Women’s Representation in Academic Publishing: Descriptive Trends from Authors to Editors across 33 Years of Management Science

Authors:

Brooke Gazdag (University of Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Jamie Gloor (University of St. Gallen, Switzerland)

Cécile Emery (University of Exeter, UK)

Sebastian A. Tideman-Frappart (Syracuse University, USA)

Eugenia Bajet Mestre (University of St. Gallen, Switzerland)

Journal (Year):

The Leadership Quarterly (2024/forthcoming)

Summary:

This study examines women's representation in leadership positions across 11 top management journals over 33 years, finding that while overall increases occurred, these are primarily attributed to broader societal trends rather than editorial influence.

Research Questions:

(1) What is women’s representation across the four levels of academic publishing (i.e., editors, associate editors, editorial board members, and authors) over time?

(2) Are there associations between women’s representation in leadership roles (i.e. editors, associate editors) and the other levels?

(3) How does women’s representation at the various levels compare to their baseline representation (e.g., as doctoral students and faculty members)?

What We Know:

Women's representation in academic publishing is a critical issue for the field of management science. It significantly impacts the careers of management scholars and shapes the overall trajectory of the discipline. Despite its importance, there is a lack of comprehensive data on this subject. Recognizing this gap, leading scholars and editors have recently called for increased attention to this issue. This study responds to this call by providing the first comprehensive dataset on women's representation in top management journals over time.

Novel Findings:

This study is the first to offer a comprehensive analysis of women's representation across all levels of leaders in academic publishing (i.e., editorial board, associate editor, and editor roles) and authors within 11 top management journals over a 33-year period (1990-2022). We document overall progress in women’s representation, which is primarily attributable to general time trends. Yet, we also observe significant heterogeneity across different journals and over time, highlighting the critical role of editorial leadership in shaping women's representation.

Novel Methodology:

To construct a comprehensive dataset on women's representation in academic publishing, we conducted an exhaustive search across multiple sources to compile archival editorial board information for 11 top management journals from 1990 to 2022. Our data collection involved digitizing editorial board data from online archives (e.g., JSTOR), requesting historical records from journal administrative teams, and physically locating and scanning journal volumes from university libraries across five countries through interlibrary loans.

This multi-step process yielded a dataset containing 21,510 unique authors (51,360 data entries) and 4,173 unique leaders (320,544 data entries). Recognizing the substantial effort invested in data collection, integration, cleaning, and organization, we commit to open science principles by publicly sharing our data and code to foster future research and discoveries.

Implications for Practice:

To enhance women's representation in academic publishing, editors must prioritize diversity and equity initiatives. Implementing strategies like creating DEI plans, employing longer shortlists for recruitment, and setting targets for women in leadership positions might be effective. Additionally, providing training and support for aspiring women editors can contribute to a more inclusive editorial landscape. However, it is crucial to acknowledge the challenges editors face, such as time constraints and potential backlash, and to develop strategies to mitigate these obstacles.

Implications for Policy:

Publishers play a vital role in advancing gender equality in academic publishing. By setting transparency standards, collecting and analyzing data on women's representation, and supporting evidence-based initiatives, publishers can drive positive change. Implementing policies that mandate DEI reporting and benchmarking can hold journals accountable for their progress. Furthermore, investing in programs that support women's leadership development can create a pipeline of qualified female candidates for editorial positions.

Implications for Society:

The underrepresentation of women in academic publishing leadership has broader societal implications. Addressing this issue requires a concerted effort from individuals, institutions, and the broader academic community. By promoting diversity and inclusivity in publishing, we can create a more equitable knowledge ecosystem that better reflects the diversity of society. Investing in women's leadership development not only benefits the academic field but also contributes to a more just and inclusive society.

Implications for Research:

Our findings underscore the need for further investigation into the complex factors contributing to gender disparities in academic leadership. The dataset we provide and our descriptive analyses serve as a robust foundation for future research to explore these disparities across different journals, leadership roles, and time periods. By examining trends, patterns, and potential causal mechanisms, future research might be able to develop targeted interventions that promote gender equity in academic publishing.

Full Citation:

Gazdag, Brooke A., Gloor, Jamie L.; Emery, Cécile; Tideman-Frappart, Sebastian A; Bajet Mestre, Eugenia (2024): Women’s Representation in Academic Publishing: Descriptive Trends from Authors to Editors across 33 Years of Management Science. The Leadership Quarterly, forthcoming.

Abstract:

Traditionally, leadership scholars often study snapshots of leaders in organizations. However, academic publishing offers a unique, more controlled context to study leadership with implications for leadership scholars and scholarship. Hence, we present a descriptive overview of women’s representation across 33 years in 11 top management journals across levels of leaders in academic publishing (i.e., editors, associate editors, and editorial board members) and authors. To do so, we curated an archival dataset tracking women’s representation over time and across these four levels (i.e., 21,510 authors and 4,173 leaders) with 51,360 data entries for the authors and 320,545 for the leaders. Overall, women’s representation increased over time, which was explained by simple time trend effects. Only 32 of 135 editors were women (i.e., 23.7%), and the share of women associate editors showed particularly drastic fluctuations. We did not observe a “leaky pipeline” except from the associate editor to editor step, as well as notable fluctuations—particularly after new editor appointments—and between journals. We discuss the influential roles editors and publishers have on women’s representation in academic publishing and science more broadly as well as implications for future research and policy.