1. Athena SWAN departmental applications November 2017
Sarah Fink – Athena SWAN Programme Manager (Ireland)

2. Aims of this presentation
Background and purpose
Award criteria
Approaching the application
SMART action planning
Q&A

3. Background
15 minutes chat, 20 minutes regroup

4. Charter
Recognition scheme of excellence in women’s employment in STEMM
Runs in the UK, Ireland and Australia
2005: 10 members
2017: over 140 members
STEMM = Science, Technology, Engineering, Maths, Medicine

5. Athena SWAN: expansion
Recognition scheme of commitment to gender equality more broadly
Expanded to take in AHSSBL and professional and support staff
Transition period starting from November 2017 and all using expanded forms from November 2020
AHSSBL = Arts, Humanities, Social Sciences, Business, Law
STEMM = Science, Technology, Engineering, Maths, Medicine

6. Athena SWAN awards 710 award holders in total across UK and Ireland
Bronze
87 Bronze universities
13 Bronze research institutes
385 Bronze departments
Silver
12 Silver universities
3 Silver research institutes
172 Silver departments
Gold
8 Gold departments
Institutional criteria released in July 2015
First Bronze submission success rate ≈ 50%

7. Understanding Award Criteria
15 minutes chat, 20 minutes regroup

8. How does it work?
Athena SWAN provides a framework for approaching gender equality through an application process
Awards recognise steps along the way
It is necessary for the whole department to pull together to deliver sustainable change
Submissions are assessed by peer-review panels

9. Athena SWAN: what is it all about?
Commitment to removing barriers that contribute to underrepresentation
Taking a targeted approach to issues that may be of internal or external origin
Producing reports and recommendations
Vagueness or platitudes
Operating a deficit model: trying to “fix the women”

10. Athena SWAN principles
Recognise talents of all
Advance gender equality
Recognise disciplinary differences
Tackle the gender pay gap
Remove obstacles
Address short-term contracts
Tackle discrimination against trans people
Demonstrate senior commitment
Make structural and cultural changes
Consider intersectionality

11. ● Award criteria Bronze Silver Gold
A thorough self-assessment using qualitative and quantitative analysis ●
Identify key issues
Actions in place to address key issues and carry the department forward
Demonstrates the impact of previous activity
Serves as a beacon in the discipline, sector and beyond

12. Why does Athena SWAN work?
Athena SWAN framework requires you to:
1. Collect data (quantitative and qualitative)
2. Critically analyse data
3. Identify reasons for exclusion and under-representation
4. Develop a 3 (or 4) year action plan to address these
5. Show progress over time
individualised approach; not a box-ticking exercise
Data → Analysis → Action

13. Approaching the application

14. Characteristics of Bronze departments
Identify why they are applying and what they want to achieve
Candid, thorough, and specific identification of the issues
Understand what they do well and why
Development of targeted actions with a clear rationale
Allocate adequate resources to make changes

15. Across the entire application
Have clear gender equality priorities
When you are directly asked for data, provide 3 years
Include specific data from staff and student consultation, disaggregated by gender
Link each issue to action(s) directly related to why that issue exists
Don’t just describe institutional activity – consider how the department supports or experiences policies and practices

16. Letter of endorsement
Demonstrate commitment of the HoD, discuss how Athena SWAN is valued (time, money, recognition)
Discuss specific challenges and actions for the future
Link to strategy of department
Be candid and honest
Mention if you chair the SAT or are responsible for any actions

17. The self-assessment process
Include specific details from staff and student consultation (who, what, when, response rates by gender)
Detail role on the SAT to show how work is shared
ECU’s updated SAT guidance:

18. “think like a panellist”
Provide this
“think like a panellist”
To raise awareness and build capacity for the initiative internally, prior to putting a formal self-assessment team together:
All-staff s were sent from the departmental SAT lead to raise awareness of, and signal senior commitment to, Athena SWAN
Workload allocations (64 hours) were made for three Athena SWAN Champions to visit an award holding department attend and observe a panel assessment
Athena SWAN introductory seminar was held and included a town hall with the departmental SAT lead during core hours (28 attendees, 68% women)

19. A picture of the department
Benchmark externally with your discipline (or similar) for student data and staff pipeline
Identify leaks in the pipeline, reflect on why they exist and link to actions
Disaggregate by course/specialism where appropriate

20. Key career transition points and career development
Ensure you are reflecting on staff awareness of, take-up (even of mandatory activity and feedback on particular initiatives (by gender) – this will help ensure your application is analytical rather than descriptive

21. Flexible working and managing career breaks
Reflect on both informal and formal supports
Ensure you are reflecting on staff awareness of, take-up and feedback on particular initiatives (by gender)
If you are applying on the expanded process, present PSS separately

22. “think like a panellist”
Instead of this
“think like a panellist”
Our high maternity return rate shows that leavers are well supported in the department.

23. “think like a panellist”
Provide this
“think like a panellist”
Following feedback from the Parents’ Network, we ran a targeted survey in 2014 (60 responses) looking at the quality of service received by staff going on maternity leave. 33% reported no support prior to maternity leave; 75% reported no support during maternity leave; and 30% reported no support on their return.

24. Organisation and culture
Provide 3 years of committee data
Use feedback from consultation to provide a picture of departmental culture
Include PSS staff if applying on the expanded form
This is a common section where panellists look for proactive actions rather than further research

25. Using data to tell a story
Successful applications:
Give a clear description of methods
Present data clearly
Demonstrate an in-depth analysis
Show honesty & self-reflection
Unsuccessful applications:
Omit data
Mask issues
Describe, rather than reflect
Lack relevant, gender-specific analysis

26. Developing SMART actions

27. Forming an action plan
Is the action specific? Could someone from another department read it and know what you are talking about?
Does it have a clear rationale tied to an issue/data in the application?
Who is responsible for implementing the action? Accountable for making sure it happens?
Are there clear start and end dates, and milestones?
How do you know it’s worth doing? (It isn’t just about completing actions!)

28. Women are less likely to apply for promotion
Identifying issues
Women are less likely to apply for promotion
Some women have not been encouraged to apply – is this widespread?
Research is the primary driver of success – is this built into the criteria, i.e. is this a perception, or a process problem?
Appraisal is rated less helpful by women – could they be encouraged to apply for promotion?
Women are less likely to agree that the full breadth of their role is recognised – is this keeping them from applying?

29. Women are less likely to be successful for promotion
Identifying issues
Women are less likely to be successful for promotion
Research is the primary driver of success – are women being supported to undertake research?
Appraisal is rated less helpful by women – is planning for career progression discussed?
Women are less likely to agree that the full breadth of their role is recognised – is this keeping them from being successful?
Teaching is praised and encouraged – is it being recognised at promotion?

30. SMART action: appraisal
Rationale
Timescale
Responsible
Success Measure
Introduce an appraisal checklist, mandating discussion of career development and actively encouraging promotion applications
Appraisal is rated as less helpful by female staff [baseline%]
Some staff have not been encouraged to apply for promotion
Women are less likely to apply for promotion [baseline%]
Checklist approved by HoD – April 2018
Checklist circulated to line managers and published in staff handbook – May 2018
Checklist used in all appraisal meetings from May 2018
Julia D. to draft checklist
HoD to approve checklist
Line managers to use checklist – HoD to be accountable for this
Appraisal is rated as helpful by >90% of staff, regardless of gender
Increase in the proportion of women applying for promotion from X% to >Y%

31. SMART action: promotion
Rationale
Timescale
Responsible
Success Measure
Clarify promotions criteria re teaching and knowledge exchange pathways
Review staff handbook and make criteria clearer
Publish case studies of staff who have been promoted, showcasing different pathways
Run promotions workshop
Women are less likely to agree that the full breadth of their role is recognised [baseline%]
Research is seen as the primary driver for success
Women are less likely to apply for promotion [baseline%]
Women are less likely to be successful for promotion [baseline%]
Handbook reviewed and updated – Feb 2018
Updated handbook circulated to all staff – March 2018
Case studies published – March 2018
Promotions workshop run in April 2018 and every spring term annually thereafter
Mark T. to review handbook in collaboration with HR
Shivani B. to commission case studies from previous applicants and upload to departmental website
HoD to deliver promotion workshop
>90% of staff, regardless of gender, agree that the full breadth of their role is recognised
Increase in the proportion of women applying for promotion from X% to >Y%
Increase in the proportion of women successful at promotion from X% to >Y%

32. Progress vs Impact
It’s not about having done your action, but about the effect that your activity has had on gender equality and the culture of your department:
You run an annual promotions workshop, which after a year has 100% staff attendance →Progress
As a result of these workshops, promotion success rate for women has increased →Impact
Progress = Bronze renewal
Impact = Silver

33. Measuring your progress
Staff/student numbers
Representation and influence
Survey data (or qualitative data)
Know and understand your baselines
Consult with staff and students from the beginning
Be clear from the start what you are trying to achieve
Check-in regularly

34. Athena SWAN: Defining action
Successful applications:
Assign responsibility
Reflect accountability
Consider gender specific data
Set KPIs
Unsuccessful applications:
Copy other generic Action Plans
Are passive
Present broad actions as one large activity
Shy away from setting targets

35. Top tips Good applications: Are honest Depend on data reporting
Link data, analysis and action
Target support
Don’t make it a ‘women’s problem’
Always ask ‘So what?’
Include a SMART action plan
SMART = Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound

36. Next Steps

37. Why do it?
“I know that some are unhappy with its focus – some are men worried about unfairness, and some are women who sense they might become victims of tokenism. But most of the changes proposed by departments – such as holding key meetings during core hours, or promoting flexible working – end up benefitting both sexes, especially those who are parents and caregivers, making the profession a little bit more friendly.”
Jenny Rohn, UCL

38. Get involved
Read our resources:
the team: or
Become a panel observer:
Sign up to our JISCMail list:
Follow us on

39. Any questions?