Gender in Academic Networking: The Role of Gatekeepers in Professorial Recruitment

• Author: Yvonne Benschop,Marieke Brink
• Date: 01 May 2014
• Published date: 01 May 2014
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12060

Gender in Academic Networking: The Role of

Gatekeepers in Professorial Recruitment

Marieke van den Brink and Yvonne Benschop

Radboud University Nijmegen

ABSTRACT The aim of this study is to build a theoretical framework to understand how

gendered networking practices produce or counter inequalities in organizations. We introduce

a practice approach combined with a feminist perspective in organization network studies. The

notions of gender and networking as social practices allow better insights into what people say

and do in networks, and the ways that networking produces or counters gender inequalities.

We draw on empirical material about professorial appointments in Dutch academia and

analyse the accounts of gatekeepers illuminating their networking practices. The accounts show

which networking practices gatekeepers routinely use in recruitment and how these networking

practices are intertwined with gender practices. We use the notion of mobilizing masculinities

to understand the self-evident identification of men gatekeepers with men in their networks,

and to understand how both men and women gatekeepers prefer the male candidates that

resemble the proven masculine success model. Furthermore, this study provides the first

empirical insights in mobilizing femininities in which women search for and support women

candidates. We show how the gender practice of mobilizing femininities is a more precarious

and marked practice than mobilizing masculinities. Mobilizing femininities in networking is

intended to counter gender inequalities, but is only partially successful. Through constructions

of ‘who you can trust’ or ‘who is a risk’, gatekeepers exercise the power of inclusion and

exclusion and contribute to the persistence of structural gender inequalities.

Keywords: academic recruitment, gatekeepers, gender practices, mobilizing femininities,

mobilizing masculinities, networking

INTRODUCTION

Networks are a burgeoning terrain of research in management and organization studies

(Borgatti and Foster, 2003; Ibarra et al., 2005; Jack, 2005; Kilduff and Brass, 2010;

Parkhe et al., 2006). Organizational scholars have shown that involvement in networks

is important for a successful career since interpersonal networks can provide job oppor-

tunities (Burt, 1992, 2005; Granovetter, 1974; Lin and Dumin, 1986), support (Bagilhole

Address for reprints: Marieke van den Brink, Institute for Management Research, Radboud University

Nijmegen, PO Box 9108, 6500 HK Nijmegen, The Netherlands (mcl.vandenbrink@fm.ru.nl).

bs_bs_banner

© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and Society for the Advancement of Management Studies

Journal of Management Studies 51:3 May 2014

doi: 10.1111/joms.12060

and Goode, 2001; Gersick et al., 2000; James, 2000), influence and status attainment (Lai

et al., 1998; Mehra et al., 2006), and a higher salary (Seidel et al., 2000). Most research

concentrates on the beneficial effects of networks, such as social support, resources,

information, and improved performance (Flap and Völker, 2004). Yet, networks also

produce inequalities as there is ample evidence of network related unequal outcomes in

status, influence, careers, information, and trust (Ibarra, 1992; Krackhardt, 1990;

Podolny and Baron, 1997). Network studies have paid some attention to inequalities in

the networks of people with different social identities, such as age, race, ethnicity, social

class, and gender (Ibarra et al., 2005; G. McGuire, 2012; M. McGuire, 2002; Reagans,

2011). The focus of this paper is on gender in networks, as gender is a fundamental

organizing principle (Scott, 1986) that cuts through other social identities.

Previous network research has shown differences between women and men in struc-

tures and success of networks (Brass, 1985; Burt, 1998; Durbin, 2011; Forret and

Dougherty, 2004; Ibarra, 1997). Men have more access to higher status sponsors,

strategic network partners, and powerful coalitions (Burt, 1998; Ibarra, 1993). Women

experience barriers to networking because of time constraints and family responsibilities

(Forret and Dougherty, 2001; Linehan, 2001) and their reluctance to engage in network

activities (Tonge, 2008). Women use their networks for social support whereas men

successfully use networks for self-promotion and increasing their internal visibility (Forret

and Dougherty, 2004; Ibarra, 1992).

Despite their contribution to the identification of sex differences in networks, these

studies present two major limitations. First, they consider gender as a variable, main-

taining the categories of women and men as robust categories to measure and explain

various inequalities in networks (Alvesson and Billing, 2009). This emphasis on sex

differences constrains our ability to consider how organizations as socio-cultural contexts

shape these differences (Ely and Padavic, 2007). This is problematic as it fails to address

gendered norms in organizations, overlooks structural power inequalities, and neglects

the complex interplay between organizational features and individual-level processes

(Acker, 1990).

Second, in line with the majority of social network research in organizations, studies

on sex differences in networks concentrate on network structures and outcomes. Several

prominent network scholars have noted that the networking activities that produce these

structures and outcomes receive much less attention (Brass et al., 2004; Ibarra et al.,

2005; Kilduff and Tsai, 2003; Porter and Powell, 2006). The emphasis on social struc-

tures gives centre stage to the formal properties of abstract relations between actors, but

provides little insight in how those structures come about. Agentic perspectives on

networks are relatively rare and there is still much more to learn about network behav-

iour or networking (Ibarra et al., 2005). Kilduff and Brass (2010) note how the most

frequent criticism of social network research is that it fails to take human agency into

account. Thus, there is a need to develop better insights into the crucial role of actors and

into how these actors behave in networks.

To address these limitations, we turn to a practice approach that focuses on what

people are actually saying and doing in daily interactions (Yanow, 2006). The ‘practice

turn’ in the social sciences (Organization Studies, 2009; Schatzki et al., 2001) addresses the

classic social theory question of the relation between social structures and agency in a

Gender in Academic Networking 461

© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and Society for the Advancement of Management Studies

novel way through the study of the actual work practices of people in organizations

(Feldman and Orlikowski, 2011; Yanow, 2006). The adoption of practice approaches has

enabled organization scholars to more closely describe and understand organizational

phenomena as they unfold (Sandberg and Dall’Alba, 2009). The interest in practices has

not yet been taken up in organizational network research, but the conceptualization of

gender as a social practice has already gained some prominence in feminist organization

studies (Martin, 2003; Poggio, 2006).

The aim of this study is to develop a theoretical framework that combines a practice

approach and feminist constructionism to understand how networking practices perpetu-

ate or counter gender inequalities. This framework allows us to make two important

contributions to network studies. First, the notion of networking practices gives center

stage to agentic women and men who engage in micro-level activities that are conse-

quential in producing the structural contours of organizational life (Feldman and

Orlikowski, 2011). Their accounts of networking provide us with a more comprehensive

and accurate understanding of how networking practices routinely produce organi-

zational outcomes. Second, calling attention to gender in networking introduces a more

sophisticated notion of gender in organization network studies that conceptualizes

gender as a social practice, not as a variable. The notions of gender and networking as

social practices bring a new perspective in organization network research that allows

better insights into the networking activities of people (Benschop, 2009; Shaw, 2006), in

how their networking is gendered and how their gendered networking creates, reinforces,

or counters structural gender inequalities.

The context in which we study gender in networking is academic recruitment, more

specifically the recruitment of full professors. In earlier papers we have shown that

informal and formal networks of elite academics are essential in building a reputation of

excellence for professorial candidates (Van den Brink and Benschop, 2012b). This study

builds on that by focusing on the networking practices of those elite academics whom we

consider to be gatekeepers. The networking practices of gatekeepers play a crucial role

in granting access to the influential and desirable positions of full professors. We use

information from a qualitative study among gatekeepers, who are members of selection

committees of seven Dutch universities. The data contain detailed accounts of how

networking is a routine part of the recruitment of full professors. As privacy and confi-

dentiality issues prevented us from observing the networking practices as they unfold, our

analysis focuses on the accounts of networking practices. The accounts of networking

practices help us to identify how elites grant access to top positions through informal

relations and interactions and also how these gatekeepers legitimize their practices of

granting access to some and not to others. We analyse those accounts along three

research questions: (1) Which networking practices do gatekeepers use in professorial

recruitment? (2) How do gatekeepers practice gender in networking? (3) How do these

networking practices produce or counteract gender inequalities?

The paper is organized in five sections. We start with an elaboration of our theoretical

perspective on gender in networking practices. We then describe our qualitative meth-

odology, including the data collection and the analysis. In the third section, we present

the empirical material that shows how gatekeeping is used in professorial recruitment

and how gender is practiced in gatekeeping. We end the paper with a discussion and

M. van den Brink and Y. Benschop462

© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and Society for the Advancement of Management Studies