More than 50 Cambridge staff including heads of colleges and departments have backed the call, laid out in a letter published today in the Times Higher Education magazine.
The group argues traditional metrics used to identify high performers have a male-bias because they fail to recognise stereotypically female achievements in the sector.
University of Cambridge pro-vice-chancellor for institutional affairs Jeremy K. M. Sanders, who is responsible for policy and strategy around HR, told HR Magazine the situation was founded in universities’ funding structures.
He said more than 70% of Cambridge University’s funding was received via income from grants – a situation similar in other high-performing institutions. He added grants won by staff both enabled them to do research and provided a measure of success. But such indicators were likely to favour men, who were more inclined to pursue research in place of other job roles within a university.
“The grants people get - the numbers of high-profile publications, patents, or invitations to lectures at international conferences - they’re the kind of metrics that are easy to measure and tend to favour individuals who are focused purely on their research,” said Saunders.
“But we also need to do teaching, administration, and nurturing – looking after our colleagues.
“What tends to happen in a competitive environment like Cambridge, which is not unique, is that the men are more likely to end up being focused primarily on research, and the women are less likely to say no when they’re asked to do teaching or administrative things.
“As a result, women tend to be less successful in ending up with big grants, big research groups, big publication records, and big lists of lecture invitations.”
Saunders said the academics wanted to find a method of broadening the criteria used to measure success within universities. He said finding a solution was difficult because institutions could not risk damaging their success in receiving grant funding.
“We are tremendously successful and we wouldn’t want to damage that record of success by going away from these traditional metrics,” said Saunders.
“We’re saying, is there a way of expanding and redefining our criteria for success to include some of these softer matters?”
The university’s gender equality champion Dame Athene Donald said female staff members backed the suggestion a male-bias existed in the sector.
“Our experience at Cambridge, where we have recently surveyed 126 female academics and administrators on this subject, suggests that this is indeed the case,” she said.
“Women seem to value a broader spectrum of work-based competencies that do not flourish easily under the current system.
“If universities inhibit the progression of talented female staff, they in turn are unable to reach their full potential. And we know that universities make a huge contribution to society through research, teaching and partnerships with businesses, among many other activities.”
Statistics from the Higher Education Statistics Agency show there are four male professors for every female professor in UK universities, despite women accounting for 45% of the UK academic workforce.
