Women in Higher
Education
Leadership
Professor Louise Morley
Centre for Higher Education and
Equity Research (CHEER)
University of Sussex, UK
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/education/cheer
28 June, 2016
Snapshot Statistics: Women Vice-Chancellors
Aust
EU
HK
India
JP
Mal
Kuw
Swe
Tur
UK
18%
13%
0%
3%
2.3%
15%
2%
43%
7%
14%
28 June, 2016
Some Provocations
•The global academy
= innovation and
hypermodernism
•Male-dominated
leadership =
archaism.
(Morley, 2011).
28 June, 2016
Missing Senior Women
Are women:
desiring
dismissing
being disqualified
from senior leadership?
Are women:
self-identifying
identified
by existing power elites, as
having leadership legitimacy?
28 June, 2016
Consequences of Absence of
Leadership Diversity
• Democratic Deficit
• Distributive injustice
• Depressed career opportunities
• Wasted talent
• Knowledge Distortions
• Reproduction of Institutional
Norms and Practices
28 June, 2016
Focus on East Asia
28 June, 2016
Fastest Growing Higher Education
Sector in the World
Men
• Gross undergraduate
enrolment ratio
• 11% in 1970 to 26% in
2009.
Women
• Tripled from 8% in 1970 to
28% in 2009.
• Now exceed male
participation.
28 June, 2016
Quality not Equality
Hong Kong
• 8 universities
• 3 in Global Top 50
• No Female vice-chancellor
Japan
• 86 (national) universities
• 3 in Global Top 50
• 2 Female vice-chancellors
(1 women-only)
28 June, 2016
Collecting New Evidence: British Council Global
Education Dialogue Workshops in Hong Kong
and Tokyo
• 47 Workshop Participants
(China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia,
Singapore, Thailand, UK, Vietnam).
• 13 Questionnaire Respondents
(Australia, China, Hong Kong, Japan, Malaysia, the
Philippines, Thailand)
• 9 Panel discussants
(Australia, China, Hong Kong, Japan, the Philippines,
Thailand, UK)
• 4 papers
(the Philippines, Malaysia Japan x2)
The rationale, attractions/ deterrents,
enablers, impediments for women
entering senior leadership.
28 June, 2016
Why is Senior Leadership
Unattractive to Women?
• The neo-liberalised, competitive,
performance-driven, globalised
academy.
• The ‘Ideal Leader’ = male.
• Leadership v Scholarship.
• Emotional Labour
• Women’s authority not recognised.
• Greedy organisations.
• Professional v domestic
responsibilities.
28 June, 2016
What Enables Women to Enter Leadership?
28 June, 2016
Recognition/ Investment
• Support
• Training/ Development/ CapacityBuilding
• Mentorship, Advice and
Sponsorship
• Rules of the Game
• Policy contexts
• Legislative frameworks
• Effective advocacy
28 June, 2016
What Impedes Women from Entering Leadership?
28 June, 2016
Cultural Climate/Hidden Curriculum
• Mis-recognition
women’s skills
knowledge
potential
•
•
•
•
Hostility
Discrimination
Toxic social relations
Favouring of men
28 June, 2016
Socio-Cultural Norms: The
Educated Woman as the Third Sex
• Leadership/ HE = transgression
A saying that ‘people can be
classified into three categories:
male, female, and female PhD’
(Chinese respondent).
28 June, 2016
Gendered Division of Labour
•Women’s caring
responsibilities v
the temporalities
and rhythms of
academia
• (Cheung & Halpern, 2010).
28 June, 2016
Sex Role Spillover
•Women = teaching
and student
support.
•Male counterparts
= international
networks and
research.
28 June, 2016
Summary of Research Findings
•
Diversity = sustainability in a
globalised knowledge economy.
•
Women Not:



identified
supported
developed
as senior leaders
•
Women Are:

on career pathways that do not
lead to senior positions
•
Time for action for change.
28 June, 2016
Manifesto for Change: Accountability,
Transparency, Development and Data
• Equality as Quality - equality should be made a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) in
quality audits, with data to be returned on percentage and location of women professors
and leaders, percentage and location of undergraduate and postgraduate students and
gender pay equality. Gender equity achievements should be included in international
recognition and reputation for universities in league tables.
• Research Grants - funders should monitor the percentage of applications and awards
made to women and to actively promote more women as principal investigators. The
applications procedures should be reviewed to incorporate a more inclusive and diverse
philosophy of achievement. Gender implications and impact should also be included in
assessment criteria.
• Journals - Editorial Boards, and the appointment of editors, need more transparent
selection processes, and policies on gender equality e.g. to keep the gender balance in
contributions under review.
• Data - a global database on women and leadership in higher education should be
established.
• Development - more investment needs to be made in mentorship and leadership
development programmes for women and gender needs to be included in existing
leadership development programmes.
• Mainstreaming - work cultures should be reviewed to ensure that diversity is
mainstreamed into all organisational practices and procedures.
28 June, 2016
Follow Up?
• Morley, L. (2013) International
Trends in Women’s Leadership
in Higher Education In, T. Gore,
and M. Stiasny (eds) Going
Global. London, Emerald Press.
CHEER
http://www.sussex.ac.uk/education/cheer/
• Morley, L. (2013) "The Rules of
the Game: Women and the
Leaderist Turn in Higher
Education " Gender and
Education. 25(1):116-131.
28 June, 2016