Gender Equality in Selection Procedures
Appointment and hiring processes at universities are crucial points of contact for promoting gender parity in the academic world (current equality data). At a time when equal opportunity and diversity are increasingly becoming the focus of social and institutional discussions, these procedures are of central importance in reducing structural inequalities and ensuring a balanced representation of all genders in academic positions. By specifically designing and implementing selection criteria that promote diversity and social equity, universities can not only improve the quality of their teaching and research, but also create an inclusive environment that values and utilizes the talents of all genders. The way appointments and hiring are made thus has a far-reaching impact on academic culture, the visibility of women and other marginalized groups in leadership positions and the development of a more equitable academic landscape. In this context, it is essential to critically scrutinize existing procedures and develop innovative approaches that enable true equality in higher education.
In order to ensure, among other things, compliance with and consideration of legal gender equality requirements, internal regulations and gender-equitable, transparent and fair selection procedures, the central Equal Opportunity Representative is an advisory member of all appointment and selection committees, endowed with specific rights, including the right of veto.
On this page, we would like to give interested persons an insight into gender equality work in appointment committees and other personnel selection procedures.
Questions About Appointment Processes or Hiring?
The obligation to fully involve the central Equal Opportunity Representative in all procedures is stipulated by law and is therefore an elementary component of every appointment processes. For this reason, the central Equal Opportunity Representative must be involved in a planned procedure from the very beginning - i.e. from the formulation of the application for approval.
At Osnabrück University, responsibility for monitoring appointment processes lies with the central Equal Opportunity Representative. If necessary, she can be represented by her central deputy as well as by the decentralized Equal Opportunity Representative of the schools. In contrast to the other members of the appointment committees, representation is possible either for the entire procedure or for individual meetings of the appointment committee.
As with appointment processes, the cental Equal Opportunity Representative must be involved in hiring processes from the outset, i.e. from the moment the position is approved. She must be involved in the entire procedure in the same way as a committee member. In contrast to appointment processes, the responsibility for hiring processes lies primarily with the decentralized Representative holders.
The central Equal Opportunity Representative can at any time take over the procedures that lie with the decentralized colleagues or the colleagues can hand over the procedures to the central Equal Opportunity Representative at any time.
Active recruitment includes targeted research and subsequent personal contact with potential, expectedly qualified candidates for an advertised professorship.
Due to structural disadvantages, FLINTA* (German acronym that stands for all genders facing structural discrimination in society) are still disproportionately likely to leave the academic system after completing their doctorate. This significantly reduces the group of academics who are potentially eligible for appointment. The active recruiting measures are intended to counteract this phenomenon and motivate those responsible to look around for promising applicants and to approach them specifically and motivate them to apply.
The aim of every appointment and personnel selection process is to recruit the most qualified and suitable person for the position in question. In these personnel selection processes, we are fundamentally subject to unconscious assumptions and prejudices, a so-called unconscious bias, which guides us. The phenomenon of so-called homosocial cooptation is also effective. This refers to the tendency of decision-makers to favor members of their own social group in selection processes. Gender is a dominant selection category here.
These factors mean that the performance, behavior and appearance of applicants are assessed differently. For example, a self-confident and energetic appearance in a male applicant is more likely to be associated with assertiveness, confidence and drive, whereas in a female applicant it is associated with arrogance, pretentiousness and a lack of team spirit. The same behaviour is evaluated differently depending on gender, but also, for example, age or ethnicity, whereby this evaluation often follows common gender stereotyping. On the basis of stereotypical gender attributions, scientific achievements and practices can also be evaluated differently, such as publication strategy, frequent or no change of universities or research institutions, stays abroad, etc..
These effects of unconscious bias lead to distortions in the application process that often put female scientists and other underrepresented groups at a disadvantage. Most people do not intentionally evaluate the performance of academics differently or set out to discriminate, rather we all fall victim to our own unconscious assumptions and biases.
Contact Persons
Dr.in Sabine Jösting (she/her)
Phone: +49 541 969-4767
sabine.joesting@uos.de
Room: 52/507
Equal Opportunity Office
Neuer Graben 7/9
49074 Osnabrück
Short Bio: Sabine Jösting
Annkatrin Kalas, M.A. (she/her)
Phone: +49 541 969-4520
annkatrin.kalas@uos.de
Room: 52/505
Equal Opportunity Office
Neuer Graben 7/9
49074 Osnabrück