Lack of ambition or lack of support? Diverging career experiences of men and women explain the persistence of gender bias

Abstract

Abstract In this study we explore possible causes for the differential career success of women in academia. We do this by testing the content of organizational narratives about plausible reasons why women are less likely than men to advance in their academic careers, against the self‐reported experiences and career choices of women and men in the organization. We compared content‐coded narratives (N = 84) with quantitative self‐report (N = 661) data. Both data sets were collected around the same time, taking care that different members of the organization contributed to each of these two data sources. First, we report the qualitative data (Study 1). These revealed the organizational narrative about gender differences in academic careers. On the one hand, people in the university acknowledged the sexist treatment of women, but on the other hand, they failed to note that this “chilly climate” might adversely impact the careers of women in the organization. We report the quantitative data in Study 2. This revealed no support for the validity of this narrative, which maintains the pervasive belief that women are less interested in, and prefer to “opt out” from, an academic career. Notably, we found no actual differences between female and male academics in their self‐reported motivations. However, women did report having made more difficult life choices and having received less support from the organization for their careers. Together, these findings reveal blind spots in organizational narratives and point to additional measures that can be taken to ensure equal career opportunities for all employees.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 19 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.