Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Snakes and Ladders

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Women Professors

  • 332 Accesses

Abstract

Specific theorists and concepts were introduced and discussed in Chap. 5, and some of these ideas are drawn on in the analysis undertaken in this chapter. Considering catalysts (ladders) and inhibitors (snakes) gives insight into what it takes to make it to the professoriate and some of the factors involved. This chapter identifies four types of catalysts for and four types of inhibitors to career progression for women in the academy. These catalysts and inhibitors include Individual Influences, Academic Work Influences, Academic Environment Influences, and Social Influences, and each is discussed in this chapter. The culture of the Boys’ Club was identified as one of the four inhibitors in the category Academic Environment Influences. It is mentioned briefly in this chapter but is discussed more fully in Chap. 7.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The first letter indicates whether the data source was the survey (S) , focus group interview (FG) , individual phone interview (IP) or individual email interview (IE). The second letter indicates if the academic was female (F) or male (M). Note that all focus group and individual interviewees were female. A one- to three-digit code was also assigned to participants in the surveys (N = 520), focus group interviews (n = 21), and individual phone and email interviews (n = 8).

  2. 2.

    Identifiers: The first letter indicates whether the data source was the survey (S) , focus group interview (FG), individual phone interview (IP), or individual email interview (IE). The second letter indicates if the academic was female (F) or male (M). A one- to three-digit code was also assigned to participants in the surveys (N = 520), focus group interviews (n = 21), and individual phone and email interviews (n = 8).

  3. 3.

    ATN’s Women’s Executive Development Program

  4. 4.

    Early career researcher.

References

  • Australian Research Council. (2015). ARC research opportunity and performance evidence (ROPE) statement. Retrieved from http://www.arc.gov.au/arc-research-opportunity-and-performance-evidence-rope-statement.

  • Bagilhole, B., & White, K. (2003). Created in their image: An analysis of male cultural hegemony in higher education in Australian and the United Kingdom. In B. Groombridge & V. Mackie (Eds.), Re-searching research agendas: Women, research and publication in higher education: Proceedings of the Australian Technology Network – Women’s Executive Development (ATN-WEXDEV) 2003 research conference. Perth, Australia: Learning Support Network, Curtin University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, M. (2010). Career confidence and gendered expectations of academic promotion. Journal of Sociology, 46(3), 317–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, M. (2012). Fertility, childrearing & the academic gender gap. Women’s Health and Urban Life, 11(2), 9–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, L., & Barrett, P. (2011). Women and academic workloads: Career slow lane or Cul-de-sac? Higher Education, 61(2), 141–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, C. (2011). Beyond the leaky pipeline: Consolidating understanding and incorporating new research about women’s science careers in the UK. Brussels Economic Review, 54(2/3), 149–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackaby, D., Booth, A. L., & Frank, J. (2005). Outside offers and the gender pay gap: Empirical evidence from the UK academic labour market. The Economic Journal, 115(501), F81–F107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boreham, P., Western, M., Baxter, J., Dever, M., & Laffan, W. (2008). Gender differences in early post-PhD employment in Australian universities: The influence of the PhD experience on women’s academic careers (Final Report). Brisbane, Australia: University of Queensland Social Research Centre. Retrieved from https://www.wgea.gov.au/sites/default/files/Gender-differences-in-early-post-PhD-employment.pdf.

  • Bozeman, B., & Gaughan, M. (2011). Job satisfaction among university faculty: Individual, work, and institutional determinants. The Journal of Higher Education, 82(2), 154–186. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2011.0011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, A. (2008). Derrida’s ‘of grammatology’: An Edinburgh philosophical guide. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronstein, P. (2001). Older women in academia: Contemporary history and issues. Journal of Women’s History, 12(4), 184–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, J. (2014). The critical mass marker approach: Female quotas and social justice. Political Studies, 62(4), 862–877.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Camussi, E., & Leccardi, C. (2005). Stereotypes of working women: The power of expectations. Social Science Information, 44(1), 113–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesterman, C. (2005). Getting there and staying there: How to build and maintain a critical mass of women in senior positions in the current context. Paper presented at the Equal Opportunity Practitioners in Higher Education Australasia (EOPHEA) Conference, Brisbane, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dany, F., Louvel, S., & Valette, A. (2011). Academic careers: The limits of the “boundaryless approach” and the power of promotion scripts. Human Relations, 64(7), 971–996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J. (1976). Of grammatology (G. Spivak, Trans.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J. (1997). Deconstruction in a nutshell: A conversation with Jacques Derrida. Edited with a commentary by John D. Caputo. New York, NY: Fordham University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickie, C. (2011). Winning the PhD Game: Evocative playing of snakes and ladders. The Qualitative Report, 16(5), 1230–1244.. Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1296&context=tqr.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diezmann, C. M., & Grieshaber, S. J. (2013). Australian women in the academy: Challenges and aspirations. In W. Patton (Ed.), Conceptualising women’s working lives (pp. 157–173). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Doherty, L., & Manfredi, S. (2005). Improving women’s representation in senior positions in the higher education sector, stage 1 findings. Oxford, UK: Centre for Diversity Policy Research, Oxford Brookes University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duguid, M. (2011). Female tokens in high-prestige work groups: Catalysts or inhibitors of group diversification? Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 116(1), 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.05.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. (2007). Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 85(9), 62–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2016). Meta-analysis of gender and science research: Synthesis report. Brussels, Belgium: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_gender_equality/meta-analysis-of-gender-and-science-research-synthesis-report.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, N. (2001). A case study of women academics’ views on equal opportunities, career prospects and work and family conflicts in a UK university. Career Development International, 6(1), 28–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972–1977 (C. Gordon, L. Marshall, J. Mepham, & K. Soper, Trans.). Brighton, UK: Harvester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardiner, M., Tiggemann, M., Kearns, H., & Marshall, K. (2007). Show me the money! An empirical analysis of mentoring outcomes for women in academia. Higher Education Research & Development, 26(4), 425–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, S. K. (2012). “I couldn’t wait to leave the toxic environment”: A mixed methods study of women faculty satisfaction and departure from one research institution. NASPA Journal About Women in Higher Education, 5(1), 71–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gheus, A. (2015). Three cheers for the token woman! Journal of Applied Philosophy, 32(2), 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12088.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gladwin, M., McDonald, G., & McKay, J. (2014). Conversations with professors: An exploration of career success. Higher Education Review, 46(3), 26–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hensel, N. (1991). Realizing gender equality in higher education: The need to integrate work/family issues (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 2). Washington, DC: School of Education and Human Development, George Washington University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heward, C. (1994). Academic snakes and merit ladders: Reconceptualising the ‘glass ceiling’. Gender and Education, 6(3), 249–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ibarra, H., Carter, N. M., & Silva, C. (2010). Why men still get more promotions than women. Harvard Business Review, 88(9), 80–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, A. Y., & Mazzei, L. A. (2012). Thinking with theory in qualitative research: Viewing data across multiple perspectives. London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimura, D. (1997). Affirmative action policies are demeaning to women in academia. Canadian Psychology, 38(4), 238–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ledford, K. (2012). Navigating the world of academia as a mother and contingent faculty member: A narrative inquiry. Doctoral dissertation. Retrieved from http://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_dissertations/1029/.

  • Maranto, C. L., & Griffin, A. E. C. (2011). The antecedents of a ‘chilly climate’ for women faculty in higher education. Human Relations, 64(2), 139–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1973). The Matthew effect in science. In N. W. Storer (Ed.), The sociology of science (pp. 439–459). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morley, L. (2013). The rules of the game: Women and the leaderist turn in higher education. Gender and Education, 25(1), 116–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2012.740888.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noon, M. (2010). The shackled runner: Time to rethink positive discrimination? Work, Employment & Society, 24(4), 728–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, O. (2000). Resistance in academia. Paper presented to NAWE International Conference on Women in Higher Education, New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penney, S., Young, G., Badenhorst, C., Goodnough, K., Hesson, J., Joy, R., … Pelech, S. (2015). Faculty writing groups: A support for women balancing family and career on the academic tightrope. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 45(4), 457–459.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pyke, J. (2013). Women, choice and promotion or why women are still a minority in the professoriate. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 35(4), 444–454. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2013.812179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossiter, M. W. (1993). The Matthew Matilda effect in science. Social Studies of Science, 23(2), 325–341. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631293023002004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, E. K., & Faber, S. T. (2016). Benefits of peer mentoring to mentors, female mentees and higher education institution. Mentoring & Learning: Partnership in Learning, 24(2), 137–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2016.1170560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seifert, T. A., & Umbach, P. D. (2008). The effects of faculty demographic characteristics and disciplinary context on dimensions of job satisfaction. Research in Higher Education, 49(4), 357–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sloane, P. J., & Ward, M. E. (2001). Cohort effects and job satisfaction of academics. Applied Economics Letters, 8(12), 787–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. W., & Calasanti, T. (2005). The influences of gender, race and ethnicity on workplace experiences of institutional and social isolation: An exploratory study of university faculty. Sociological Spectrum, 25(3), 307–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soliman, I. (1998). Many routes one destination: Profiles of successful academic women. Armidale, Australia: University of New England.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spivak, G. C. (1993). Outside in the teaching machine. New York, NY/London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Su, X., Johnson, J., & Bozeman, B. (2015). Gender diversity strategy in academic departments: Exploring organizational determinants. Higher Education, 69(5), 839–858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-014-9808-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sussman, D., & Yssaad, L. (2005, February). The rising profile of women academics. Perspectives,6–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Symonds, M. (2007). Quantity, quality and equality. New Scientist, 194(2611), 48–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tessens, L., White, K., & Web, C. (2011). Senior women in higher education institutions: Perceived development needs and support. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 33(6), 653–665. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2011.621191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thanacoody, P., Bartram, T., Barker, M., & Jacobs, K. (2006). Career progression among female academics: A comparative study of Australia and Mauritius. Women in Management Review, 21(7), 536–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, R., & Davies, A. (2002). Gender and new public management: Reconstituting academic subjectivities. Gender, Work and Organization, 9(4), 372–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, M. (1990). The liberal promise: Anti-discrimination legislation in Australia. Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, M. (2013). The mirage of merit: Reconstituting the ‘ideal academic’. Australian Feminist Studies, 28(76), 127–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/08164649.2013.789584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Anders, S. (2004). Why the academic pipeline leaks: Fewer men than women perceive barriers to becoming professors. Sex Roles, 51(9–10), 511–521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-004-5461-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van den Brink, M., & Benschop, Y. (2012). Slaying the seven-headed dragon: The quest for gender change in academia. Gender, Work and Organization, 19(1), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2011.00566.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, B. (2003). The female professor: A rare Australian species – The who and how. PhD thesis. Murdoch University, Perth, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, K., & Wolf-Wendel, L. E. (2004). Academic motherhood: Managing complex roles in research universities. Review of Higher Education, 27(2), 233–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, M. E., & Sloane, P. J. (2000). Non-pecuniary advantages versus pecuniary disadvantages: Job satisfaction among male and female academics in Scottish universities. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 47(3), 273–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, K. (2001). Women in the professoriate in Australia. International Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 3(2), 64–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J., Marks, G., Noone, L., & Hamilton-Mackenzie, J. (2010). Retaining a foothold on the slippery paths of academia: University women, indirect discrimination, and the academic marketplace. Gender and Education, 22(5), 535–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winchester, H., Lorenzo, S., Browning, L., & Chesterman, C. (2006). Academic women’s promotions in Australian universities. Employee Relations, 28(6), 505–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, QLD, Australia

    Carmel Diezmann

  2. La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, Australia

    Susan Grieshaber

Authors
  1. Carmel Diezmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Susan Grieshaber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Diezmann, C., Grieshaber, S. (2019). Snakes and Ladders. In: Women Professors. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3685-0_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3685-0_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-3683-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-3685-0

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation