Search results

Science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine (STEMM) workplaces worldwide remain stubbornly resistant to gender equality initiatives. Leaders are vital to driving change, but the extent to which their capabilities lead to change remains unknown. This article examines STEMM leaders' gender competence to achieving transformative changes in gender inequality.

This article examines the capability of STEMM leaders to act as change agents through an in-depth, qualitative analysis of perceptions of gender inequality, sexual harassment, sex discrimination and gender bias within their organisations. Findings are analysed using a customised tripartite gender competence schema, comprising commitment, knowledge and method (or know-how).

The findings suggest that while STEMM leaders may express a commitment to addressing gender inequality, misapprehensions about the nature and scope of the problem are likely to hamper efforts. Two key misapprehensions standout: a tendency to frame gender inequality in primarily numerical terms; and recourse to blaming external factors beyond STEMM for gender inequality in STEMM.

This article makes an original contribution by examining the gender competence of leaders in STEMM organisations, which has not been previously researched. The findings extend understanding of the salience of leaders' capabilities to lead change by identifying key gaps and misapprehensions in STEMM leaders' understanding of the nature and scope of the problem.

Despite some recent progress, gender inequality remains a persistent problem in science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine (STEMM) organisations. This article seeks to better understand resistance to gender equality (GE) in this context with the aim of shedding light on the workplace-based impediments to equality and unlocking remediation opportunities.

The article draws on in-depth interviews with 20 STEMM leaders to examine how they talk about the problem of gender inequality in the organisations they lead. Because resistance is rarely expressed directly, we adopt an in-depth, granular approach to examining what we call STEMM leaders’ “resistance talk” by decoding expressions of GE resistance that may appear, ostensibly, as something else.

We found various ideas, arguments and other discursive practices which function to legitimate or justify the status quo. These are both described by leaders in relation to what they are dealing with in their own organisations and expressed themselves. While similar “legitimating discourses” operate in other gender-segregated workplaces, our findings show how they manifest specifically in STEMM contexts.

Our results provide much-needed granular level evidence of the discursive tactics deployed to legitimate the status quo and obstruct progress toward GE in STEMM. This extends understanding of barriers to GE in STEMM and, importantly, highlights where attention might be directed to both counter resistance and harness potentially changing attitudes to expedite the necessary change required for GE in STEMM.