The purpose of this action-research project is to effect structural and cultural change in higher level education and research institutes, and particularly in their decision-making bodies and processes so as to create more transparent and inclusive decision-making processes, which will advance gender equality (FESTA, 2012).

The partners in this work package are three higher level education and research institutes in Ireland, Italy and Turkey and case studies were undertaken of these organisations. In Ireland, the partner is a government-funded, independent university, which provides research and teaching from undergraduate to postdoctoral levels. In Italy, the partner is a non-profit, independent organisation, which conducts research in technology, science and humanities. In Turkey the partner is one of the oldest and leading research universities, providing research and teaching from undergraduate to postdoctoral levels.

We locate this action-research in the context of theories of gender and power. Gender is both an institution and a social construction, which ascribes particular roles, behaviours, activities, and attributes to men and women. Gender schema theory explains how individuals become gendered in society, and how sex-linked characteristics are maintained, transmitted and differently evaluated. French and Bell (1995) argue that the concept of power is central to understanding organisational life, because people devote much of their energies at work trying to accomplish tasks either for themselves or on behalf of others. Power may be defined as the extent to which individuals are able to pursue, or convince others, to take a certain course of action. The essence of power is therefore control over others’ behaviour (Morley et al, 2004). The questions driving this research are

This work package is concerned with the meaning of power, its operation and effects and therefore we used qualitative research methods. We also conducted a documentary review in the case study organisations to examine those processes and procedures which lead to career-enhancing decisions for people in such organisations.

Qualitative methodology is both processual and reflexive, in the grounded theory tradition. To examine the decision making and communication processes and people’s interpretation of them in our institutions, we took a critical realist approach. A purposive sample of people who participate in committees or have decision making power outside the committee structure was used, focusing particularly on decisions which allocate positions, resources and make appointments, as these have potentially career enhancing effects. Overall the sample included twenty-five positional power holders in the institutions, nine women and sixteen men. We analysed the data from semi-structured interviews with them using content analysis. We developed a specific cross-national method which recognised the different contexts and cultures within which we conducted this research. This methodology facilitated an in-depth interrogation of the practices cross-nationally.

We found that 69-100 per cent of all mid-to high level positional power structures and positions in all three organisations were held by men. There was an absence of awareness of gender, even while there was rhetorical support for involving more women in decision making. There was evidence of the operation of gender schemas and unconscious bias, with the overwhelming view being that women’s attitudes and behaviors were ‘the problem’. We found that institutional control is maintained in various ways: through committee decision making, policies and procedures as well as through retaining power at the highest level in each organisation. Some committees were exercises in approving already taken decisions. This system of apparent democracy maintains central control, but may limit the ability of individuals at faculty and department level to participate effectively. Ostensibly objective procedures for creating decision making committees has the potential to conceal gender schemas because those who participate on committees are unaware of their own gender blindness. Respondent’s accounts suggest that decision making by consensus is the norm across the three institutions. On closer examination, this is not real consensus, but a decision to agree with the power holder (the Chair) because of ties of loyalty; a recognition that disagreement is futile because many decisions are ‘pre-cooked’; or rhetorical compliance to avoid endless meetings and discussions.

In the three institutions, the role of the Chair on committees was considered significant, both in directing the outcome of the decision and in reaching what was presented as consensus. Thus, in the Irish and Italian organisations, the chair of a committee is influential, particularly on hiring and promotion committees. In the Turkish organisation ere is no chair, as such, on these committees. However, the Dean summarises the committee members’ reports, which are then submitted to the University Executive Board and Faculty Boards where decisions regarding hiring and promotion are taken.

We found that different perceptions of transparency exist in the three institutions and different practices in relation to recording and circulating minutes are evident within and between different levels in the organisations in Ireland, Turkey and Italy. Similarly different perceptions of communications exist in these organisations. Hierarchical top-down systems of communication are the norm, and a strong theme in respondent accounts is the absence of opportunities to communicate upwards, particularly in relation to objecting or complaining about decisions.

Recommendations to create structural change include:

 making the gender situation visible by publishing gender disaggregated data;

 establishing an independent equality committee with top level support;

 gender auditing the organisation;

 ensuring gender balance on key committees;

 having an independent (gender) observer at recruitment and promotion committees to eliminate potential bias in decision making.

Recommendations to create

 training decision makers in gender awareness;

 making committee membership more transparent;

 creating accountability measures for decision makers;

 circulating minutes of all decisions and meetings;

 regular meetings between management and staff for information exchange.

Those to support women to

 Encouraging women’s participation in management positions

 Sharing good practices – female role models

 Training for women in leadership and decision making