Professional Documents
Culture Documents
www.emeraldinsight.com/0261-0159.htm
EOI
28,6
Creating an ‘‘agora’’ for
storytelling as a way of
challenging the gendered
486 structures of academia
Received 15 October 2007 Jennifer Rindfleish and Alison Sheridan
Revised 9 November 2008,
20 January 2009,
School of Business, Economics and Public Policy, University of New England,
25 February 2009 Armidale, Australia, and
Accepted 1 March 2009 Sue-Ellen Kjeldal
Guangzhou Cornell University Vocational Technical Institute,
Private College of the University of Queensland, Guangdong, China
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present personal experiences of using storytelling as a
‘‘sensemaking’’ tool, to argue for the benefits of this method as a process of better understanding the
gendered academy and the role storytelling can play in effecting change.
Design/methodology/approach – Drawing on personal experiences of storytelling within
workplaces, the paper explores how stories between colleagues can lead to positive change
through the co-construction of new worlds of meaning which are spontaneously revised through
interaction.
Findings – The paper demonstrates how storytelling between individuals experiencing inequality
makes visible the gendered practices in academic workplaces and can lead to a change in those
experiences of the workplace. Also, such stories can be a means for prompting change through
negotiation. Theoretically, a triple-loop learning environment within an organization could provide
the agora required for stories about inequality to be heard continually and change to come about
through negotiation.
Research limitations/implications – The paper uses a method that serves as a heuristic device
and as such cannot be generalized for all organizational settings. The findings offer a new but partial
solution for negotiating gender inequity in academia by suggesting that there must be more
storytelling in openly public spaces between colleagues to challenge and negotiate the gendered
organizational cultures of academia.
Practical implications – The application of the method of triple-loop learning in academic
organizational settings can assist in challenging and changing gender inequity through the consistent
use of narratives.
Originality/value – The paper is unique in that it argues for the value of a self-reflexive narrative
form of method which favours stories being shared in public spaces – the agora – as a way of
addressing gender inequity within complex, male dominated professions such as academia.
Keywords Storytelling, Gender, Organizational structures, Organizational culture
Paper type Conceptual paper
Introduction
We are three academic women who have had an ongoing research interest in women’s
experiences in the workplace. This research interest is not only confined to the
experiences of others, but it also has a very personal dimension. Our own experiences
in an academic institution, and our perceptions of the gendered culture in which we
Equal Opportunities International work, have been of considerable interest to us and deeply affected our working lives.
Vol. 28 No. 6, 2009
pp. 486-499 While we have been concerned with the lack of representation of women in senior
# Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0261-0159
positions in our faculty for many years, our efforts in the mid to late 1990s to draw
DOI 10.1108/02610150910980783 women together in our faculty to consider how to improve women’s positions were
largely unsuccessful. These efforts did not lead to cultural change. Instead, from our Creating an
perspective, inequities continued to be played out in the workplace. Over a period of
time, how inequity was manifested in our work environment became more obvious as
‘‘agora’’ for
we three women shared our stories. What was happening to one, we found replicated in storytelling
the others’ experiences. This realization prompted us to write about our perceptions of
the internal conflicts we were experiencing and how these perceptions related to the
formal policies of equal opportunity in our workplace and the tension between our
‘‘lived experiences’’ and these policies. As one of us has a background in psychology,
487
she was able to identify the processes we were experiencing as cognitive dissonance
(Festinger, 1957), and pointed out that such dissonance could be relieved through
reflection and writing. As organizational scholars our understanding of the construct
of psychological contracts (Robinson and Morrison, 2000) also helped us to make sense
of our stories, as did our reading of the literature surrounding narratives in
organizational studies (Czarniawska, 1997, 2004).
According to Shaw (1997, p. 179) if individuals share their stories in various
contexts, they ‘‘provoke conditions in which people’s co-constructed worlds of meaning
are spontaneously revised in interaction’’. In this case, rather than the three of us
continuing to perceive the inequities being confined to an individual (and seen as ‘‘our
fault’’), we were able to revise our thinking to recognize the systemic nature of our
experiences. In particular, we came to understand how our perceptions of inequity
related to the recognition that the ‘‘grand narrative’’ of equity in our workplace could
not accommodate the events we were recounting to each other. Furthermore, this
realization highlighted that our psychological contracts were being violated (Robinson
and Morrison, 2000) because of the incongruence between our experiences and the
rhetoric of the equitable work environment. Through the process of storytelling, we
came to see there was a mismatching between our expectations and those of the
hegemonic decision makers (Martin et al., 1983) about how an equitable work
environment would operate. Creating the space in which we were able to share these
stories was an important means by which we were able to resist the pervasive
gendered practices and exercise some agency through our writing.
In this paper, we have drawn on our experiences of using storytelling as a
‘‘sensemaking’’ tool (Boje, 1991) to argue for the benefits of sharing personal stories as a
process of better understanding the gendered academy and the role storytelling can
play in effecting change. As Bruner (1990, p. 67) argues, stories are ‘‘especially viable
instruments for social negotiation’’. One of the aims of this paper is to discuss how the
process of storytelling helped make visible the gendered practices in our workplace
and to describe how this led to a change in our experiences of our workplace. A further
aim is to argue for ensuring that such stories are not confined to ‘‘safe’’ spaces, but are
heard in the open public space (agora) of the workplace, as a means for prompting
change through negotiation. The paper is therefore conceptual in nature, however, like
Martin (2003, p. 344) we ‘‘assume that harmful practices can be, if made visible and
named, challenged’’ and argue that, theoretically, a triple-loop learning environment
could provide such an open public space or agora. We explore the barriers to creating
such an environment when gender is the ‘‘problem’’, and give some suggestions for
addressing these constraints. While we are yet unable to map out the ideal solution, we
believe there is some scope for greater reflection and communication between
colleagues to challenge the gendered organizational cultures of academia. More stories
need to be heard in openly public spaces for there to be some recognition of the ongoing
disadvantage women experience in academia. Indeed, to make the stories plausible to
EOI those in the hegemony, we argue that management needs to be committed to creating
and monitoring such an agora, where multiple authors contribute. It will only be
28,6 through such processes that the need for change can be recognized and acted on.
Conclusion
The process of storytelling between we three academic women became a reflexive
device that not only led to the three of us identifying with our individual perceptions of
inequity but produced the ‘‘safe’’ space for a dialogue that co-constructed a world of
meaning and allowed for a spontaneous revision of our ‘‘lived experience’’ through our
interaction. Our storytelling of internal conflict actually made visible the gendered
practices in our workplace. Once made visible these practices could be resisted and
challenged (Gabriel, 2000) with the outcome being that our agency was enhanced.
However, in order for our wider workplace culture to become more inclusive we also
realized that the stories of others within the culture must be included for healing,
‘‘sensemaking’’ and effective change to occur. As Maddock and Parkin (1994) argued
more than a decade ago, ‘‘democratic organizations will only develop when the power
of gender cultures is acknowledged and challenged by both men and women’’
(Maddock and Parkin, 1994, p. 40). In this paper we have argued that creating an agora
where the different stories of others can be heard could assist the broader aim of
achieving real cultural change in academia. In participating in these agoras,
individuals and groups could work towards new ways of experiencing their
organization based on equitable and respectful relationships between the genders.
Further research could explore how to make this happen in practice.
EOI References
28,6 Ahmed, S., Hunter, S., Kilic, S., Swann, E. and Turner, L. (2006), Final Report: Integrating
Diversity, Gender, Race and Leadership in the Learning and Skills Sector, Lancaster Centre
for Excellence in Leadership, Lancaster University, Lancaster.
Armstead, C. (1995), ‘‘Writing contradictions: feminist research and feminist writing’’, Women’s
Studies International Forum, Vol. 18 Nos 5/6, pp. 627-36.
496 Bell, S. and Gordon, J. (1999), ‘‘Scholarship – the new dimension to equity issues for academic
women’’, Women’s Studies International Forum, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 645-58.
Benokraitis, N. (1998), ‘‘Working in the ivory basement, subtle sex discrimination in higher
education’’, in Collins, L., Chrisler, J. and Quina, K. (Eds), Career Strategies of Women in
Academe: Arming Athena, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Blackaby, D., Booth, A. and Frank, J. (2005), ‘‘Outside offers and the gender pay gap: empirical
evidence from the U.K. academic labour market’’, The Economic Journal, Vol. 115,
pp. 81-107.
Boje, D. (1991), ‘‘The storytelling organization: a study of story performance in an office-supply
firm’’, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 36, pp. 106-26.
Boud, D. and Walker, D. (1993), ‘‘Barriers to reflection on experience’’, in Boud, D., Cohen, R. and
Walker, D. (Eds), Using Experience for Learning, SRHE and Open University Press,
Buckingham.
Bronn, P.S. and Bronn, C. (2003), ‘‘A reflective stakeholder approach: co-orientation as a basis for
communication and learning’’, Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 7 No. 4,
pp. 291-303.
Bruner, J. (1990), Acts of Meaning, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Bruner, J. (1991), ‘‘The narrative construction of reality’’, Critical Inquiry, Vol. 18, pp. 1-21.
Burnes, B., Cooper, C. and West, P. (2003), ‘‘Organisational learning: the new management
paradigm?’’, Management Decision, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 452-64.
Chesterman, C. (2002), ‘‘Women’s executive development in Australian higher education’’, in
Howie, G. and Tauchert, A. (Eds), Gender, Teaching and Research in Higher Education,
Challenges for the 21st Century, Ashgate, Aldershot.
Coopey, J. and Burgoyne, J. (2000), ‘‘Politics and organizational learning’’, Journal of Management
Studies, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 869-85.
Czarniawska, B. (1997), Narrating the Organization, Dramas of Institutional Identity, University
of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Czarniawska, B. (2004), Narratives in Social Science Research, Sage Publications, London.
David, M. and Woodward, D. (1998), ‘‘Introduction’’, in David, M. and Woodward, D. (Eds),
Negotiating the Glass Ceiling, Careers of Senior Women in the Academic World, Falmer
Press, London.
De Cieri, H. and Kramar, R. (2005), Human Resource Management in Australia, 2nd ed., McGraw-
Hill, Sydney.
Duguid, P. (2006), ‘‘What talking about machines tells us’’, Organisation Studies, Vol. 27 No. 12,
pp. 1794-804.
Ellis, C. (1997), ‘‘Evocative autoethnography: writing emotionally about our lives’’, in Tierney, W.
and Lincoln, Y. (Eds), Representation and the Text, Re-Framing the Narrative Voice, State
University of New York Press, Albany, NY.
Ely, R., Meyerson, D. and Davidson, M. (2006), ‘‘Rethinking political correctness’’, Harvard
Business Review, Vol. 84 No. 9, pp. 78-87.
European Youth Forum (2008), ‘‘E-youth opinion: electronic newsletter of the European Youth
Forum’’, No. 5, pp. 1-17.
Festinger, L. (1957), A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, Row Peterson, Evanston, IL. Creating an
Fletcher, C. (2007), ‘‘Passing the buck: gender and management of research production in UK ‘‘agora’’ for
Higher Education’’, Equal Opportunities International, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 269-86.
Fondas, N. (1997), ‘‘Feminization unveiled: management qualities in contemporary writings’’,
storytelling
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 257-82.
Gabriel, Y. (2000), Storytelling in Organizations Facts, Fictions, and Fantasies, Oxford University
Press, Oxford. 497
Ginther, D. and Hayes, K. (2003), ‘‘Gender differences in salary and promotion for faculty in the
humanities’’, Journal of Human Resources, Vol. 38, pp. 34-73.
Granleese, J. and Sayer, G. (2005), ‘‘Gendered ageism and ‘lookism’: a triple jeopardy for female
academics’’, Women in Management Review, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 500-17.
Hunter, S. and Swann, E. (2007), ‘‘The politics of equality: professionals, states and activists’’,
Equal Opportunities International, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 377-86.
Jabri, M. (2004), ‘‘Team feedback based on dialogue: implications for change management’’,
Journal of Management Development, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 141-51.
Jabri, M. and Pounder, J. (2001), ‘‘The management of change: a narrative perspective on
management development’’, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 20 No. 8, pp. 628-91.
Jackson, S. (2000), ‘‘Networking women: a history of ideas, issues and developments in women’s
studies in Britain’’, Women’s Studies International Forum, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 1-11.
Jackson, S. and Jones, J. (1998), ‘‘Thinking for ourselves: an introduction to feminist theorizing’’, in
Jackson, S. and Jones, J. (Eds), Contemporary Feminist Theories, Edinburgh University
Press, Edinburgh.
Johansson, A.W. (2004), ‘‘Consulting as story-making’’, Journal of Management Development,
Vol. 23 Nos 3/4, p. 339.
Kanter, R.M. (1977), Men and Women of the Corporation, Basic Books, New York, NY.
Katila, S. and Merilainen, S. (1999), ‘‘A serious researcher or just another nice girl? Doing gender
in a male-dominated scientific community’’, Gender, Work and Organization, Vol. 6 No. 3,
pp. 163-73.
Kaye, M. (1995), ‘‘Organisational myths and storytelling as communication management: a
conceptual framework for learning an organization’s culture’’, Journal of Management &
Organisation, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 1-13.
Knights, D. (2006), ‘‘Authority at work: reflections and recollections’’, Organization Studies, Vol. 27
No. 5, pp. 699-720.
Lund, H. (1998), A Single Sex Profession? Female Staff Numbers in Commonwealth Universities,
Commonwealth Higher Education Management Service, Association of Commonwealth
Universities, London.
McDowell, J., Singell, L. and Ziliak, J. (1999), ‘‘Cracks in the glass ceiling: gender and promotion in
the economics profession’’, American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, Vol. 89,
pp. 397-402.
McDowell, J., Singell, L. and Ziliak, J. (2001), ‘‘Gender and promotion within the economics
profession’’, Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 54, pp. 224-44.
Maddock, S. and Parkin, D. (1994), ‘‘Gender cultures: how they affect men and women at work’’, in
Davidson, M. and Burke, R. (Eds), Women in Management Current Research Issues, Paul
Chapman Publishing, London.
Maitlis, S. (2005), ‘‘The social processes of organizational sensemaking’’, The Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 21-49.
Martin, J., Feldman, M., Hatch, M.J. and Sitkin, S. (1983), ‘‘The uniqueness paradox in
organisational stories’’, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 28, pp. 438-53.
EOI Martin, P.Y. (1996), ‘‘Gendering and evaluating dynamics: men, masculinities and managements’’,
in Collinson, D. and Hearn, J. (Eds), Men as Managers, Managers as Men, Sage
28,6 Publications, London.
Martin, P.Y. (2003), ‘‘‘Said and Done’ versus ‘Saying and Doing’: gendering practices, practicing
gender at work’’, Gender and Society, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 342-66.
Martin, P.Y. (2004), ‘‘Gender as a social institution’’, Social Forces, Vol. 82 No. 4, pp. 1249-73.
498 Morley, L. (1994), ‘‘Glass ceiling or iron cage: women in UK academia’’, Gender, Work and
Organization, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 194-204.
Morley, L. (2005), ‘‘Sounds, silences and contradictions: gender equity in British commonwealth
higher education’’, Australian Feminist Studies, Vol. 20 No. 46, pp. 109-19.
O’Connor, P. (2000), ‘‘Resistance amongst faculty women in academe’’, Higher Education in
Europe, Vol. XXV No. 2, pp. 213-9.
Pini, B. (2004), ‘‘On being a nice country girl and an academic feminist: using reflexivity in rural
social research’’, Journal of Rural Studies, Vol. 20, pp. 169-79.
Pullen, A. (2006), ‘‘Gendering the research self: social practice and corporeal multiplicity in the
writing of organizational research’’, Gender, Work and Organization, Vol. 13 No. 3,
pp. 277-98.
Robinson, S. and Morrison, E. (2000), ‘‘The development of the psychological contract breach and
violation: a longitudinal study’’, Journal of Organizational Behaviour, Vol. 21, pp. 525-46.
Robinson, S.L. and Rousseau, D.M. (1994), ‘‘Violating the psychological contract: not the
exception but the norm’’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 15, pp. 245-59.
Sefcovic, E. and Bifano, D. (2004), ‘‘Creating a rhetorical home for feminists in the ‘Master’s
House’ of the academy: toward a gendered taxonomy of form and content’’, Women and
Language, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 53-62.
Shain, F. (2000), ‘‘Managing to lead: women managers in the further education sector’’, Journal of
Further and Higher Education, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 217-29.
Shaw, P. (1997), ‘‘Intervening in the shadow systems of organizations: consulting from a complexity
perspective’’, Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 235-50.
Sinclair, A. (2000), ‘‘Teaching managers about masculinities: are you kidding?’’, Management
Learning, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 83-101.
Sinclair, A. (2004), ‘‘Journey around leadership’’, Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of
Education, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 7-19.
Sinclair, A. (2005), Doing Leadership Differently, Melbourne University Press, Melbourne.
Singh, J. (2002), Still a Single Sex Profession?: Female Staff Numbers in Commonwealth
Universities, Association of Commonwealth Universities, London.
Smith, D. (1987), The Everyday World as Problematic: A Feminist Sociology, North Eastern
University Press, Boston, MA.
Strachan, G., Burgess, J. and Henderson, L. (2007), ‘‘Equal employment opportunity legislation
and policies: the Australian experience’’, Equal Opportunities International, Vol. 26,
pp. 525-40.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission (1996), The Committees of the TRC, available at:
www.doj.gov.za/trc/trccom.htm (accessed 3 August 2005).
Weick, K.E. (1995), Sensemaking in Organizations, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Westrum, R. (1982), ‘‘Social intelligence about hidden events’’, Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion,
Utilisation, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 381-400.
Woodward, D. (2007), ‘‘Work-life balancing strategies used by women managers in British
‘modern’ universities’’, Equal Opportunities International, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 6-17.
Yeo, R. (2002), ‘‘Learning within organisations: linking the theoretical and empirical Creating an
perspectives’’, The Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 109-22.
‘‘agora’’ for
About the authors storytelling
Jennifer Rindfleish is currently a Senior Lecturer in the School of Business, Economics and Public
Policy at the University of New England, in Armidale, NSW, Australia. Her research interests
cover the areas of gender in organisations, consumption and self-identity and applied marketing.
Jennifer teaches in the areas of Consumer Behaviour and Marketing Communications. She is the 499
corresponding author and can be contacted at: jrindfle@une.edu.au
Alison Sheridan is currently a Professor in the School of Business, Economics and Public
Policy at the University of New England, in Armidale, NSW, Australia. Her research interests
cover the areas of gender in organisations, women on boards and human resource management.
Alison teaches in the areas of Human Resource Management and Gender Issues in Management.
Sue-Ellen Kjeldal is currently a Professor in the Guangzhou Cornell University Vocational
Technical Institute, a private college in China affiliated with the University of Queensland. Her
research interests cover the areas of communications management, gender in organisations and
organisational behaviour. Sue-Ellen teaches in the areas of organisational behaviour, consumer
behaviour and human resource management.