would have as its members a UCL
Equality Champion (as in the proposed UCL Gender Equality Scheme), the HR Equality Team, an
Academic Lead Gender Equality Ambassador, one (or two) Faculty Gender Equality Ambassadors
from each UCL faculty, and departmental DEOLOs (Departmental Equal Opportunity Liaison
Officers).
A senior female academic/researcher would be appointed as the Academic Lead Gender
Equality Ambassador. This individual would lead the network of Faculty Gender Equality
Ambassadors. These Ambassadors would be one (or two) individuals (at least one female),
appointed in each faculty from among relatively senior academic or research staff. They would take
initiatives forward within their faculty, working primarily with the HR Equality Team and their
departmental DEOLOs. They would form a communication channel to and from members of their
faculty on gender equality matters. They would directly report to the Academic Lead Ambassador
and the Equality Champion. It is suggested that ambassadors would be appointed (or elected) for 2
or 3 years, with a maximum of 5 years in the position.
Recommendations:
A number of the recommendations below have already been acted upon in some departments, and
some are to be put in place in the next academic year.

The UCL Gender Equality Network (UCL-GEN) should be set up in the coming academic
year and should hold at least twice-termly meetings chaired by the Equality Champion and the
Lead Gender Equality Ambassador.

Leadership and Management Training: Each year a number of individuals should be
identified (suggested number 3-6 per faculty per annum) who are considered by the Faculty
Dean, in consultation with the Faculty Gender Equality Ambassadors, to be likely to benefit from
a short leadership training programme (or ‘Masterclass’). This programme would be developed
through the HR Office of Staff Development and would be initially open to female members of
UCL staff, but would be extended if funding permitted to male staff also.

Women on Major Committees: Following the current review of UCL Committees, the
composition of remaining committees and working groups should be reviewed with the explicit
goal of improving equality, in particular gender balance. The aim should be for at least 40%
women with relevant expertise, on all major decision-making committees and working groups.

Male and Female Pay: From the current pay review (Grades 1-9) there appears to be no
gender differential in pay. However, pay for men and women in grade 10 should be scrutinized,
where there are believed to be some gender differentials, which if verified should be prioritized
for rectifying.

Mentoring: Current mentoring schemes should be continued and extended. In addition, a
‘circle of advisors’ should be set up in each faculty. This would be a group of individuals (three
or four senior members of the faculty, both men and women- possibly including the faculty
ambassadors) who would be willing to give informal consultation and advice on specific aspects
of career development, e.g. balancing work with responsibilities outside work.

Interview panels: Interview panels for all appointments (academic, research, support staff)
should have a gender balance on the panel which is appropriate for the post, and should
include at least one female member.

Workload: Workload measures should explicitly include enabling and pastoral care activities,
and take full account of these, including recognition of any participation and responsibilities in
activities relating to the promotion of equalities.

Appraisal: Discussion of career progression (including prospective promotion and changes in
work:life balance where appropriate) should be an essential part of all appraisals. The current
format of the on-line appraisal form should be altered appropriately.

Promotion: Workshops on promotion, some specifically for women, should be maintained and
extended. The on-line HR document on promotion procedures should be reviewed to
investigate whether there are ways of simplifying and shortening it.

Timing of meetings: All significant meetings should be scheduled, whenever possible, to start
and end within the hours 9:30am – 5.00pm, to promote participation from across the whole
constituency of UCL.

UCL Women’s Achievements on UCL web: There should be increased and specific
highlighting of UCL women’s achievements on UCL web pages. The best source of such
information should come from the senior management of faculties and the UCL-GEN.

Women’s Champion Celebration Lecture: There should be an annual lecture given by a
prestigious female champion (a role model for academic and professional leadership). The
selection and organization of this event would be the responsibility of members of the UCLGEN.

Gender Equality Forum (internet blogs): These should be set up for discussion (which could
be anonymous at the point of delivery if desired) of such issues as the factors and solutions for
promoting women’s early career development, successful management of career breaks,
coping with the school holidays, work:life balance for those taking on caring responsibilities for
relatives.

Women, Work:Life Balance and Wellbeing: As part of the UCL Grand Challenge on Human
Wellbeing, there should be an event(s), with experts in the field and open discussion to highlight
the links in terms of wellbeing and happiness between women’s academic activities and
work:life balance.
‘UCL WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT’ PROJECT
FINAL REPORT SEPTEMBER 2010
1. Background
UCL has a long history of being at the forefront in terms of gender equality in its egalitarian
tradition. Massive changes in gender balance have been brought about over the past few years
and today in UCL there is a near equal balance of female and male staff and students. However
there are still relatively few women in senior grades or in the top decision-making bodies in UCL.
In recent years there have been a number of successful gender equality initiatives, many of these
being related to Athena, a national body hosted by the Royal Society for promoting career
development for women in SET (Science, Engineering and Technology - including mathematics,
medicine and architecture/built environment (‘STEMM’)) through its ASSET surveys and SWAN
awards programme. The Provost and Senior Management Teams have fully supported these
initiatives.
Since 2004, Prof Jan Atkinson (JA) has been UCL’s Coordinator for Athena, a national body,
initially hosted by the Royal Society, to promote women’s career development in scientific
disciplines through its ASSET surveys and SWAN Charter Awards programme. UCL’s participation
and successes in these programmes are outlined below.
2. WLM and the wider ‘equalities agenda’
UCL is currently reviewing its Gender Equality Scheme as required by Government, in the light of
the Equalities Act 2010. The new Act provides a common framework for all equalities issues
(gender race, disability, age, sexual orientation). In the light of this, the case for a specific
programme to develop women in leadership and management may need particular justification.
While there are common ethical and legal principles involved, each area of equality arises in a
different historical, cultural, and demographic context and faces distinct obstacles. Distinctive
issues for women’s development include their large proportion in the population (as distinct from
minority groups), their relatively high presence in the early stages of academic careers, and the
impediments to their career progress created by childbearing and family carer roles. Furthermore,
the issues associated with access to high-level leadership positions are difficult to combine with the
attention to across-the-board equalities at all levels. For these reasons, a focus on women in
leadership and management requires there to be individuals within UCL who have specific
responsibility for this goal. The institution also needs to set specific objectives in this area, over and
above the broader need for gender equality at all levels within UCL, which is the goal of the
Equality Team within HR and the UCL Gender Equality Scheme.
For new initiatives concerning UCL women in leadership and management, those taking these
initiatives forward will need to deal with aspirant women and their peers at the highest levels within
UCL. This role will be best fulfilled by individuals who have themselves high-level academic and
managerial experience in UCL, hence the proposal in the recommendations below for a UCL
Gender Equality Ambassador and Faculty Gender Equality Ambassadors. These roles should
share the strategic vision and work closely within the wider equalities agenda for which HR is
responsible, but academic leadership will be essential to carry the strategy forward.
3. Athena ASSET and SWAN programmes.
JA, as UCL’s Athena co-ordinator, was responsible for setting up an Athena Advisory Group and
for leading UCL on Athena ASSET (Athena Survey in Science, Engineering and Technology), and
Athena SWAN (Scientific Women’s Academic Network). UCL has participated in ASSET in 2004,
2006 and 2010. The data has been analysed at a national level and JA has analysed further the
responses from UCL participants in SET departments, taking these results for discussion to the
UCL Committee for Equal Opportunities. These results have helped to inform the WLM initiative.
UCL was one of the first universities to be awarded a Bronze Athena SWAN Charter in 2006, which
was renewed in 2009 for its progress in forwarding careers for women in SET. JA presented the
UCL SWAN Charter award trophy to the Provost, who has endorsed these submissions, at the
Heads of Departments meeting in December 2009.
Four SWAN Charter Awards (Silver) were awarded in 2009 to UCL. These were to the Division of
Psychology and Language Sciences consisting of 8 departments/institutes within the Life Sciences
Faculty (‘PaLS’ ), the MRC Laboratory for Molecular Cell Biology (LMCB), the UCL Departments of
Chemical Engineering and of Civil, Environmental and Geomatic Engineering
Copies of the proposals and Action Plans for the Bronze Renewal award and the Silver awards can
be found at: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/hr/equalities/gender/athena_swan.php.
4. UCL Women in Leadership and Management project
In the autumn of 2009 the UCL President and Provost, Prof Malcolm Grant, asked JA to lead on a
project in conjunction with UCL-HR, on 'UCL Women into Leadership and Management'. The longterm aim of this project is to establish gender equality in management and leadership roles within
UCL, where at present women are under-represented in a number of areas.
4.1 Remit
The core aims of the WLM project, agreed with Sarah Brant, the Director of Human Resources,
are:

To find ways to increase the number of women with the aspiration, knowledge, skills and
experience to be able to apply for a leadership/management post, with a realistic chance of
success. This would include women’s membership within decision-making senior committees
and working groups in UCL.

To identify organisational or procedural barriers to the appointment of women to management
and leadership roles in order that they can be addressed

To build on the successful Athena SWAN Charter award of UCL and its departments,
disseminating ‘good practice’ across UCL, so that all the departments in UCL move forward as
a whole towards gender equality.
4.2 Methodology
Consultation by JA has been undertaken to gather experiences and perceptions and to understand
further the key issues affecting women in UCL.
In addition, a number of relevant surveys and questionnaires have served as sources of evidence
concerning current experiences and perceptions within UCL.
A short questionnaire was devised, circulated, and analysed by JA on possible new leadership and
management initiatives which might be extended or introduced in UCL. The analysis of responses
to this questionnaire is presented in appendix 2.
4.3 Areas of potential focus
1. Review the work in the departments/divisions which were successful in the SWAN Charter
Award so that lessons of good practice for gender equality can be learnt and disseminated
across UCL. This will include support for new submissions for SWAN Charter Awards from SET
departments, divisions, and faculties, and similar initiatives to be put in place, if not already
present, in non-SET departments, divisions, or faculties in UCL.
2. Identify any barriers in UCL’s recruitment, promotion or work:life balance arrangements that
may militate against women progressing in their careers or lead to bias in decision making on
career progression.
3. Learn from best practice in other universities, in UK and abroad, in considering any new
initiatives and their effectiveness.
4. Consider creation and leadership of a UCL group which is actively interested in improving the
number of women at senior levels within UCL and whose members are prepared to contribute
to this project in future years. This may involve identifying champions and ambassadors to lead
on matters of gender equality within faculties, divisions, institutes and departments.
4.4 Output
JA introduced this project at the Provost’s Heads of Departments meeting in December 2009 and
spoke briefly about the Interim Report at the Provost’s Heads of Departments meeting in June,
2010.
The project culminates in this report summarising the work undertaken, outcomes and
achievements with specific recommendations for further action.
It is proposed that many of the recommendations in this document should be included in the Action
Plan for the UCL Gender Equality Scheme which is currently being reviewed, with a new
submission in the near future.
5. Progress on the WLM project
5.1 Consultation
Over the past months, JA has consulted with the following to gather experiences and perceptions,
and to attempt to identify the key issues obstructing women from progressing in their careers to
reach senior levels, at an equivalent rate to their male peers

Faculty Deans and their Senior Management Teams; Staff meetings within faculties;

Women currently in senior academic management positions in UCL;

Lay members of Council who are themselves distinguished individuals who can add insights
and be supportive of the project;

UCL Director of Human Resources and members of the UCL-HR Equality team responsible for
the Staff Survey, Equality Schemes (gender/sexual orientation/race/disability) and UCL Gender
Equality Scheme consultation seminars, members of the UCL Staff Development Office;

Individuals and groups outside UCL in the field of gender equality; e.g. Athena ASSET and
Athena SWAN Steering Committee (Equality Challenge Unit), university equality teams in UK
Russell Group, Germany, Sweden, Norway, USA, Canada; the European Consortium on
Gender Equality, Professor Virginia Valian (expert advisor - Hunter College, City University of
New York), Institute for Studies in Global Prosperity (Bahai-led group on women’s rights);

Individuals involved in human wellbeing (e.g. team involved in UCL Grand Challenge in Human
Wellbeing; Dr Sue Atkinson, past Director of Public Health for London; Professor Felicia
Huppert, Cambridge University Wellbeing Institute);

Senior staff (Tim Perry and Rex Knight) responsible for the current review of UCL Committee
structure;
5.2 Questionnaire on initiatives to forward gender equality
To help with this consultation process, JA distributed a short questionnaire (see Appendix 2) asking
individuals to give their views (anonymously) on various ideas and initiatives which might progress
gender equality more rapidly in certain areas in UCL. Responses have come from across UCL,
with the largest number from Biomedical Sciences and Life Sciences. Analysis of the responses is
summarized in the table in appendix 2. Some 700+ written comments were included in responses
to this short questionnaire and these have been taken into account in the summary below
The responses to the questionnaire indicate:

there is strong support for developing initiatives for ‘positive action’, provided these are in areas
where women are currently at a disadvantage and these initiatives do not put men at a serious
disadvantage;

there is a general belief that men are more ready than women at an equivalent stage in their
career to put themselves forward for promotion and leadership positions. Many commented
further that they believed that women often receive less encouragement than men, at
equivalent stages in their career, from their line manager;

there is support for increased mentoring and ‘a circle of advisors’. (Four mentoring schemes
have been set up to date. These are in the Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, the Division of
Psychology and Language Sciences, the Department of Medical Physics and Bioengineering
and the Division of Medicine. The evaluation of the Scheme in Biomedical Sciences has shown
that both mentees and mentors found the scheme to be helpful);

there is substantial support for ‘reverse mentoring’, where more junior staff advise senior staff
on how they see their approach to and style of management;

there is support for additional training in leadership skills, particularly, but not exclusively, for
women, and assistance from senior ‘ambassadors’ or ‘champions’ (particularly from strong
female role models).

there is a need for increased transparency in the promotions process and the criteria used in
this process, with clearer, briefer guidelines for applying for promotion.

the appraisal process (for both men and women) should include a discussion of promotion
prospects and career development. In addition, appraisal should, when appropriate, include
discussion of any potential changes to work-life balance envisaged in the near future by the
individual.

there is very strong support across the whole of UCL for holding all significant decision-making
meetings in ‘family-friendly’ hours (not starting before 9.30am and finishing by 5pm). This
should include all senior management meetings to enable women and men with caring
responsibilities to enter fully into the running of UCL. For seminars and social departmental
events, efforts should be made to hold them at such times as to allow attendance from as large
and diverse a constituency as possible.

individuals (particularly women) with relevant experience and expertise should be elected or coopted onto all departmental and UCL committees to improve gender equality in decisionmaking.

work-load monitoring should take full account of all activities undertaken by women and men
involving enabling, pastoral care, mentoring, advising, promoting widening participation, and
assisting with initiatives working towards equality

initiatives are still needed to identify in more depth, potential barriers (conscious and
unconscious) to recruitment of women and barriers preventing women putting themselves
forward for promotion.

many commented that there needed to be a culture change in many departments in UCL to
bring about significant changes in gender equality.

many of the comments from the questionnaire stressed the relatively stressful work:life balance
for individuals at all levels in UCL, with some having felt increasing stress over the past 2-3
years.

there were also many comments pertaining to an individual’s choice in matters of work:life
balance. A group of responses, mainly from women, stated that they felt ‘held back’ because of
the demands of combining the responsibilities of their post in UCL and their caring
responsibilities outside UCL. Other female respondents commented that they did not want to
change their present work:life balance by being promoted to a higher grade which would be
likely to require longer working hours, particularly outside 9am-5pm. This appears to be more of
a problem in some areas of science where a ‘lab culture’ prevails in which there is the
expectation that all members of scientific teams will work long hours outside ‘family friendly’
hours, including participation in lab social activities, following seminars in the evening.
5.3
Summary from departmental initiatives and Acton Plans included in Athena SWAN
Charter submissions
A number of common initiatives within the SWAN Action Plans from different departments were
identifed. These were:

an initiative to improve collection of data on: (a) comparison of women and men in staff
recruitment, selection for short lists and promotion; (b) maternity/paternity leave and
changes to working patterns as a result (e.g. the change from full-time to part-time for some
women); (c) ‘exit’ data for all students (UG and PG), postdocs, and staff leaving UCL.
Currently data under (a), (b) and (c) above is collected and collated in some departments,
and some is also collected centrally. However, a more comprehensive approach is
necessary if approriate meaningful statistical analyses relevant to gender equality are to be
undertaken. In addiiton this data must be disaggregated for individual faculties, divisions
and departments. This requires a major commitment and resources on the part of central
information services to achieve this goal.

introduction of websites, blogs, discussion groups, forums and/or focus groups within the
department/division concerning (a) management of career breaks (particularly maternity
leave); (b) career progression for inidividuals in the early stages of their careers; and (c)
promotion processes.

mentoring schemes would be introduced or expanded. Feed back from schemes of this
kind already running found them to be beneficial to both mentors and mentees.

progress should be made towards the goal to hold all seminars/departmental meetings
between 9.30am and 5pm

there were comments from members of the departmental SWAN Self Assessment Teams
that engagement in work related to SWAN had enlarged their knowledge-base about the
processes, procedures and decision making related to equality issues in UCL and had
enabled them to engage others in their department in debates about new initiatives, thus
embedding these more firmly with UCL’s culture.
There are a number of possible future SWAN Charter submissions planned, from a range of SET
departments in UCL
5.4 Athena ASSET Survey 2010
ASSET (Athena Survey in Science Engineering and Technology) is a national survey of academics
and researchers in HEIs, concerned with comparative career progression for men and women. It is
organized with data collection and analysis under the auspices of Athena.
Previous ASSETs were conducted in 2003, 2004, and 2006. JA’s work as UCL’s Co-ordinator for
Athena started in 2004 when she promoted the survey and encouraged responses from both men
and women in UCL SET departments. UCL provided the highest number of responses of any UK
HEI. A report of JA’s analysis of the 2004 UCL data was presented to the Equal Opportunities
Committee. Responses from UCL staff indicated that females saw greater challenges compared to
males in:

‘getting in’ – moving from post-doctoral positions to a research PI or first lectureship;

‘getting back’ – maintaining their position on the career ladder following maternity leave or other
caring responsibilities;

‘getting on’ - career progression, once in an academic post, through appraisal and promotion,
and the perception of a ‘glass ceiling’, particularly in HEIs with high academic reputations such
as UCL and other members of the Russell Group.
The response rate from UCL in 2010 (around 400) was relatively disappointing, given the size of its
members in SET /STEMM disciplines This may have reflected in part a new ASSET distribution
method, in which SET Heads of Departments were e-mailed by the ASSET external organizers,
asking for nomination of a linking staff member from their department, who would forward the
survey to staff in the department. This ASSET communication method proved ‘patchy’, at best,
across UCL. In addition the rate of responses from UCL was likely to be affected by the timing of
the ASSET survey in 2010 which coincided with major policy decision- making concerning possible
redundancies within certain faculties.
From analysis of the UCL ASSET 2010 responses, points that appeared across answers to several
questions were that :

women perceive their career development, promotion, and research activities to be less well
supported by colleagues and managers than men (women, unlike men, saw their partners and
families as the major source of support);

women reported a shortage of female role models for their development into senior positions

women reported that factors including difficulty of mobility, career interruptions, limited job
opportunities, and a ‘long hours’ culture, are damaging to their career development
Responses to a number of factual questions in the survey are difficult to interpret, since female
respondents had, on average, a shorter time in post than males, so apparent differences between
the experience of the two genders may reflect in part differences in seniority in the sample. A more
complex statistical analysis would be needed to separate the two potential effects.
5.5 UCL Staff Survey
From the UCL Staff Survey, covering all staff in all grades in the college, the following conclusions
concerning men and women in UCL can be drawn:
1. Equal percentages of women and men (78%) were satisfied with their job in UCL, although
around one third of respondents did not feel valued and recognized for the work they did.
2. Only 39% of men and women thought that senior managers provided effective leadership and
were sufficiently ‘visible’ in UCL. There was felt to be a need for more effective leadership by
both men and women at senior levels and more transparency in some of the managerial
processes.
3. Two thirds of men and women thought that senior management was not open and honest in
their communication with staff.
4. Only 27% of Academic and Research women, but 41% of Academic and Research men, felt
that the promotion process at UCL was applied fairly. This is a significant difference between
men and women’s perceptions of fairness in promotions. In addition only 30% of both men and
women thought the grading review process was fair. However, 58% of men and women thought
that their pay was fair, considering their duties and responsibilities.
5. 70% of men and women felt that the flexibility in working schedules in UCL was helpful to them,
but 52% of women and 47% of men felt they had to work excessive hours to meet the
requirements of their job.
6. Women felt less comfortable than men about speaking up and questioning the way things were
done in UCL (comfortable: women 42%, men 54%).
7. Only 40% of men and women thought that there were good opportunities to learn and share
knowledge between parts of the organization; communication of good practice should be
improved.
8. 80% of men and women were proud to work in UCL and 90% were also happy to “go the extra
mile” when required.
The main messages from this survey for both men and women were that:

there was a need for more understanding and transparency in terms of promotion procedures,
so that promotion was seen to be applied fairly (particularly for academic and research women )

there was a need for better training, particularly in communication skills for senior managers
and leaders.

Training in learning and understanding both of the workings of senior management teams and
of decision-making generally in UCL, together with assertiveness training, should be available to
women, so that they might feel more comfortable about speaking up and questioning
procedures.
5.6 Pay Review: comparisons for men and women
From data from the most recent UCL Pay Review (2007/2008), there are no marked differences
between male and female staff across different grades 1-9. However, within the highest grades
(9/10) there are very few women overall, particularly in the professorial grade. It has been
suggested that there may be marked pay differences across gender in grade 10, bands 2 and 3.
This will need to be investigated further (see recommendations below).
5.7 Representation of Women on Senior Committees within UCL
JA has considered the terms of reference and committee structure for the 16 central committees of
UCL and discussed with Tim Perry the review of UCL committees being carried out by Tim Perry
(UCL Director of Academic Services) and Rex Knight (Vice Provost for Operations). JA has
together with others, encouraged non-professorial membership of Academic Board (see appendix
1). This has resulted in 50 women and 45 men being elected as new non-professorial members to
Academic Board starting next academic year.
The restructuring of committees within UCL starting next academic year provides a potential
opportunity to consider improvements in equality and diversity across those making decisions in
UCL.
It is also hoped that given the strong support across UCL for holding important committee meetings
in family-friendly hours (between 9.30am and finishing by 5pm), this will be taken into account for
all committee meetings next academic year, so that as wide and diverse a constituency as possible
will be involved in decision making in UCL in the future.
5.8 Additional areas requiring further research
From consultation with other leaders in Gender Equality from outside UCL, there are three areas
needing further investigation which are beyond the scope of this one-year project . These are:

Definition of ‘positive action’ and its relation to changes introduced by the Equality Bill

Life:work balance in relation to issues of human wellbeing for males and females

Business/economic case for gender equality in the workplace in HE institutions.
Some references and comments on these are included in the appendices, as a starting point for
future discussions.
6. Recommendations
From consultation, analysis of data and evidence–based discussion, the following
recommendations are put forward to form the basis of future action. For some of these
recommendations there is still some work to be done in terms of assigning responsibility for
initiating the action and monitoring its effects.
The recommendations in this document are to be considered by the Provost, UCL’s SMT and UCL
Council. Recommendations which are accepted should be acted upon as soon as is practical.
One of the main problems in disseminating ‘good practice’ on initiatives for gender equality is the
limitations of communication between those working centrally in the Equality Team and academic
staff in the faculties. Hence there is often a lack of ‘ownership’ on the part of academics for
initiatives aimed at improving gender equality. For this reason a primary recommendation from the
WLM project is for the setting up of a network across UCL to champion new gender equality
initiatives and carry them forward, so that they become firmly embedded within the culture of UCL.
This network model has already proved successful for Athena initiatives in some of UCL’s SET
departments, in the form of the SWAN Self Assessment Teams. Similar models have proved useful
and successful in several Russell Group Universities and a number of leading US universities in
North America.
6.1 Proposal for a network: ‘UCL Gender Equality network (UCL-GEN)’
The UCL Gender Equality Network , ‘UCL GEN’, would have as its members a UCL Equality
Champion, the HR Equality Team, an Academic Lead Gender Equality Ambassador, one (or two)
Faculty Gender Equality Ambassadors from each UCL faculty and departmental DEOLOs
(Departmental Equal Opportunity Liaison Officer)
A senior female academic/researcher would be appointed as the Academic Lead Gender
Equality Ambassador. This individual would lead the network of Faculty Gender Equality
Ambassadors. These Ambassadors would be one (or two) individuals (at least one female),
appointed in each faculty from among relatively senior academic /research staff. They would take
initiatives forward within their faculty, working primarily with the HR Equality Team and their
departmental DEOLOs. They would form a communication channel to and from members of their
faculty on gender equality matters. They would directly report to the Academic Lead Ambassador
and the Equality Champion. It is suggested that ambassadors would be appointed (or elected) for 2
or 3 years, with a five year maximum.
6.2 Specific Recommendations
A number of the recommendations below have already been acted upon in some departments and
some are to be put in place in the next academic year.

The UCL Gender Equality Network (UCL-GEN) should be set up in the coming academic
year, and should hold meetings at least twice in each term. These meetings would be chaired
by the Equality Champion and Lead Gender Equality Ambassador.

A new Leadership and Management Training programme should be devised by the Office
of Staff Development in consultation with members of the UCL-GEN. This programme might
take the form of a ‘Masterclass’ or a short one-day workshop, led by experts in the field. Each
year a number of individuals should be identified (suggested number 3-6 per faculty per annum)
who are considered by the Faculty Dean in consultation with the Faculty Gender Equality
Ambassadors to be likely to benefit from this training programme. This programme would
initially be open to female members of UCL staff, but would be extended if funding permitted to
male staff also.

Women on Major Committees: Following the current review of UCL Committees, the
composition of remaining committees and working groups should be reviewed with the explicit
goal of improving equality and diversity. The aim should be for the composition of all
committees and working groups (centrally and within departments) to include at least 40%
women with relevant expertise.

Male and Female Pay: No gender differential in pay has been identified in the current pay
review (Grades 1-9) However, pay for men and women in grade 10 (bands1, 2, 3) should be
scrutinized, as there are believed to be significant differences in pay for men and women in this
grade. If this is found to be the case it should be rectified with high priority

Mentoring: Current mentoring schemes should be continued and extended. In addition, a
‘circle of advisors’ should be set up in each faculty. This would be a group of individuals (three
or four senior members of the faculty, both men and women) who would be willing to give
informal consultation and advice on specific aspects of career development e.g. balancing their
work with responsibilities outside work

Interview panels: interview panels for all appointments (academic, research, support staff)
should have a gender balance on the panel which is appropriate for the post, and should
include at least one female member (and preferably two or more female members) .

Workload: Workload measures should make explicit and take full account of enabling and
pastoral care activities, and include recognition of any participation and responsibilities in
activities relating to the promotion of equalities.

Appraisal: Discussion of career progression (including prospective promotion and changes in
work:life balance where appropriate) should be an essential part of all appraisals. The current
format of the on-line appraisal form should be altered appropriately.

Promotion: Workshops on promotion, some specifically for women, should be maintained and
extended.

Timing of meetings: All significant meetings should be scheduled, whenever possible, to start
and end within the hours 9:30am – 5.00pm, to promote participation from across the whole
constituency of UCL.

UCL Women’s achievements on UCL web: There should be increased and specific
highlighting of UCL women’s achievements on UCL web pages. The best source of such
information should come from the senior management of faculties and the UCL-GEN.

Women’s Champion Celebration Lecture: There should be an annual lecture given by a
prestigious female champion (a role model for academic and professional leadership). The
selection and organization of this event would be the responsibility of members of the UCLGEN.

Gender Equality Forum (internet blogs): These should be set up for discussion (which could
be anonymous at the point of delivery if desired) of such issues as the factors and solutions for
promoting women’s early career development, successful management of career breaks,
coping with the school holidays, work:life balance for those taking on carer responsibilities for
relatives.

Women, Work:Life Balance and Wellbeing: As part of the UCL Grand Challenge on Human
Wellbeing, there should be an event(s), with experts in the field and open discussion to
highlight the links in terms of wellbeing and happiness between women’s academic activities
and work:life balance .
If these recommendations are accepted and put in place (hopefully many in the next academic
year) it will be necessary to carry out a thorough Audit and Impact Assessment to ascertain what
effect particular initiatives have achieved.
It would be good to see UCL lead HEIs on gender equality in academic leadership and
management, as it did when it was one of the first to admit women to full degree programmes on
equal terms to men.
Prof Jan Atkinson, September 2010
Acknowledgements
Jan Atkinson thanks the Provost; Sir Stephen Wall, Chair of UCL Council and other UCL Council
members (Gill Samuels, Vivienne Parry, Anne Bulford, Maria Wyke); Sarah Brant, Director of
Human Resources; Sarah Guise, Equalities and Diversity Coordinator and other members of the
HR Equality Team; members of the Athena SWAN departmental Self Assessment Teams, the
Faculty Deans and their senior management teams, and many individuals both inside and outside
UCL who have all generously consulted with me, giving me their expert opinions and experiences
in the field of gender equality. I thank the Deans of the Faculties of Engineering and Life Sciences
for their financial support towards the staffing of this project. I would also like to thank warmly
Harriet Hallas, who has managed to combine, in a ‘part-time’ post, her initiative, energy and
efficiency in supporting this work, with her major responsibility as my PA and co-ordinator of my
research group (meanwhile gaining a first-class degree in Psychology).
APPENDICES
Appendix 1
E-mail from JA to Deans and other potential interested parties
concerning membership of Academic Board
Women in Leadership and Management Project : Prof Jan Atkinson
Membership of UCL Committees: Academic Board Nominations by Friday February 26th
by 3pm (details below ).
PLEASE CONSIDER THIS WEEK WHETHER YOU OR YOUR COLLEAGUES WOULD
LIKE TO BE NOMINATED FOR ACADEMIC BOARD
Dear UCL Colleagues,
As part of the project 'Women in Leadership and Management' project, we are trying to find ways of
addressing the gender imbalance on many of UCL's decision-making influential Committees, where often
there are many more males than females. This is in part because many senior male members are Ex Officio
members (e.g. Deans).
It is generally believed that bringing greater equality and diversity to decision-making bodies improves the
process and outcomes for an institution and helps to decrease any 'culture biases' acting against equality
within the institution.
Academic Board (AB) is one of the largest committees within UCL. Its membership consists of the senior
academic staff, including all professorial staff and a number of elected non-professorial academic and
research staff and teaching Fellows in UCL.
Academic Board is chaired by the Provost, who speaks to the state of UCL at its meetings (usually twice
termly). This enables members of AB to know about what is happening currently in UCL. Membership of AB
for non-professorial academic staff is also a route to possible membership of a number of other important
committees in UCL (see list below).
At present there are a number of vacancies on Academic Board for non-professorial academic staff (including
Honorary Senior Lecturer staff and including grant supported research staff) - 159 vacancies and Teaching
Fellow Staff (40 vacancies) and non- academic staff (26 vacancies).
This e-mail is to ask you to help to redress the gender balance on all of UCL's committees by considering
whether your female colleagues or other female members of your department or Faculty should be
nominated, because of their particular qualities, for Academic Board membership (and possibly also going on
to be members on other UCL committees).
You may want to be nominated yourself and feel that you are well qualified for membership. If so please talk
to your colleagues about it and put in a nomination. Of course it is not our aim to discourage
nominations from interested male members of your faculty or department!
These nominations have to be in by email by February 26th (3pm) and nominations have to be supported by
a Proposer and Seconder from the SAME STAFF CATEGORY (i.e. a member of non-professorial staff or
Teaching Fellow Staff) and the SAME CONSTITUENCY (usually Faculty)
I have pasted the information for staff on nominations below in this email.
I do hope you will be able to help by thinking about possible nominees for AB over the next week and put in
some nominations.
Please pass this information onto other interested parties as I am sure there are relevant names that I have
not included in this e-mail.
Best wishes
Jan Atkinson
Appendix 2
Questionnaire on Women in Academic Leadership and Management (JA)
The questionnaire as circulated appears below. A graphical summary of the 160 responses is
appended after the questionnaire
Women in Academic Leadership & Management
I am seeking views from all academic staff on how this initiative, which the Provost has asked me
to pursue, can be taken forward. Some specific suggestions, on which I would appreciate your
view and comments, are listed below.
Of course, I’d be very pleased to hear from you with any other comments, not restricted to these
questions.
Please return completed questionnaires by email or hard copy to my PA (h.hallas@ucl.ac.uk)
Harriet Hallas, Visual Development Unit, Dept of Developmental Science, Div of PaLS, UCL)
Professor Jan Atkinson
Lead on Women in Leadership and Management, UCL Athena SWAN Coordinator,
Head of Department of Developmental Science
The questionnaire is anonymous, but it would be helpful for you to indicate your present position
under the following headings.
Male/Female Grade (e.g. Lecturer)
Faculty
Dept/Inst/Div(optional)
1. Current senior staff, from whom academic leadership positions are drawn, reflect academic
recruitment over the past 10-20 years. ‘Positive action’ (not ‘affirmative’ action to discriminate in
favour of women over men in appointments) should be taken to accelerate women’s career
advancement, to improve gender balance as soon as possible.
strongly agree
strongly disagree
1 
Comments:
2
3
4
5 
2. Men are more ready than women at an equivalent career stage, to put themselves forward for
promotion and leadership positions.
strongly agree
strongly disagree
1 
Comments:
2
3
4
5 
3. The gender balance on important UCL decision-making committees is typically around 20%
female, as it is affected by the fact that most committee positions are ex officio for individuals
such as Deans (who are predominantly male). Some women without specific senior offices
should be co-opted to committees to move towards gender equality.
strongly agree
strongly disagree
1 
Comments:
2
3
4
5 
4. The timing of significant meetings should be within ‘family friendly’ hours to help participation
of all UCL staff with caring responsibilities outside their work.
strongly agree
strongly disagree
1 
Comments:
2
3
4
5 
5. Greater representation of women in academic leadership should be sought because, quite
apart from issues of equity, decision and management processes would benefit from the
diversity of approaches they would bring.
strongly agree
strongly disagree
1 
Comments:
2
3
4
5 
6. Women’s development towards leadership would be encouraged by:
a. circles of advisors/mentors
strongly agree
strongly disagree
1 
2
3
b. additional training in leadership skills
strongly agree
4
5 
strongly disagree
1 
2
3
4
5 
c. senior female ‘ambassadors’ appointed within each faculty, to advise and go between all
academic women staff and academic managers
strongly agree
strongly disagree
1 
2
3
4
5 
d. ‘reverse mentoring’ in which junior staff, female or male, advise senior staff and managers
on how their policies and approaches ‘look’ from ‘below’
strongly agree
strongly disagree
1 
Comments:
2
3
4
5 
7. Whatever specific initiatives are taken within UCL, women will not achieve an equivalent
role to men in academic leadership and management, unless there are broader social changes
which make men and women more equivalent in how they balance personal, family, and
professional goals.
strongly agree
strongly disagree
1

2
Additional comments
3
4
5 
Appendix 2 (continued): graphical summary of questionnaire responses
Questionnaire responses
strongly agree
strongly disagree
% responses
0
1. ‘Positive action’ should be taken to accelerate women’s career advancement
2. Men are more ready than women to put themselves forward for promotion
and leadership.
3. Some women without specific senior offices should be co-opted to
committees to move towards gender equality.
4. The timing of significant meetings should be within ‘family friendly’ hours
5. Greater representation of women in academic leadership because
management processes would benefit from their diversity of approaches
b. additional training in leadership skills
c. senior female ambassadors appointed within each faculty
d. 'reverse mentoring'
7. Whatever initiatives are taken within UCL, women will not achieve an
equivalent role to men without broader social changes
20
40
60
80
100
Appendix 3 Positive Action
While ‘affirmative action’ or ‘positive discrimination’ (which allows lower criteria for women’s
employment to alter gender balance or fulfil gender quotas), is illegal, ‘positive action’ which
encourages candidates from a minority gender (and may provide special training opportunities to
improve their position in competition for appointment) is legal and can be used to cover a number
of different types of initiatives.
Examples of Positive Action are as follows:
1.
Jacqueline McCluskey (employment lawyer) , senior associate, Dundas & Wilson, Personnel
Today: ‘Aspirational targets are lawful, but quotas are not. With quotas, candidates are
appointed because of their membership of an underrepresented group (i.e. gender). This is
known as positive discrimination, which is unlawful in the UK. Positive action, on the other
hand, is permissible where an employer offers encouragement or training to under-represented
groups.’
2.
NHS employers’ briefing document defines: “Positive action is a range of lawful actions that
seeks to address an imbalance in employment opportunities among targeted groups that have
previously experienced disadvantage, or that have been subject to discriminatory policies and
practices, or that are underrepresented in the workforce.”
3.
Roundtable seminar, March 2009, organized at Eversheds on “Positive Action in Theory and
Practice” : Reference is made to the less narrow framework being introduced in the Equality
Bill concerning ‘positive action’, and a briefing on this bill by the Equality Challenge Unit
specifically for Higher Education Institutions which includes:
“Currently, the law only allows for limited positive action measures in relation to employment.
The Bill extends the law, and provides scope for HEIs to adopt voluntary positive action
measures to alleviate ‘disadvantage experienced by people who share a protected
characteristic, reduce under representation in relation to particular activities, and meet
particular needs’ (clause 152), providing such measures are a proportionate way of achieving
the relevant aim. This could, for example cover the provision of benefits to underrepresented
students from particular races or nationalities, or to men and women who are
underrepresented or disadvantaged. This extension of positive action provisions to allow for
more flexibility for HEIs was an issue that the Equality Challenge Unit had previously argued
for during the course of consultations with the Government Equalities Office.”
References on Positive Action
1. Why so Slow ? Virginia Valian, MIT Press 1999,
2. Jacqueline McCluskey Personnel Today, 2009
3. Positive Action in Theory and Practice: Experiences from the UK and Europe. Report of a
UKREN Round Table held at Eversheds Law Firm, 2009
4. Equality Act 2010: Implications For Higher Education Institutions. Equality Challenge Unit,
London (2010)
Appendix 4
The Business and Economic case for Gender Equality
The Business Case is at a micro level and emphasises the need for equal treatment to reflect
diversity among potential employees in the organization and the organization’s customers. There
are many factors to take into account is assessing the business case for equality.
Cost Benefit Analysis and/or cost effectiveness analysis may be a more rapid method of assessing
the benefits of gender equality. One possibility might be to apply these methods to data collated in
the REF concerning publications and impact analysis for men and women.
The Economic case is at a macro level - it stresses the wider economic benefits that span
individuals, firms, regions and nations.
Gender equality can contribute to economic development by:
1.
Quantitative improvement in female participation (as envisaged by the European Employment
Strategy) but also through qualitative improvement in terms of effective use of investment in
human capital
2.
Women’s contribution to growth through greater economic independence and their contribution
as consumers of goods and services;
3.
Integration of more women into the fiscal system as contributors to the welfare state;
4.
Through establishment of a sustainable system of social reproduction that is essential for
growth, future labour market, and sustainable public finances (given the ‘aging crisis’).
References on Business/Economic case for Gender Equality in the workplace
Increasing Women in SETT: The Business Case. Canadian Coalition of Women in Engineering,
Science, Trades & Technology (WinSETT Centre). Edmonton, Canada, 2009.
Female Attrition, Retention and Barriers to Careers in SET Academic Research. Dr Anna Zalevski.
UK Resource Centre, 2010.
The business case for gender diversity. Women to the Top. http://www.women2top.net/. Joint
project between Estonia, Denmark, Greece and Sweden with support from the European
Community - Community Framework Strategy on Gender Equality (2001-2005)
Analysis Note: the Economic Case for Gender Equality. M Smith & F Bettio. Prepared for the
European Commission DG for Employment, Social Affairs & Equal Opportunities, 2008.
Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. R B Adams & D
Ferreira. Journal of Financial Economics, 94: 291-309, 2009.
Enriching Science and Engineering: Exploring the Business Case for Gender Diversity. J
Brookman & others, Cambridge AWiSE/WiSETI meeting, Cambridge, 2004.
The Careers Paths of Women. Talking Points: Stafford Long & Partners, 2009.
Appendix 5
Additional References
Human Wellbeing in relation to stress and work-life balance
UCL Town Meeting on Human Wellbeing. “What is wellbeing and how can we measure it?” 29
January 2010.
NHS Health and Well-being – Final report. (Dr Stephen Boorman, Lead Reviewer) Department of
Health, 2009
Fair Society, Healthy Lives. Strategic View of Health Inequalities in England Post-2010. The
Marmot Review, 2010
Working for a Healthier Tomorrow. Dame Carol Black’s review of the health of Britain’s working
age population. London, TSO, 2008
Mentoring :
What is unique about reverse mentoring? Survey results. M M Starcevich. Center for Coaching &
Mentoring, Bartlesville Oklahoma, USA, 2001.
Reverse and reciprocal mentoring. Brook Graham, Diversity and Inclusion specialists, Hornchurch
Essex. http://www.brookgraham.com/reverse_mentoring.htm
Mothers
of
Invention.
Panel
discussion
at
the
British
Library,
2007.
http://www.bl.uk/news/2007/pressrelease20070215.html
Get
Mentor,
Get
More
Grants.
Mentornet,
Sunnyvale
http://www.mentornet.net/documents/about/news/news.aspx?nid=56
CA,
USA
(2010)