Does your university workload allocation model support gender equality?

Forty per cent teaching, 40 per cent research, 20 per cent service: for years, this has been the typical model of academic workload. While many institutions have developed their own structured models, they can often unintentionally reinforce gender inequality. However, our experience of workload allocation modelling at our university and research from the ELEVATE project helped us make the process more transparent, equitable and gender-informed. Here, we’ll share five ways you can do this at your university.

Apply a gender lens 

Many people assume that workload allocation models are objective, data-gathering tools. However, if they do not explicitly consider systemic or more nuanced issues around gender inequality and how societal gender roles are reflected in higher education, they may end up compounding it.  

• How to survive the academic treadmill
• Good daily work habits for early career researchers
• Three easy ways to stay healthy in the new year (even with a busy job)

A clear finding in our research was that rigid, formulaic models do not adequately capture the reality of female academics’ workload. For example, participants reported an over-reliance on female academics for service tasks, including student support roles, committee work and a high volume of academic “housekeeping”, such as coordinating meetings. However, women across participating universities reported that where they had experienced a work allocation model, it often did not consistently provide a way to reflect the true extent of this invaluable service work. 

Some participants also perceived higher teaching loads than male counterparts, resulting in less time for research activities like applying for grants. These inequities may be exacerbated by the absence of transparent workload allocation models.

That is why we recommend that those developing and reviewing workplace allocation models apply a gender lens, and adjust the systems underpinning the model to reflect the very real experiences of women in academic life. 

Mind the visibility gap

While service work is highly appreciated, it was often perceived by the women in our study to be “invisible”, or inadequately captured as part of formal workload allocation modelling. Research activity, on the other hand, is highly measurable, commercially and reputationally valuable and regarded. This visibility gap may impact opportunities for career progression. 

Heads of departments can take a proactive approach by ensuring rotation of roles that have high visibility and prestige with those that are less visible and input-intensive work, such as student support. 

At an individual level, academics need to be encouraged to monitor their own workload and distribution across activities of teaching, research and service. They should be able to safely raise career objectives and unbalanced allocations of work tasks with their line managers and heads of departments. At our university, we are encouraged to discuss these issues in one-to-one meetings and through our professional development process, which also allows shared planning on these issues. 

Multi-year planning

Workload planning that only focuses on the year ahead may also increase gender inequality. Line managers and heads of department can support female academics by adopting a multi-year planning approach for institutional, cross-department, team and project roles. This will help enhance career progression for all colleagues and negate unintended career disruptions – due to maternity or parental leaves, for example. 

Institutional commitment with departmental flexibility 

The role of the institution is to build a culture of equality and transparency in workload planning. Gender bias training and leadership capacity building are an important part of that, and so too is providing the tools and mechanisms to track workload distribution and identify issues. 

Institutions can also provide for flexibility around research time and a standardised and transparent approach to promotion, which takes account of gender inequalities in workload allocation. The promotion application form at our university, for example, has been updated to allow for greater recognition of the importance and value of service work. 

However, while institutional principles must guide the process, a one-size-fits-all approach to workload allocation will fail to take account of the realities of different departmental roles and priorities. 

The principles-based approach we have allows for adaptability and flexibility so that the model fits the scale and requirements of each individual academic department. 

A co-designed approach 

To promote gender equality and operate equitably for all academic staff, workload allocation models need to be developed inclusively with key stakeholders and take account of contextual variability across departments and institutions. 

Managers must undergo training to ensure models are guided by agreed principles and are gender-informed, support best practice and help to further embed a gender-informed culture. 

In our institution, when workload allocation models operate at their best, work distribution is regularly reviewed and feedback channels are in place. 

By using effective workload allocation modelling that takes account of the experience of female academics, we can continue to advance gender equality in higher education and make workload allocation models – and, as a result, workload – more equitable for all staff.  

Noreen O’Leary is lecturer; Hannah Christie is lecturer; Ioana Tistea is postdoctoral researcher; Liz Hughes is associate director and head of equality, diversity and inclusion; and Cathy Buffini is senior human resources partner, all at RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, and part of the ELEVATE project team.