The GENERA PAM Tool
– Find indicators to specify targets and to monitor change
– Removing barriers to the recruitment and career progression of female researchers
– Equal opportunities for career progression for male and female researchers
– Supporting the retention & career progress of female researchers
The following indicators can be relevant to find out where your institution stands regarding the retention and career progress of female researchers.
Part 1: Promotions, tenures and 'quality' of contracts
The following indicators can be relevant to find out who is applying and being submitted for promotions and tenured positions as well as the 'quality' of contracts of male and female researchers, i.e. the distribution of fixed-term and permanent positions and the prevalence of 'precarious' working contracts.
| Indicator | Value | Description & Use | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Transparent promotion system in place | Yes/No | “A transparent promotion system is characterized by formalized and correctly applied promotion rules, explicit guidelines and consequent practices. Agents, criteria and decision-making processes that are involved into a promotion decision should be made explicit (van den Brink et al. 2010). … The aim of this indicator is to show the extent of openness, accountability, and auditability regarding promotions made by decision-making bodies and to illustrate potential gender discrimination and inequality in decision-making and promotion procedures. ” [EFFORTI D3.3] Qualitative indicator on the openness, accountability, auditability of all promotions made by decision-making bodies. | Van den Brink 1) EFFORTI D3.32) |
| Number of submitted tenure applications | Number by sex Proportion (%) by sex | Number of tenure applications that were submitted in your institute/department/institution in the past year. | Toolkit3) |
| Number of awarded tenures | Number by sex Proportion (%) by sex | Number of male and female researchers who were awarded tenures in your institute/department/institution in the past year. | Toolkit4) |
| Number of promotion applications | Number by sex Proportion (%) by sex | Number of applications for promotion in your institute/department/institution in the past year. | Toolkit5) |
| Number of admissions (of promotion applications) | Number by sex Proportion (%) by sex | Number of promotions in your institute/department/institution in the past year. | Toolkit6) |
| Share of women and men among applicants for promotion | Number by sex Proportion (%) by sex | Indicator can only be used, if there is a formal application process for promotions. The indicator can be used to find out if women (or men) are underrepresented among researchers applying for promotion. Indicator should be broken down by scientific field and academic position. | Science Europe 7) |
| Share of women and men among promoted researchers | Number by sex Proportion (%) by sex | Indicator can only be used, if there is a formal application process for promotions. The indicator can be used to find out if women (or men) are underrepresented among promoted researchers. Indicator should be broken down by scientific field and academic position. | Science Europe 8) |
| Success rate for women and men applicants for promotion | Success rate of women applicants Success rate of men applicants | Success rate = number of promoted women/men divided by the total number of women/men applying for promotion Indicator can only be used, if there is a formal application process for promotions. Indicator should be broken down by scientific field and academic position. | Science Europe 9) |
| Share of female researchers promoted in a higher category/grade | % | ERABASE-Indicators MS39_38f 10) | |
| Assessment of fixed-term contracts vs. permanent positions/contracts | # of male researchers with fixed-term contracts # of male researchers with permanent positions % of male researchers with fixed-term contracts # of female researchers with fixed-term contracts # of female researchers with permanent positions % of female researchers with fixed-term contracts | Please fill in the numbers for your institute/department/ institution. % of male researchers with fixed-term contracts = # of male researchers with fixed-term contracts / all male researchers | ECNGD p.61 11) |
| Proportion of researchers with 'precarious' working contracts | % of male researchers with precarious working contracts % of female researchers with precarious working contracts | The indicator compares the proportion of men and women researchers on 'precarious working contracts' (each calculated as a percentage of the respective total number of women and men researchers). Researchers with 'precarious working contracts' are those with no contracts, fixed-term contracts of one year or less or other contracts associated with student status. | She figures12) |
| Indicators to reflect on promotion processes in general | |||
| Promotion policy: Do you have a policy on promotion? | Yes/No/Do not know | GENDER-NET 13) | |
| Transparency of promotion process and criteria (communication or dissemination) | - The promotion processes and criteria are not communicated or disseminated at all - The promotion processes and criteria are irregularly communicated to some staff - The promotion processes and criteria are irregularly communicated to all relevant staff - The promotion processes and criteria are regularly communicated to some staff - The promotion processes and criteria are regularly communicated to all relevant staff | GENDER-NET 14) | |
| Is the promotion policy gender sensitive (which takes into account gender equality / equal opportunities for women and men)? | Yes/no/Do not know | GENDER-NET 15) | |
| Which system of promotion does the institution use? | - The decision is made by an individual - The decision is made by a panel (2 or more people) - Do not know | GENDER-NET 16) | |
| In case of panels: Is there a policy on gender balance in promotion panels? | Yes/No/Do not know | GENDER-NET 17) | |
| Do decision makers (individual, members of promotion groups/panels) receive training on gender bias? | - Yes, all of them receive training on gender bias - Yes, some of them receive training on gender bias - No, none of them receive training on gender bias - Do not know | GENDER-NET 18) | |
| Do the candidates who apply for promotion receive training on gender bias? | Yes/No/do not know | GENDER-NET 19) | |
| Is gender sensitive language used in the promotion documentation? | - Yes, all documentation has been checked for gender sensitivity - Yes, some documentation has been checked for gender sensitivity - No, documentation has not been checked for gender sensitivity - Do not know | GENDER-NET 20) | |
| Indicator | Value | Description & Use | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender Pay Gap (unadjusted) | % points | Calculation: (M-F)/M * 100 M = average gross hourly earnings of men F = average gross hourly earnings of women The unadjusted Gender Pay Gap describes the difference between average gross hourly earnings of male and female employees as % of male gross earning. | EUROSTAT 21) |
| Indicator | Value | Description & Use | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex differences in the international mobility of researchers during their PhD | % points | The indicator shows the difference in the percentage of women/men researchers who - during their PhD - moved for at least three months to a country other than that where they attained (or will attain) their PhD. It is calculated by subtracting women's rate of mobility from that of men. In other words by subtracting the share (%) of internationally mobile women researchers from the share (%) of internationally mobile men researchers. A positive value indicates that men are more mobile, and a negative value indicates that women are more mobile. | She figures22) |
| Sex differences in the international mobility in post-PhD careers | % points | The indicator shows the difference in the percentage of women/men researchers who - during their post-PhD career stages - have worked abroad for three months or more at least once in the last decade. The indicator is calculated by subtracting women's rate of mobility from that of men. In other words by subtracting the share (%) of internationally mobile women researchers (out of the total number of women researchers) from the share (%) of internationally mobile men researchers (out of the total number of men researchers). A positive value indicates that men are more mobile, and a negative value indicates that women are more mobile. | She figures23) |
Please have a look at the list of relevant indicators and its use.
1)
Van den Brink, M., Benschop, Y., & Jansen, W. (2010). Transparency in Academic Recruitment: A Problematic Tool for Gender Equality? Organization Studies, 31(11), 1459–1483. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840610380812
2)
Kalpazidou Schmidt, Evanthia; Bührer, Susanne; Schraudner, Martina; Reidl, Sybille; Müller, Jörg; Palmen, Rachel; Haase, Sanne; Graversen, Ebbe Krogh; Holzinger, Florian; Striebing, Clemens; Groó, Dora; Klein, Saskia; Rigler, Dorottya; Høg Utoft, Ea. (2017). EFFORTI – Deliverable 3.3. A Conceptual Evaluation Framework for Promoting Gender Equality in Research and Innovation. A synthesis report https://efforti.eu/sites/default/files/2018-03/EFFORTI%20D3.3%20FINAL%2027032018.pdf
3)
, 4)
, 5)
, 6)
Frehill, Lisa et al. (2005): |Toolkit for Reporting Progress Toward NSF ADVANCE: Institutional Transformation Goals, ADVANCE Institutional Transformation https://advance.vt.edu/content/dam/advance_vt_edu/documents/other/advance_indicators_toolkit.pdf
7)
, 8)
, 9)
Science Europe (2017). Practical Guide to Improving Gender Equality in Research Organizations http://eige.europa.eu/sites/default/files/se_gender_practical-guide.pdf
10)
Dinges, M.; Bouttier, R.; Schiffbaenker, H.; Holzinger, F.; Van der Giessen, A.; Lehenkari, J.; Deschryvere, M.; Kuittinen, H.; Rammer, Ch. (2014). Analysis of the state of play of the European Research Area in Member States and Associated Countries: focus on priority areas. Final Report https://www.joanneum.at/fileadmin/user_upload/imported/uploads/tx_publicationlibrary/analysis_of_the_state_of_play_of_era_vf20140826.pdf
11)
ECNGD. (2017): see Reidl, Sybille; Holzinger, Florian; Streicher, Jürgen;
Beranek, Sarah; Unger, Maximilian; Hafellner, Silvia (2017): EFFORTI Comparative Background Report. Deliverable D2.3. https://www.efforti.eu/sites/default/files/2018-03/EFFORTI%20WP2%20Comparative%20Report%20Final.pdf
12)
, 22)
, 23)
European Commission (2016). She figures 2015. Gender in Research and Innovation. Statistics and Indicators. https://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_gender_equality/she_figures_2015-final.pdf
13)
, 14)
, 15)
, 16)
, 17)
, 18)
, 19)
, 20)
Loke, Gary; Christoffersen, Ashlee; Dumétier, Vanessa; Toader, Alina (2016). Qualitative indicators on gender equality in research institutions. GENDER-NET Report. http://www.gender-net.eu/IMG/pdf/GENDER-NET_D4-15_Publish_first_joint_monitoring_report_on_gender_equality_indicators_MENESR_ECU_.pdf
21)
EUROSTAT Statistics Explained Glossary
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Thematic_glossaries
