Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Gender equity programmes in academic medicine: a realist evaluation approach to Athena SWAN processes
  1. Louise Caffrey1,2,
  2. David Wyatt1,2,
  3. Nina Fudge1,2,
  4. Helena Mattingley3,
  5. Catherine Williamson2,4,
  6. Christopher McKevitt1
  1. 1Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, Division of Health & Social Care Research, King's College London, London, UK
  2. 2NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Guy's and St. Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London, UK
  3. 3Arts & Sciences Faculties, King's College London, London, UK
  4. 4Women's Health Academic Centre, King's College London, Guy's Hospital, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Louise Caffrey; louise.caffrey{at}kcl.ac.uk

Abstract

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.

  • gender equity
  • Athena SWAN
  • Realist Evaluation
  • Academic medicine
  • gender inequality

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/

View Full Text

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.