Presentation given at the OECD Gender Budgeting Experts Meeting, Vienna, Austria. 18-19 June 2018 For more information see http://www.oecd.org/gov/budgeting/gender-budgeting-experts-meeting-2018.htm

1. Aiming for Gender Equality in
Higher Education
… but (how) can we measure success?
Philipp Otto
Performance Controller for
Science and Research
Federal Ministry of Education,
Science and Research, Austria

2. Responsibilties
• All matters concerning tertiary education
• Improving the framework for scientific research,
especially fundamental research
Data
• 22 Public Universities, 13 Private Universities
• 21 Universities of Applied Sciences
• 368.842 students (2017; 52,6% female)
Budget
• 2018: 4,463 billion €
• 2019: 4,783 billion €
15.06.201815.06.2018 2
Who are we? Facts and
figures

3. How is the budget spent?
15.06.201815.06.2018 3
Universities
Universities
of Applied
Sciences
Support for
Students
Scientific
Research
Other
• Nearly 75% of the budget is spent on Public Universities
• Public Universities are therefore in the center of the
Ministry‘s strategy

4. • complete autonomy since 2002
• mainly financed by state
• Performace Agreements
 3 year period
 Global budgets
 budget defined by 3 pillars (starting 2019):
o Teaching
o Research
o Infrastructure and strategic development
15.06.201815.06.2018 4
How are Public Universities
governed?
basic and competitive indicators

5. Universities are a ‘male‘ institution.
That‘s common sense. But is it a fact?
And what can we do about it?
15.06.201815.06.2018 5
What‘s the (gender) problem
with the Public Universities?

6. Glass Ceiling Index (GCI): comparison of proportion
of women in academia (grades A, B and C) to women
in top academic positions (grade A):
CGI in Austrian Public Universities:
What‘s the (gender) problem
with the Public Universities?
0 1 >1
Women have a
fair chance of
being promoted
Women have a
better chance of
being promoted
Women have a
worse chance of
being promoted
1.50
1.54
1.60
1.59
1.59
1.64
1.67
1.73
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010

7. According to GCI,
Universities (in Austria)
don‘t have enough
female leaders. Is that
an Austrian problem?
What‘s the (gender) problem
with the Public Universities?
No, it‘s not. But others
do better.
*SHE FIGURES 20153.16
2.96
2.82
2.56
2.23
2.12
1.95
1.82
1.82
1.8
1.78
1,76
1,75
1.75
1.73
1.73
1.72
1.71
1.64
1.63
1.63
1.63
1.58
1.57
1.51
1.49
1.43
1.41
1.34
1.26
1.25
0.75
0.72
CYP
LIT
LUX
EST
UK
CZE
BEL
POL
SVK
ESP
NED
AUT
EU-28
POR
SUI
ITA
FRA
DAN
SWE
LET
ROM
SLV
FIN
HUN
NOR
GRE
IRL
ISL
GER
CRO
BUL
MAK
MLT
2013
2010
GCI in Europe,
2010 and 2013*

8. What‘s the (gender) problem
with the Public Universities?
Is the problem new?
No, definitely not.
3.6%
4.7% 5.1%
10.6%
19.0%
24.4%
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
Share of female
professors, 1962-2017
There has been some
progress, but we‘re still
far away from gender
equality.

9. So where do we lose all the women?
15.06.2018 9
What‘s the (gender) problem
with the Public Universities?
52.60%
58.70%
49.10%
38.70% 46.60%
35.30%
24.80% 23.70%
47.40%
41.30%
50.90%
61.30%
53.40%
64.70%
75.20% 76.30%Women Men
Leaky Pipeline: the higher the hierarchical level, the
lower the number of women becomes

10. Now that we have an evidence-based proof that
there is a problem, what can we do about it?
1. Define according strategic goals in Outcome
Orientation
2. Integrate those goals into the Performance
Agreements with the Universities
3. Don‘t forget to monitor and evaluate!
15.06.201815.06.2018 10
Strategic Measures against
the problem

11. Gender Objective for Chapter
31: Science and Research
„Gender Equality in leading positions,
management bodies and the young generation of
scientists“
Indicators:
15.06.201815.06.2018 11
24%
76%
Share of professors
female male
35%
65%
Career Positions
female holders male holders
STEP 1
47%
53%
Share within
management bodies
female male

12. • Push universities to improve gender equality via
the negotiation of the Performance Agreements.
• Obligatory contributions for the Ministry‘s
performance goals are part of the Performance
Agreements (and partially relevant for funding!)
12
Gender Objective for Chapter
31: Science and Research
Strategic Embedding / Instruments
Outcome Orientation: Target Setting for systemwide share of professors and career positions
Performance Agreements 2019-2021: mandatory integration and target setting per university
Per university: Plan for promotion of women, university governance in detail
STEP 2

13. 13
The potential-oriented
cascade model for target
setting
• How can reasonable target values for the
indicators be defined?
• We‘ve seen in the leaky pipeline, that we lose
women along the career ladder.
• The best way to define the target for any
hierarchical level is to take a look at the reservoir
of potential applicants – and they sit in the next
lower hierarchical level (‘potential category’). So
the gender ratio of the lower level must be the
basis for the target setting of the higher level.
• This is called the potential-oriented cascade
model.

14. 14
Potential-oriented target
setting – one example
University of Vienna
Professors 2018* New professors 2019 & 2020
♀ ♂ ratio TOTAL (replacements + additional staff)
134 311 30,1% 54
* estimated: data 2017- expected retirements + expected replacements
Required share of women is
calculated potential-oriented
In the lower hierarchical level (esp.
career positions), share is 46%
New professors
2019 & 2020
Estimated prof‘s
December 2020
♀ ♂ ratio ♀ ♂ ratio
25 29 46% 153 319 32,3% + 2,2 PP
(vs 2018)

15. • NOT a tool for promotion of women, but it offers
equal opportunities for both genders (can be
better ‘sold‘ to stakeholders)
• Screening of appointment processes and career
models according to the gender dimension
15.06.201815.06.2018 15
Advantages of the cascade
model

16. 1. Progress is monitored in the standard
accompanying discussions between
University and Ministry twice a year
2. Progress is taken into account for the
upcoming Performance Agreements –
sancations are possible, if university fails
to meet targets
-> The Casade Model and the requirement to
push gender equality is not a separate topic,
but integrated into normal means of
controlling/steering of the Universities!
Integration into ‚normal‘
steering and controlling circle
BEST
PRACTISE
15.06.2018
STEP 3

17. Philipp OTTO
Federal Ministry of Education,
Science and Research
philipp.otto@bmbwf.gv.at
Any Questions?
Your turn!