COMMUNICATION ESSAY

Barriers to and facilitators of female Deans’ career advancement in higher education: an exploratory study in Vietnam

Thi Lan Huong Nguyen

Published online: 9 December 2012 © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Abstract Although the slow progress of female academics compared to their male col- leagues and the challenges that female academic leaders have to face in taking leadership

roles have been well-documented, very little is known about female academic leaders and

managers’ career advancement in developing countries like Vietnam. This paper reports on

an exploratory study of a research project funded by the Cambridge—Viet Nam Women

Leadership Programme, which aims to advance an understanding of the status of, and

identify strategies to empower, female academic managers in Vietnamese higher educa-

tion. The focus of this paper is on university leaders and female Deans’ perceptions of the

barriers to female academic Deanship and female Deans’ reflections on the facilitators for

their career advancement. The study found that the main barriers are strong family obli-

gations, negative gender stereotypes regarding females as leaders, and female academics’

unwillingness to take management positions. The major facilitators of female Deans’

career advancement are self-effort, strong family support, and, what is perceived to be, a

favourable or ‘lucky’ selection context. The paper provides empirical evidence to support

the view that family support is a crucial factor for female academic career advancement in

Vietnam. Women are both an agent and an object of change in empowering female

academic leadership.

Keywords Middle level management · Female academic managers · Women empowerment · Vietnamese higher education

T. L. H. Nguyen (&) LH Martin Institute for Higher Education Leadership and Management, 170 Bouverie Street, Carton, VIC 3053, Australia e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]

T. L. H. Nguyen Hanoi University of Industry, Km 13, Minh Khai, Tu Liem, Hanoi, Vietnam

123

High Educ (2013) 66:123–138 DOI 10.1007/s10734-012-9594-4

Introduction

The fact that women are under-represented in leadership and management positions,

including those in higher education, is well documented in the literature (Bornstein 2008;

Doherty and Manfredi 2006; Mai 2007; McNeill 2007; Va´zquez-Cupeiro and Elston 2006;

Valian 1998; Winchester et al. 2006). There also is a large volume of literature that

identifies the challenges and facilitators for women assuming leadership and management

roles, in society generally and in academic institutions. However, there is little docu-

mentation of the experiences of female academic ‘leaders’ and ‘managers’ career

advancement in south-east Asian contexts, particularly in Vietnam.

This article aims to fill this information gap by examining the experiences of female

Deans in selected Vietnamese universities. The Deanship role is chosen because of its

centrality to higher education middle management (Meek et al. 2010). The article will

identify both the barriers and facilitators these female Deans have experienced in pursuing

their careers. The study is based on findings from a research project funded by the

Cambridge—Viet Nam Women Leadership Programme, which seeks to advance an

understanding of the status of, and identify strategies to empower, female academic

managers 1 in Vietnamese higher education.

This research is significant for at least two reasons. Firstly, it helps to fill a gap in the

literature on female academic leadership. The literature has been dominated by a number

of studies on women in higher education management in Western settings, particularly in

the UK, USA, and Australia and in some developing countries such as China, Malaysia,

Turkey, etc. However, very little has been written on the subject in Vietnam. Secondly,

understanding the barriers and facilitators for women in assuming leadership positions in

higher education is important in deepening and broadening understanding of leadership

development as a whole within higher education (Madsen 2010). The task of empowering

female leadership is essential not only in terms of achieving gender equity but also for

organizational productivity and human capital development (Bell 2009; Cheung and

Halpern 2010).

Following a review of the relevant literature, the context and methods of the study are

presented. Then the main findings of the study are reported and discussed. Finally, con-

clusions and recommendations arising from the study are presented.

Conceptual framework

In the absence of an appropriate theoretical framework grounded in the Vietnamese

experience, a very general socio-structural framework is employed based on the literature

of women in management and leadership positions, focusing on the higher education

contexts. The framework is used as a guide to analyse the barriers and facilitators for

female Deans’ career advancement in Vietnam. Two main components of this framework

are barriers to and facilitators for women assuming leadership and management positions.

1 In this paper, the term ‘managers’ is deliberately used to refer to Deans and ‘leaders’ refers to university’s

most senior leadership positions such as Rectors or Vice Rectors, because in Vietnam Deans enjoy a low level of autonomy and in classifying between university leaders and lower level of leaders, they are only considered as department leaders, not university leaders.

124 High Educ (2013) 66:123–138

123

Barriers to women taking leadership and management positions

Researchers both outside and inside academia agree broadly that for women who aspire to

top leadership positions, paths exist but are full of ‘twists and turns’, both unexpected and

expected (Eagly and Carli 2007, p. 64). Researchers put forward a range of theories to

explain the under-representation of women in senior management positions. However, the

two most common are based on psychological and cultural theories. From a psychological

perspective, negative gender stereotypes regarding female leaders may critically impede

women’s leadership advancement (Eagly and Carli 2007; Heilman 2001; Schein 2001).

From a cultural perspective, women have to face multiple cultural barriers in accepting

leadership positions arising from the ‘macro’ socio-political level, the ‘mesco’ 2 organi-

zational level, and the ‘micro’ individual level (Cubillo and Brown 2003).

Psychological barrier: think manager–think male attitudes

Prejudicial attitudes towards women as leaders is arguably the most ingrained barrier to

women in leadership and management (Twombly 1998). Women are often thought to be

more communal: affectionate, helpful, friendly, kind, and sympathetic, interpersonally

sensitive, gentle, and soft-spoken. These communal characteristics often are considered to

be inappropriate for effective leadership and management. In contrast, men are considered

to be more agentic: aggressive, ambitious, dominant, self-confident, forceful, self-reliant,

and individualistic. These agentic traits are often associated with successful management

(Eagly and Carli 2007; Eagly and Johannesen-Schmidt 2001). These stereotypes impede

women’s career advancement as it is assumed that women do not have the attributes

associated with management. Such views about men and women are often implicitly

acquired and thus very resistant to change.

Research indicates that the ‘think manager–think male’ attitude is an entrenched view,

especially among males (Schein 1973, 2001). This phenomenon translates equally well into

the university sector as “think professor–think male” (Tharenou 1994) and “think vice

chancellor–think male” (Tilbrook 1998). Such attitudes not only limit women’s access to

leadership roles but also create biased evaluations for women when they occupy such roles

(Bailyn 2003; Eagly and Carli 2007; Heilman 2001; Mabokela 2003). If women choose to

be highly communal, they can be criticized for lacking agentic qualities; in contrast, if they

are too agentic, they may be criticized for lacking empathy. Whichever way they act, they

may be considered to lack the ‘right stuff’ for powerful jobs (Eagly and Carli 2007). Due to

this paradox between the way women and managers are supposed to behave, women

leaders may find it very difficult to successfully fulfill leadership and management roles—

damned if you do, damned if you don’t. However, it should be acknowledged that there are

obviously women who are successful leaders and managers.

Cultural barrier 1: The “macro” socio-political level

Socio-political barriers refer to entrenched hegemonic cultural traditions of a region or

country that women are generally required to follow (Cubillo and Brown 2003). These

cultural expectations often put women in a disadvantaged position compared to men in

trying to advance their careers (Cubillo and Brown 2003; Oplatka 2006).

2 ‘Mesco’ is a term used by Cubilllo and Brown (2003) to denote a middle level between the macro and

micro level.

High Educ (2013) 66:123–138 125

123

Research has shown that women, particularly those in traditional societies, are expected

to take more family responsibilities than men, such as solely careering for their children,

husband, and extended family. They are also required to do more domestic work. Such role

expectations have been found to be an important obstacle in academic career progression

for women in Turkey (Neale and Ozkanli 2010), Thailand, Hong Kong, Singapore, and

Malaysia (Luke 2000), Kenya (Olser 1997, cited in Oplatka 2006), and even for Asian

American Pacific Islanders (Chen and Hune 2011) and African American women

(Blackwood and Brown-Welty 2011). The pressure of family responsibilities results in

women continuing to be the ones who interrupt their careers, take more days off work, and

work part-time. As a result, they have fewer years of job experience, and fewer hours of

employment per year, which slow their career progress and reduces their earnings. Even

women who have found a way to reduce family pressures by sharing housework and child

rearing with husbands, relatives, or paid workers are still perceived as having domestic

responsibilities which will be inappropriate for promotion, especially to time consuming,

demanding positions (Eagly and Carli 2007). With the bulk of domestic work still falling

on their shoulders, women’s career advancement continues to be slowed.

Apart from family responsibilities, women are also required to follow particular cultural

traditions imposed by the society in which they live (Cubillo and Brown 2003; Luke 2000;

Oplatka 2006; Twombly 1998). For example, in a study on how women’s career paths and

opportunities are shaped by the intersection of cultural values and structures, and legal

systems of the state in four countries in South East Asia, Luke (2000) found that Asian

values or Asian culture promotes a specific concept of femininity. The stereotype ideal of

women’s roles is as dutiful wives, mothers, and homemakers (Stivens 1998a, b, cited in

Luke 2000). Women’s public conduct should be ‘subdued’, ‘quiet’, and ‘withdrawn’. As a

result, women have to perform an ‘Asian sense of what it means to be womanly’ or else

‘you will lose face’ (Luke 2000). Being required to be confined within cultural rules of

feminine propriety, women are more reluctant to demonstrate their leadership skills in

public or to socialize with colleagues to build professional networks. This limits profes-

sional opportunities and advancement.

Cultural barrier 2: The ‘mesco’ organizational level

Beside socio-political culture barriers, the highly masculinist culture at universities can act

as another barrier for women interested in leadership and management positions (Chen and

Hune 2011; Tilbrook 1998; White 2003.). Like most large institutions, universities were

historically the realm of a certain class of men, so university practices and norms are

constructed around men’s life experiences (Meyerson and Fletcher 2000). Because these

practices are well-established they are taken for granted and very difficult to change

(Bailyn 2003). Although women have entered the workforce and have added enormous

value, the balance of power within organisations still is in favour of men. Consequently,

female academics are often disadvantaged in pay and promotion.

The literature provides evidence on how organizational structures, norms, and values

disadvantage women in their career advancement. For example, the culture of long hours

makes it difficult for women who have family commitments (Airini et al. 2011); poor

policies on women returnees from leave; and discrimination against women in selection

and promotion through the syndrome of supporting ‘people like us’ (Mann 1995). While

research is highly valued for academic promotion, women are required to do more teaching

and pastoral care than their male colleagues on similar appointment levels (Spurling 1997,

126 High Educ (2013) 66:123–138

123

cited in Tilbrook 1998; White 2003). In an established university in the United Kingdom,

the human resources department informally looked for interested candidates before an

election of a Head of Department. Because women were less likely to get involved in the

informal networking required to get noticed, the initial informal search was considered

lacking in transparency and possibly a form of indirect discrimination (Doherty and

Manfredi 2006). In Malaysia and Hong Kong, training specifically for women managers is

often not a university priority (Luke 2000). Or if a general management training program is

provided, it does not fit well with women’s schedules. In short, policies and processes in

higher education can act as barriers against women assuming leadership and management

positions.

Cultural barrier 3: The ‘micro’ individual level’

As a consequence of the imposition of traditional male hegemony at the socio-political and

organizational level, women’s internalisation of barriers may also contribute to their under

representation in management. Some examples of these barriers are lack of competitive-

ness, lack of confidence, and a fear of failure (Cubillo and Brown 2003).

With the pressure of dutiful compliance with societal “norms”, values and roles, women

may feel that they need to adhere to the social expectations of their roles. As a result,

women are reluctant to ‘come forward and parade their achievements in annual compe-

titions for promotion or professorial conferment’ Doherty and Manfredi (2006, p. 568),

Luke (2000) argues that they may have even internalized a sense of ‘gender neutral

meritocratic idealism’. Organizational structures that bias power in favour of men also

make women unenthusiastic to engage in “politicking and power-mongering” and a gen-

eral “distaste for political party” (Arroba and James 1987, cited in Mann 1995). In

eschewing the role of power and politics, some have argued that women demonstrate a lack

of political competence, which can impede career progress.

Facilitators for women in higher education leadership and management

Whilst research focuses on the underrepresentation of women in management and barriers

to success, it may be argued that insufficient original research has been undertaken on

facilitators for women gaining senior academic leadership and management positions in

higher education (Airini et al. 2011; Chen and Hune 2011). A literature review of this topic

has found very few relevant publications in English (Airini et al. 2011; Blackwood and

Brown-Welty 2011; Cubillo and Brown 2003; Harris et al. 2011; Turner 2007; Twombly

1998). From this scant literature, the three most common facilitators appear to be personal

factors, family support and mentor support.

Personal factors

Senior academic women seem to demonstrate very strong personalities such as being self-

motivated, independent and hardworking. In interviews with 18 women in positions of

academic leadership at the University of Costa Rica, Twombly (1998) found that to rise to

the top of their professions these women were determined not to be left behind by trying

their best to survive many battles through their own excellence, tenacity, and political skill.

They also worked twice as hard as their male colleagues to succeed. In a study of narratives

drawn from women aspiring to leadership and management in nine different educational

High Educ (2013) 66:123–138 127

123

contexts, from very different parts of the world, Cubillo and Brown (2003) similarly found

that although they had to face hostile male-dominated cultures, these women appeared to

be extremely independent, confident and self-motivated. In studying pathways to leader-

ship for women of color in California Community Colleges, Blackwood and Brown-Welty

(2011) also found that these women always tried to be the best in their position. Working

hard and working smart were also the strategies employed by a number of other female

leaders and managers (Cheung and Halpern, 2010).

Family support

Support from family is the second common facilitator for women’s career advancement.

By reviewing the literature, Cheung and Halpern (2010) reported that women leaders in

various studies all mentioned the importance of family support in achieving their top

positions. While the extended family provided great help with housework and childcare,

the husbands could also take on a substantial share of household chores or take the role of

the trailing spouse, i.e. being willing to move to a new location with uncertain career

prospects for the advancement of their wife’s career. Family and partner support were also

recognized as playing an important role in three ‘first’ Mexican–American, Native

American, and Asian Pacific/Asian American women university presidents’ (Turner 2007)

and twelve Asian American female leaders’ (Kawahara et al. 2007) achievement. Almost

all of the women in Cubillo and Brown’s (2003) study identified their fathers as strong

influences in shaping their thinking and enabling them to aspire to higher education and

role achievement.

Mentor support

Mentor support plays a significant role for women taking leadership and management

roles. By analysing secondary data in exploring the career paths of African American

women presidents, Harris et al. (2011) found that for African American women to achieve

a presidency, mentoring was strongly recommended because mentors and networking may

help women access significant information and opportunities for career advancement. In a

New Zealand study, Airini et al. (2011) identified what helps or hinders women to advance

in university leadership roles. One of the facilitators was having senior leaders who support

women to assume leadership roles. The importance of mentoring was also confirmed by

Peters (2011) in the study of African American women achieving tenure in the field of

educational leadership, and by Blackwood and Brown-Welty (2011) research on women of

color assuming leadership roles in California Community Colleges.

Other factors

Apart from personal factors, family support, and mentor support, some less common

factors were also identified in the literature. For example, the importance of early edu-

cational and career success and teachers’ inspiration was emphasized by the three ‘first’

Mexican–American, Native American, and Asian Pacific/Asian American women presi-

dents (Turner 2007). Day-to-day application of organizational policies and practices could

also help empower women (Airini et al. 2011). By allowing women with full time

appointments to work part time when necessary, universities provided some structural

facilitators for female academics (Twombly 1998). Female administrator’s career

128 High Educ (2013) 66:123–138

123

advancement might also be facilitated by being able to move to another institution or by

accepting an interim position (Blackwood and Brown-Welty 2011). Some female leaders’

success resulted from adopting non-traditional leadership styles to bring diverse commu-

nities together (Turner 2007).

Even though there have been some common themes with respect to facilitating female

leadership in the academy, they are not necessarily universal. For example, although role

models appeared to be essential to the success of academic American women of color

(Blackwood and Brown-Welty 2011; Harris et al. 2011; Peters 2011), women in North

America (Kelly 2011) and New Zealand (Airini et al. 2011), it was not obviously a factor

for Costa Rican women academic leaders (Twombly 1998) or Korean women (Johnsrud

1995, cited in Twombly 1998). Successful academic and administrative managers in New

Zealand universities were proactive in building their career development plans (Airini et al.

2011). However, female leaders of color in California Community Colleges did not have

any well articulated career plans (Blackwood and Brown-Welty 2011) and African

American female community college presidents saw their career development just as ‘‘in

the right place at the right time’’ (Gooch 2009, p. 118, cited in Harris et al. 2011). This may

indicate the importance of socio-cultural context in determining what facilitates/hinders

women’s academic advancement. So it’s important to widen our understanding in different

contexts.

There is a gap in the literature in that most of the studies primarily focused on very

senior women in more advanced countries such as the US or New Zealand (Airini et al.

2011; Kelly 2011; Turner 2007). When researchers examined the topic in less developed

country contexts, they didn’t distinguish academic from administrative leadership roles

(Cubillo and Brown 2003) and when they did, the data was quite outdated (Twombly

1998). In partly addressing this literature gap, this study furthers our understanding in how

a particular group of middle-level academic managers (female Deans) from a developing

country (Vietnam) have been hindered or facilitated in their career progress. The two major

questions guiding this study are: (1) What are the barriers to female Deans taking Deanship

positions at a Vietnamese university and (2) What are the facilitators for their pathways to

the Deanship?

Context

Empowering women in leadership and management has been a significant goal that

Vietnam has aimed to achieve. Vietnam ranks second among Asia Pacific countries and 9th

out of 135 countries worldwide in the number of female National Assembly Members.

Even so, the percentage of female National Assembly Members for the 11th election is

only 28 %. Apart from politics, Vietnamese women have taken leadership roles in fields

such as economics, culture, social organizations, and educational institutions. Although,

due to lack of data, no specific ratios could be identified, the numbers of women leaders are

modest in comparison with males (Quy and Nga 2008).

In higher education, there have been no specific university policies on promoting

women in leadership and management. Vietnamese universities generally conduct activi-

ties related to gender equity as stipulated by the Communist Party’s leadership and the

government’s laws and policies. For example, each university generally has a Women’s

Association. Their major activity is to hold annual meetings for the university’s female

staff on Vietnamese Women’s Day to praise women’s achievements both at work and in

High Educ (2013) 66:123–138 129

123

raising and educating their children at home. These associations also organize sightseeing

tours or holidays for women to socialize and network once or twice annually.

One of the two Vietnamese national universities was selected as the site for this

research. At the time this research was conducted in 2009, the selected national university

consisted of six university members 3 . Of their total 42 faculties only nine faculty Deans

were female (21 %), coming from four of the six university members. On average, women

represent 34 % of the academic staff in these four university members. Female academics

accounted for about 20 % of the total academic staff with Doctoral qualifications. This

figure is 15 % at associate professor level, and well under 5 % at professor level. As stated

in the University Regulations (Thủ tướng Chı́nh phủ 2010), it is necessary for both men and women to hold a Doctorate to be a Dean.

Methods

Face to face interviews were the primary method of investigation. All nine female Deans

were invited to participate; however only six were able to participate in the research. One

female Dean did not wish to participate; two others were on business overseas at the time

the data was collected. One member of the Board of Rectors or one Human Resources

Manager from each of the six universities was also invited to participate. However, only

three male university leaders and two male Human Resources Managers were available to

take part in the research. Because these participants were most likely to be decision makers

on whether female academics were promoted, their perceptions helped to obtain a more

comprehensive picture of the barriers to female Deans’ career advancement.

All participants were asked to share their perceptions of the status and empowerment of

female Deans at their university, facilitators and barriers for women taking Deanship

positions, and how they think their university and society can help women to overcome the

obstacles in their career development. Six female Deans were also asked to describe times

when incidents in work or non-work situations have helped (or hindered) them developing

as university managers. All interviews were recorded and transcribed in Vietnamese.

Selected verbatim quotes were translated into English in the final report.

Findings

The female Deans’ Faculty profile

The six female Deans have been in their current roles for between one and three years.

Before their current position, they most commonly held an academic Head of Program or

Deputy Dean Position. The average number of their Faculty’s tenured staff is approxi-

mately 25, except for one Dean whose faculty has approximately 40 tenured lecturers.

Each Dean is supported by one or two Deputy Deans. The number of students enrolled in

each faculty varies from 300 to 1,000. One faculty provides doctoral training; all other

faculties only deliver Master and Bachelor level courses. Females account for the majority

of the staff and students in all of the six faculties. All of the female Deans have doctoral

degrees; two have been promoted to ‘Assistant Professor’. No female Dean is a ‘Professor’.

3 The two Vietnam National Universities are the two largest and most autonomous universities in Vietnam.

Each national university consists of several independent mono-disciplinary university members.

130 High Educ (2013) 66:123–138

123

Barriers

The most common barriers to women taking academic management positions as perceived

by the respondents are strong family obligations, negative gender stereotypes, and

women’s unwillingness to take leadership roles.

Strong family obligations

According to the participants, strong family commitment is the biggest barrier to female

Deans. This barrier is perceived by both university leaders as well as female Deans

themselves. From a male university leader’s perspective ‘it seems to be the world’s

unwritten rule that women, not men must care about their family more’ and therefore,

‘women are afraid that if they take part in too many social activities and don’t care much

about their families, problems will arise’. This challenge is recognized by all of the female

Deans. They say that the most common challenge for them is to fulfill their roles as a wife

and a mother while working as a Dean:

The workload is now becoming heavier and heavier so female academic leaders must

know how to balance family life and university work’. (Female Dean)

For me, the biggest obstacle is time constraints. Sometimes my husband complains

about me spending inadequate time with my family and my children are sad because

I am too busy’. (Female Dean)

My children are still small, so I have to take care of them. I didn’t get the title

‘excellent staff’ in 2002 and 2003 because my child was often ill and I couldn’t

arrive at work on time. This is a very big challenge’. (Female Dean)

Having to take major responsibility for family, leadership and management work was

perceived as ‘not suitable’ for women because ‘leaders have to deal with a variety of social

communications, go on business very often, and meet a lot of people’ (Female Dean). So, if

women are leaders ‘sometimes they cannot come to their office on time’ and ‘their family

duties affect university work’ (University Manager). Therefore, male academics are valued more than females because ‘males have more time for work than females’ (University

Manager). One university leader further commented that ‘if we want women to participate

more in social activities, the first task is to change society’s assessment of women’s work’.

Stereotypes against women being leaders

Stereotypes against females being leaders still exist and they do hinder female academics

from becoming leaders and managers. Female academics are thought to be indecisive, less

active, limited in thinking, and dare not take risks.

From the male university leaders’ perspective, ‘female managers are not very decisive’ and ‘women’s disadvantage is their lack of organizational capability’. Some female Deans

themselves also think that ‘women are less active than men’. They blame this on women’s

characteristics:

Women are very careful in making plans; however, they are less decisive and dare

not take the risks. They care about too many things. Consequently, they may lose a

lot of good opportunities’. (Female Dean)

High Educ (2013) 66:123–138 131

123

Sometimes I am not decisive enough so I cannot solve a problem completely. I also

want to cover a lot of work. That is a disadvantage, not an advantage. Maybe it is due

to my personality. (Female Dean)

or on women’s general low level of education and experience compared to men:

Women’s thinking and management capabilities are more limited than those of men

due to how they are educated, their living standards, and social circumstances.

Except for females with very good living conditions or self-reliance, the majority of

females’ thinking is limited in terms of vision, depth, and width. (Female Dean)

The issue that women do not support women was also identified:

At our university, there are a lot of female academics so it is easy to choose a female

leader; however, females don’t seem to select other females, it is females’ problem. I

have a feeling that females don’t vote for other females. (Female Dean)

Women’s unwillingness to take leadership roles

Living in a culture where women’s primary role expectation is as homemakers, some

women are satisfied with doing a low ranking job and taking care of their family:

In fact, many women hold an attitude that they shouldn’t be too involved in social

activities, their husband and children should be their primary concern. As the Head

of a unit, they must deal with all problems and conflicts in their unit. This takes a lot

of their time. Sometimes they just want to care about their family and look after their

public appearance. They are fed up with all day management work. (Female Dean)

This thinking appears to be common among Vietnamese women. However, in this study

it is a viewpoint held only by a minority.

The facilitators for female Deans’ career advancement

The major facilitators for female Deans’ career advancement are self-effort, strong family

support, and a favourable promotion context.

Female Deans’ self effort

The first factor that influences the female Deans’ career advancement is their individual

abilities and effort in gaining high level qualifications. All of the six Deans worked hard to

complete their Doctoral training programs. They were among the first female Doctors in

their specialization.

I myself decided to study subject X. I didn’t plan anything or didn’t think that I

would become a Dean one day. I myself felt that I had to study. The current position,

first of all, is an outcome of my own motivation and efforts’. (Female Dean)

The completion of my Doctoral thesis possibly made me a Dean. I am the first female

PhD candidate who completed PhD study successfully. (Female Dean)

There must be a strong need for learning, an adequate level of expertise in the

specialized area, and professionalism. (Female Dean)

132 High Educ (2013) 66:123–138

123

Strong family support

Apart from the Deans’ personal ability and efforts, strong support from their families is a

decisive factor. Support can come from the female Dean’s husband, parents, and/or par-

ents-in-law:

I have an advantage because my husband is also a lecturer; he supports me to

advance in my career. Sometimes, he is not happy when I come home late but

generally, he is very supportive’. (Female Dean)

My husband is very supportive because some relatives in my husband’s extended

family also work in my specialized area. My parents-in-law are also involved in a lot

of social work and go on business extensively. Since I was married, my husband’s

family has created favourable conditions for me to study and participate in social

activities. It has been a long supportive process. Now that my son follows my

profession, my husband must also support me more. (Female Dean)

In fact, family support was the most important factor that helped me to become a

Dean. I must say that I am very lucky because I have a Doctoral qualification while

my husband doesn’t. For Asians and the Vietnamese, it is not easy to accept a woman

whose education is better than that of her husband. Luckily, my husband’s parents

are very understanding. They respect me because of my high-level education. My

father-in-law used to be Deputy Director of the National Department of Agriculture,

my mother-in-law used to be a lecturer of English; therefore they supported me for

my PhD study. Another advantage is that my family’s financial situation is very

strong. (Female Dean)

The selection context

Organizational contexts play a very important role in deciding who can become Deans. In

the cases of the female Deans, most of them were able to take management positions

because no men were qualified or available. Four of the six Deans are Foundation Deans in

their faculty.

Actually, I was not elected or selected to be a Dean. I didn’t apply for the post either.

It came quite naturally. It seemed inevitable. When I started working in this Faculty,

there was only one male colleague who had graduated from Russia. He was the one

who offered me my position in the Faculty. However, he only worked in the Faculty

for two years, and then had to stop for military duties. There was only me left in the

faculty at that time [with a Doctoral qualification]. So I am not selected or appointed.

It just came naturally’. (Female Dean)

In fact, there was nothing special about my career advancement. Our specialized

subject group was founded in 1995 consisting of only me and another female PhD.

When there was a need to nominate a Head of the group, people could only select

between me and the other female. I was chosen because I was younger. After that, in

2001, the group became a Faculty and I was nominated Dean. Also, there were not

many people who had a Doctoral qualification at that time’. (Female Dean)

I worked as Deputy Dean from 2005–2007. When I started the role I had nearly finish

my PhD. In 2008, when the former Dean retired and my department was separated

High Educ (2013) 66:123–138 133

123

into an independent Faculty, I became Dean. I was strongly qualified for the post

since I had a Doctoral qualification and was a Communist Party member. Apart from

that, in terms of capabilities, no one else in the faculty was qualified. If I wasn’t

qualified, no one from the Faculty was better than me at that time. (Female Dean)

In general, there are some common features in the six Deans’ career advancement. None of

them had any clear plans for their career development (similar findings can be found in

Blackwood and Brown-Welty 2011); however, they all had excellent learning capabilities

and demonstrated great effort and determination to progress. In addition, they had very

strong family support, especially from their husbands and parents-in-law in studying

further. Thanks to these favourable factors, they became outstanding in their faculties.

Having almost no competitors for the position at the time of selection, they became the

strongest candidates for the Deanship. Similar findings of being in the right place at the

right time are also found in Gooch (2009) and Ausmer (2009), cited in Harris et al. (2011).

Discussion

A number of barriers and facilitators for women taking Deanship positions in this study

confirm findings from previous research on this subject. In terms of the challenges, female

Deans in the current study face almost all the common barriers identified in the literature.

Psychologically, prejudicial attitudes against female managers are quite common among

both male university managers and female Deans. Women were perceived as having some

personal attributes that are inappropriate for being leaders, for example, being indecisive,

narrow thinkers, and not being risk takers. Similar findings can be found in the literature

(Eagly and Carli 2007; Heilman 2001; Schein 2001). However, the think manager-think

male attitude was not clearly expressed.

Women’s strong family obligations act as the strongest macro socio-political cultural

barrier to female academic advancement. This ‘unwritten rule’ places a heavy burden on

female Deans’, both physically and mentally. The psychological effects of this social

imperative can be seen as one type of ‘glass ceiling’ for academic women (Cotter,

Hermnsen, Ovadia, and Vanneman 2001; Powell and Graves 2003, cited in Harris et al.

2011). This is because university leaders are often in favor of men in selecting a manager

since as a social norm men have more time for work than women. Psychologically, women

themselves may feel ashamed if they are involved too much in career activities and cannot

devote adequate time to their family and consequently face family problems. While this

finding resonates very well with previous research of Neale and Ozkanli (2010), Luke

(2000) and Olser (1997), cited in Oplatka 2006), the study does not seem to support the

Asian values of feminine propriety as a barrier for women advancement as found in a study

by Luke (2000). This is an important observation, and may be due to Vietnam’s particular

history.

Surprisingly, even though universities did not seem to have any available gender profile

data or any particular policies on supporting women, respondents appeared to be happy

with the current level of university support. No participants claimed university structures

and policies as a barrier to female academic advancement. One female Dean even thought

that ‘the university is right in not having any special support for women’ because ‘if

anyone can satisfy the criteria, s/he can become a manager’. Although this finding is not

exclusive to the current study—similar findings can be found in a study on Turkish

universities by White and Ozkanli (2011), it differs greatly from most other studies in

134 High Educ (2013) 66:123–138

123

‘Western’ contexts in which organizational structures, norms, and values are perceived as

barriers to women’s career advancement (Airini et al. 2011; Doherty and Manfredi 2006;

Tilbrook 1998; White 2003). Perhaps, the female Deans themselves have internalized a

sense of gender neutrality at work as a result of the deeply rooted social expectation of

their family roles. This finding may indicate that Vietnamese academic women’s slow

professional progress is mainly due to the social expectations of their role in the family.

Organizational interventions may help, but they may not be the decisive factors in

removing barriers for academic women, if the broader social barriers are not removed.

Possibly, women should learn to take the advantages of the work-family interface rather

than considering work-family balance as a major concern (Cheung and Halpern 2010).

Despite barriers, the women in this study are successful in their career. Women’s

self-ability and determination appear to be the prerequisites for success. Not surprisingly,

family support is the strongest facilitator for the female Deans not only prior to but also

during their Deanship. In addition, the way in which they were selected for the role appears

to be the final decisive factor. These findings support previous research on the facilitators

of female academics’ advancement: personal factors (Blackwood and Brown-Welty 2011;

Cubillo and Brown 2003; Twombly 1998), family support (Cheung and Halpern 2010;

Kawahara et al. 2007; Turner 2007) and a favorable selection context (Gooch 2009,

pp 118, cited in Harris et al. 2011). However, unlike in some other studies (Airini et al.

2011; Blackwood and Brown-Welty 2011; Harris et al. 2011; Peters 2011), in this study the

success of the female Deans wasn’t facilitated by mentors.

This study is limited to one university and its findings cannot be generalized to all

female Deans in Vietnam. But in this case study, apart from their own ability and efforts,

female Deans depend on ‘luck’ as a factor for their career advancement. They seemed to be

lucky because at work they were simply in the right place at the right time. There is

nothing wrong with someone being lucky in life in general, in one’s career advancement in

particular; but it can be argued that in order for women to advance more systematically,

there is much more to be done than for women sitting passively in one place and waiting

for their luck to come. The female Deans in this study have very powerful family support

because their family members understand the need to empower them. This may suggest

that in order for women to be empowered and promoted, we need to enhance people’s

awareness of freeing and empowering women’s potential. Possibly, in order to make this

change, women themselves need to first change their thinking (Mann 1995).

This study adds to the literature on barriers to and facilitators for female academic

advancement in higher education. It helps to illuminate the experiences of academic

women taking management positions from a research context in a developing South East

Asian country. Such specific knowledge is very important in building gender equity pro-

grams in these contexts.

Although this research has achieved its overall aim of exploring the barriers to and

facilitators of female academic Deans’ advancement at a national university in Vietnam,

there are nonetheless limitations to this research work. The study is based on a quite small

sample of female Deans and university leaders at only one institution in Vietnam. The

results cannot represent the whole of Vietnamese higher education, much less that of all or

even only South East Asian developing countries. However, as there is a lack of research

on this subject in Vietnam, it is important to have this exploratory study in the Vietnamese

context. It is expected that additional research will be undertaken to provide a broader

understanding of the advancement of female academic leaders in higher education in

Vietnam and other developing countries. Future research is planned in other Vietnamese

universities, involving a greater number of stakeholders from wider university contexts.

High Educ (2013) 66:123–138 135

123

It would be interesting to compare the facilitators of and the barriers to female Deans in

Vietnam with those in other Asian contexts such as China, Thailand, Malaysia, etc. The

similarities and differences in female academic Deans’ facilitators and barriers from such

comparative studies would help universities learn how to better empower and promote

female academic leaders.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this is an exploratory study on barriers to and facilitators of female Deans’

career advancement at a Vietnamese university. An important limitation of this study is

that it is based on only one university and there is a need to extend the study to a number of

other universities before any reliable generalisations can be drawn. However, in the

absence of such research in the Vietnamese context, the study helps to narrow the

knowledge gap by providing perceptions of male university leaders and female Deans on

the factors that enhance or hinder female academic leadership and management. The

conclusion that can be drawn from this study is that family support is a very important

factor that can significantly impede or facilitate female academic career progress in

Vietnam. In addition, women themselves can be both an object and an agent of change in

empowering female leadership.

Since having more women as leaders and managers can promote not only gender equity

but also organizational productivity and human capital development, appropriate measures

should be taken to empower female leaders. In the Vietnamese context, as the social

expectations of women as dutiful wives and mothers are so strong, appropriate policies and

measures must be developed to lessen the time demands of women’s domestic work and

childcare so that women can invest time as much as men do in their career progress. At the

same time, women should learn to take the advantages of the work-family interface rather

than considering work-family balance as a major concern (Cheung and Halpern 2010).

Additionally, female academics must be aware of and interested in their career advance-

ment. Without female academics’ personal interest in and commitment to their own

careers, it is difficult to see how any of the other measures designed to promote their career

advancement will prove fruitful. Vietnamese higher education is presently undergoing a

radical transformation in the attempt to create a modern higher education system for the

nation. Women leaders and managers have a crucial role to play in this process.

Acknowledgments This study was funded by the Cambridge—Viet Nam Women Leadership Programme. The author acknowledges the very thoughtful comments and advice on earlier drafts from Professor Vincent Lynn Meek, Professor Sharon Bell and the two anonymous reviewers.

References

Airini, Collings, S., Conner, L., McPherson, K., Midson, B., & Wilson, C. (2011). Learning to be leaders in higher education: What helps or hinders women’s advancement as leaders in universities. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 39(1), 44–62.

Bailyn, L. (2003). Academic careers and gender equity: Lessons learned from MIT. Gender, Work and Organization. Gender, Work, and Organization, 10(2), 137–153.

Bell, S. (2009). Women in science in Australia: maximizing productivity, diversity, and innovation: FASTS. Blackwood, J., & Brown-Welty, S. (2011). Chapter 6: Mentoring and interim positions: Pathways to

leadership for women of color. In G. Jean-Marie & B. Lloyd-Jones (Eds.), Women of color in higher

136 High Educ (2013) 66:123–138

123

education: changing directions and new perspectives (Vol. 10, pp. 109–133). Bingley, U.K.: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Bornstein, R. (2008). Chapter 7: Women and the college presidency. In J. Glazer-Raymo (Ed.), Unfinished agendas: New and continuing gender challenges in higher education (pp. 162–184). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Chen, E. W.-C., & Hune, S. (2011). Chapter 8: Asian American Pacific Islander women from Ph. D. to campus president: Gains and leaks in the pipeline. In G. Jean-Marie & B. Lloyd-Jones (Eds.), Women of color in higher education: Changing directions and new perspectives (Vol. 10, pp. 163–190). Bingley, U.K.: Emerald Group.

Cheung, F. M., & Halpern, D. F. (2010). Women at the top: Powerful leaders define success as work+family in a culture of gender. American Psychologist, 65(3), 182–193.

Cubillo, L., & Brown, M. (2003). Women into educational leadership and management: International differences? Journal of Educational Administration, 41(3), 278–291.

Doherty, L., & Manfredi, S. (2006). Women’s progression to senior positions in English universities. Employee Relations, 28(6), 553–572.

Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. (2007). Women and the labyrinth of leadership (pp. 63–71). Watertown: Harvard Business Review.

Eagly, A. H., & Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C. (2001). The leadership styles of women and men. Journal of Social Issues, 57(4), 781–797.

Harris, S. L., Wright, S. J., & Msengi, C. (2011). Chapter 4: African American females’ career paths to the presidency: Navigating the glass ceiling challenge. In G. Jean-Marie & B. Lloyd-Jones (Eds.), Women of color in higher education: Turbulent past, promising future (Vol. 9, pp. 79–98). Bingley, U.K.: Emerald Group.

Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of social issues, 57(4), 657–674.

Kawahara, D. M., Esnil, E. M., & Hsu, J. (2007). Chapter 14: Asian American women leaders: The intersection of race, gender, and leadership. In J. L. Chin, B. Lott, J. K. Rice, & J. Sanchez-Hucles (Eds.), Women and leadership: Transforming visions and diverse voices (pp. 297–313). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Kelly, M. L. (2011). Next in line: Women chief academic officers, their experiences and career aspirations. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania.

Luke, C. (2000). One step up, two down: Women in higher education management in South East Asia. In M. Tight (Ed.), Academic work and life: What it is to be an academic, and how this is changing (Vol. 1, pp. 285–305). Greenwich, Conn: JAI.

Mabokela, R. O. (2003). Donkeys of the university: Organizational culture and its impact on South African women administrators. Higher Education, 46(2), 129–145.

Madsen, S. R. (2010). Chinese women administrators in higher education: Developing leadership throughout life academic leadership. The online Journal, 8(2).

Mai, T. T. B. (2007). Phu nu va su tham gia vao cong tac quan ly nha truong dai hoc o Vietnam. Nghien cuu gia dinh va gioi, 17(3), 25–35.

Mann, S. (1995). Politics and power in organizations: Why women lose out. Leadership and Organization Development, 16(2), 9–15.

McNeill, D. (2007). Few women reach the top in Japan’s universities. Chronicle of Higher Education, 54, 47.

Meek, V. L., Goedegebuure, L., Santiago, R., & Carvalho, T. (Eds.). (2010). The Changing dynamics of higher education middle management (Vol. 33). Dordrecht: Springer.

Meyerson, D. F., & Fletcher, J. K. (2000). A modest manifesto for shattering the glass ceiling (pp. 127–136). Watertown: Harvard Business Review.

Neale, J., & Ozkanli, O. (2010). Organisational barriers for women in senior management: A comparison of Turkish and New Zealand universities. Gender and Education, 22(5), 547–563.

Oplatka, I. (2006). Women in educational administration within developing countries: Towards a new international research agenda. Journal of Educational Administration, 44(6), 604–624.

Peters, A. L. (2011). Chapter 7: Black women faculty in educational leadership: Unpacking their silence in research. In G. Jean-Marie & B. Lloyd-Jones (Eds.), Women of color in higher education: Turbulent past, promising future (9th ed., pp. 147–167). Bingley, U.K.: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Quy, L. T., & Nga, N. T. T. (2008). The Vietnamese women in management and leadership. Tap chi cong san (Journal of Communism), 20(164).

Schein, V. E. (1973). The relationship between sex role stereotypes and requisite management character- istics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(2), 95–100.

High Educ (2013) 66:123–138 137

123

Schein, V. E. (2001). A global look at psychological barriers to women’s progress in management. Journal of social issues, 57(4), 675–688.

Tharenou, P. (1994). Commentary: Why so few female academics? Australian Journal of Management, 19 (2), 221–228.

Thủ tướng Chính phủ. (2010). Quyết định số 58/2010/QĐ-TTg, 22/9/2010, Điều lệ trường đại học (Decision number 58/2010/QĐ-TTg, 22/9/2010, University Regulations).

Tilbrook, K. E. (1998). An exploration of the current under-representation of senior women managers in Australian universities. Women in Management Review, 13(8), 291–298.

Turner, C. S. V. (2007). Pathways to the presidency: Biographical sketches of women of color firsts. Harvard Educational Review, 77(1), 1–38.

Twombly, S. B. (1998). Women academic leaders in a Latin American university: Reconciling the para- doxes of professional lives. Higher Education, 35(4), 367–397.

Vázquez-Cupeiro, S., & Elston, M. A. (2006). Gender and academic career trajectories in Spain: From gendered passion to consecration in a Sistema Endoga´mico? Employee Relations, 28(6), 588–603.

Valian, V. (1998). Women in academia why so slow?: The advancement of women. Cambridge: M.I.T. White, K. (2003). Women and leadership in higher education in Australia. Tertiary Education and

Management, 9, 45–60. White, K., & Ozkanli, O. (2011). A comparative study of perceptions of gender and leadership in Australian

and Turkish universities. Journal of higher education policy and management, 33(1), 3–16. Winchester, H., Lorenzo, S., Browning, L., & Chesterman, C. (2006). Academic women’s promotions in

Australian universities. Employee Relations, 28(6), 505–522.

138 High Educ (2013) 66:123–138

123

Copyright of Higher Education is the property of Springer Science & Business Media B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

women's leadership 3.pdf