Cargando…

Gender equity programmes in academic medicine: a realist evaluation approach to Athena SWAN processes

OBJECTIVES: Gender inequity has persisted in academic medicine. Yet equity is vital for countries to achieve their full potential in terms of translational research and patient benefit. This study sought to understand how the gender equity programme, Athena SWAN, can be enabled and constrained by in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Caffrey, Louise, Wyatt, David, Fudge, Nina, Mattingley, Helena, Williamson, Catherine, McKevitt, Christopher
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5020760/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27609850
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012090
_version_ 1782453260967215104
author Caffrey, Louise
Wyatt, David
Fudge, Nina
Mattingley, Helena
Williamson, Catherine
McKevitt, Christopher
author_facet Caffrey, Louise
Wyatt, David
Fudge, Nina
Mattingley, Helena
Williamson, Catherine
McKevitt, Christopher
author_sort Caffrey, Louise
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Gender inequity has persisted in academic medicine. Yet equity is vital for countries to achieve their full potential in terms of translational research and patient benefit. This study sought to understand how the gender equity programme, Athena SWAN, can be enabled and constrained by interactions between the programme and the context it is implemented into, and whether these interactions might produce unintended consequences. DESIGN: Multimethod qualitative case studies using a realist evaluation approach. SETTING: 5 departments from a university medical school hosting a Translational Research Organisation. PARTICIPANTS: 25 hours of observations of gender equality committee meetings, 16 in-depth interviews with Heads of Departments, Committee Leads and key personnel involved in the initiative. 4 focus groups with 15 postdoctoral researchers, lecturers and senior lecturers. RESULTS: The implementation of Athena SWAN principles was reported to have created social space to address gender inequity and to have highlighted problematic practices to staff. However, a number of factors reduced the programme's potential to impact gender inequity. Gender inequity was reproduced in the programme's enactment as female staff was undertaking a disproportionate amount of Athena SWAN work, with potential negative impacts on individual women's career progression. Early career researchers experienced problems accessing Athena SWAN initiatives. Furthermore, the impact of the programme was perceived to be undermined by wider institutional practices, national policies and societal norms, which are beyond the programme's remit. CONCLUSIONS: Gender equity programmes have the potential to address inequity. However, paradoxically, they can also unintentionally reproduce and reinforce gender inequity through their enactment. Potential programme impacts may be undermined by barriers to staff availing of career development and training initiatives, and by wider institutional practices, national policies and societal norms.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5020760
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50207602016-09-20 Gender equity programmes in academic medicine: a realist evaluation approach to Athena SWAN processes Caffrey, Louise Wyatt, David Fudge, Nina Mattingley, Helena Williamson, Catherine McKevitt, Christopher BMJ Open Qualitative Research OBJECTIVES: Gender inequity has persisted in academic medicine. Yet equity is vital for countries to achieve their full potential in terms of translational research and patient benefit. This study sought to understand how the gender equity programme, Athena SWAN, can be enabled and constrained by interactions between the programme and the context it is implemented into, and whether these interactions might produce unintended consequences. DESIGN: Multimethod qualitative case studies using a realist evaluation approach. SETTING: 5 departments from a university medical school hosting a Translational Research Organisation. PARTICIPANTS: 25 hours of observations of gender equality committee meetings, 16 in-depth interviews with Heads of Departments, Committee Leads and key personnel involved in the initiative. 4 focus groups with 15 postdoctoral researchers, lecturers and senior lecturers. RESULTS: The implementation of Athena SWAN principles was reported to have created social space to address gender inequity and to have highlighted problematic practices to staff. However, a number of factors reduced the programme's potential to impact gender inequity. Gender inequity was reproduced in the programme's enactment as female staff was undertaking a disproportionate amount of Athena SWAN work, with potential negative impacts on individual women's career progression. Early career researchers experienced problems accessing Athena SWAN initiatives. Furthermore, the impact of the programme was perceived to be undermined by wider institutional practices, national policies and societal norms, which are beyond the programme's remit. CONCLUSIONS: Gender equity programmes have the potential to address inequity. However, paradoxically, they can also unintentionally reproduce and reinforce gender inequity through their enactment. Potential programme impacts may be undermined by barriers to staff availing of career development and training initiatives, and by wider institutional practices, national policies and societal norms. BMJ Publishing Group 2016-09-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5020760/ /pubmed/27609850 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012090 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt and build upon this work, for commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Qualitative Research
Caffrey, Louise
Wyatt, David
Fudge, Nina
Mattingley, Helena
Williamson, Catherine
McKevitt, Christopher
Gender equity programmes in academic medicine: a realist evaluation approach to Athena SWAN processes
title Gender equity programmes in academic medicine: a realist evaluation approach to Athena SWAN processes
title_full Gender equity programmes in academic medicine: a realist evaluation approach to Athena SWAN processes
title_fullStr Gender equity programmes in academic medicine: a realist evaluation approach to Athena SWAN processes
title_full_unstemmed Gender equity programmes in academic medicine: a realist evaluation approach to Athena SWAN processes
title_short Gender equity programmes in academic medicine: a realist evaluation approach to Athena SWAN processes
title_sort gender equity programmes in academic medicine: a realist evaluation approach to athena swan processes
topic Qualitative Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5020760/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27609850
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012090
work_keys_str_mv AT caffreylouise genderequityprogrammesinacademicmedicinearealistevaluationapproachtoathenaswanprocesses
AT wyattdavid genderequityprogrammesinacademicmedicinearealistevaluationapproachtoathenaswanprocesses
AT fudgenina genderequityprogrammesinacademicmedicinearealistevaluationapproachtoathenaswanprocesses
AT mattingleyhelena genderequityprogrammesinacademicmedicinearealistevaluationapproachtoathenaswanprocesses
AT williamsoncatherine genderequityprogrammesinacademicmedicinearealistevaluationapproachtoathenaswanprocesses
AT mckevittchristopher genderequityprogrammesinacademicmedicinearealistevaluationapproachtoathenaswanprocesses