Gendered in-role behaviours of Indonesian university leaders: Experiences and voices

Abstract

This study examines whether university leaders exhibit gendered in-role behaviors that are expected of leaders in a patriarchal society like Indonesia. A total of thirty-five university leaders (ULs) participated in this study. The study utilized a critical realist approach and found similarities and differences between cohort groups from conflict resolution, negotiating with people with power, linking with external networks, and getting rid of the presumption of incompetence and gender bias. Even though female ULs needed to balance internal and external perceptions of self, they showed assertiveness, depth of conviction and purpose, and a take-charge attitude. Male ULs manifested protective attitudes borne out of positional authority. This study provided a platform for leaders to discuss through lived experiences, the enablers and barriers of in-role behaviors. The most significant finding is that female ULs were hindered by a stifling bureaucracy and insufficient resource allocation. This study contributes to a discourse on gendered leadership in the contemporary higher education space, and analyzed power dynamics and contextual processes that inhibit university leadership in a rapidly-developing nation.

Keywords:

• gender
• women in higher education
• university leaders
• Indonesia

1. Introduction

The existing literature on leadership documents the differences in the leadership styles of men and women (Eagly et al., 2003; Eagly & Karau, 2002; Eagly et al., 2000; Hooijberg & Choi, 2000). Gender roles serve as a source of implicit background identity and are frequently acted differently, even when people occupy the same position and perform the same functions (Eagly et al., 2003). Gendered practices are used by men and women in the process of leading and in acts of social interactions, that can reveal insights into how inequalities are created (Martin, 2003). Gendered practices are pervasively practiced in institutions like universities that have different formal layers of power and authority (Chase & Martin, 2021; Kairys, 2018).

The study is undertaken in the context of the multiple challenges confronting Indonesian higher education university leaders. Significant reforms in national education policies have been introduced in Indonesia since 2000 to cater for the growth of the higher education sector, and academic leaders play substantial and significant roles in moving forward national developmental reforms. ULs make a decisive contribution in substantially improving Indonesia’s three pillars of education (locally known as the Tri Dharma—three modes of service—principles): research, teaching, and community engagement. As strategic partners, ULs are relied upon by their institutions to produce skilled and talented graduates to fuel the impetus for an innovation-driven, competitive, and creative economy.

Nevertheless, despite the importance placed on them by the national government (Jalal & Suharti, 2012), there is a dearth of studies on Indonesian university leaders, enabling this study to contribute new knowledge on university leadership gendered in-role behaviors in a cross-cultural context like Indonesia. Compared to other countries like Australia, the UK, New Zealand, some EU states, and the USA where the roles of ULs have been studied in detail (Gano-Phillips et al., 2011; Jones, 2011; Scott et al., 2008; Spendlove, 2007; Vilkinas & Ladyshewsky, 2012; Vilkinas & West, 2011), current literature on academic leaders in the Asian region has focused predominantly on East Asia, China, and some Southeast Asian countries like Singapore, Vietnam, Malaysia (Lee, 2004; Ngo, 2013; Nguyen, 2012; Ong, 2012; Qian et al., 2009; Walker et al., 2007), yet, in the Indonesian context, there are very few studies on academic leadership (e.g, Marginson & Sawir, 2006; Ngo, 2013).

Importantly, none of these local studies covered how university leaders perceive, interpret, and enact their roles within prevailing institutional conditions, and socio-cultural discourses. This is a shortcoming because it amounts to a lack of knowledge on indigenous conceptions of leadership in non-Western-based contexts, such as Indonesia (Hallinger & Walker, 2011). Therefore, this study answers the call for Indonesian scholars to engage more proactively in relevant empirical research on academic leaders in local settings (Hallinger & Walker, 2011, p. 300), thereby expanding the limited knowledge base on university leadership in the most populous Muslim country in the world.

The objective of this study was to examine Indonesian university leaders (ULs) display gendered in-role behaviors in leadership practice, especially when they are confronted by situations of institutional difficulties and uncertainty in complex cultural contexts. The key research question this study aims to address is how gender differences influence the in-role behaviours of Indonesian university leaders in the process of exercising their leadership roles. To achieve this objective, we will discuss how ULs display gendered in-role behaviours in leadership practice that reflect Indonesian culture and ways, and how they have navigated through the challenges they faced.

This study makes several important contributions. First, this study extends the theoretical analysis on the large body of existing research on university leadership (Chase & Martin, 2021; Mulford, 2009; Scott et al., 2008; Vilkinas & Ladyshewsky, 2012; Vilkinas & West, 2011), and in Islamic countries (Shah, 2006). Second, the study of university leadership in Indonesia that focused on a gendered analysis of in-role behaviors is insufficient (Gaus et al., 2020; Murniati, 2012; Ngo, 2013; Nurmila, 2013; Srimulyani, 2008). Third, in order to examine the conditions that enable or hinder university leaders from engaging in in-role behaviors in the current contexts, this study focuses on the social and institutional factors that contribute to gender disparities and are problematic in such settings.

The study is organized as follows: rationale for this research, literature review, overview of Indonesian culture and gendering process, research methodology, data analysis approach, discussion of findings, and contributions to the field of study and suggestions for further research.

2. Literature review

Leadership is examined as a multi-dimensional, dynamic, and collective social process (Parry, 1998). Leadership is sometimes presented as being gender and power neutral, which many critical scholars argue is a serious oversight because gender, in fact, has a profound effect on leadership (Hoff & Mitchell, 2008). In fact, gender is a strong factor for leadership roles (Devlin, 2013; Robinson, 2009).

There are several preconceptions that men and women lead differently. Gender differences are created through gender schemas that are the opaque, power-based gendering processes that are systematically embedded in social structures, organizational processes, and social interactions (Valian, 1998), and the identities taken by men and women that subtly and latently reproduce gender distinctions (Benschop & Dooreward, 1998, p. 789).

Leadership has been equated to masculinity (Fitzsimmons et al., 2013; Jogulu & Ferkins, 2012). Agency in gender literature is similarly attributed to males (Heilman, 2012)—viz perspectives that presume men are more suited to leadership roles than women (Vecchio, 2003). Male leaders are described primarily in agentic terms, showing assertiveness, being controlling, ambitious, dominant, forceful, independent, self-sufficient, self-confident, and prone to act as leaders who are confident. They have a more autocratic, directive style. These perspectives presume that men are more suited for leadership than women (Heilman, 2012; Vecchio, 2003). This is argued in mostly Western studies (e.g., Fine, 2009; Fitzsimmons et al., 2013; Vecchio, 2003). However, this argument also occurs, especially if the context is described as patriarchal (e.g., Jogulu & Ferkins, 2012; Murniati, 2012).

Gender differences are observed in the attitudes and behaviors of men and women in university leadership (Oplatka, 2016). Gender differences can be found in how power occurs in the social interactions between men and women of certain social positions and status that makes such gender distinctions visible. Different structural positions offer different amounts of power and shape their occupants’ experiences and consciousness (Al-Hattam & Abdulsalam, 2021; Burkinshaw & White, 2017). It is argued that men with power can deny their behavior is gendered, and women often cannot challenge them (Martin, 2003). Thus, it is important how power is fostered in the practice of masculine or feminine gender identities, and how it is perceived, experienced, and interpreted by occupants of more or less powerful positions (Martin, 2003, p. 357). Examples of power differentials affecting gender have been found in academia. Research has documented that women experience a “chilly climate”—a situation where women are informally excluded from board memberships, and experience devaluation and marginalization of ideas and intellectual capital. The “chilly climate” has been cited as a key impediment to women faculty members’ achievement and advancement (Maranto & Griffin, 2010). This situation heightens the emotional labor expended by women in order to succeed; the result is additional strain on their workload and the perpetuation of masculine cultures (Burkinshaw & White, 2017).

Gender and leadership are increasingly studied as more women take on global leadership roles in business, politics, government, and entrepreneurship (Bowles, 2012). One gendering process that create perceived gender differences between men and women leaders is the codification of expectations that women ought to behave in gender appropriate ways compared to men Women must act communally with interpersonal sensitivity (Phelan et al., 2008), must be available to followers during periods of psychological distress to reduce burn-out (Adil & Kamal, 2020), and must be warm, and caring. Women are expected to be neither aggressive nor competitive, behaviors that diminish women’s potential as being labeled as successful leaders (Kaufman & Grace, 2011). Studies argue that when female leaders show assertive behaviors that violate typical stereotypes, they are subjected to the double bind where they are evaluated negatively and regarded as masculine in their leadership style (Fitzsimmons et al., 2013; Young, 2005). If women are too assertive, direct in communication styles, and inflexible in asserting power and dominance—behaviors that are established and accepted as masculine traits (Blackmore, 2002)—they may be negatively viewed by peers. According to a recent study by Chase and Martin (2021) who explored the ways women university leaders adopted postures of resistance and rejected discrimination found that structural subjectivities like these can drive discrimination against women in such leadership positions.

Nevertheless, progressive strides in gender equality over the last few decades have amalgamated evidence that women can be effective leaders, be transformational, exhibit more individualized consideration behaviors, foster interpersonal relations, nurture followers, and power-share (Eagly et al., 2003). Women who are pastoral, promote inclusion, cooperate, and selfless (Eagly & Karau, 2002; Eagly et al., 2000), show more participatory behavior and value meritocracy. Women leaders who encourage staffs to look beyond their self-interests for the common good of the group, work for the good of the community, are deemed to be effective leaders as well as men (Eddy & VanDerLinden, 2006).

3. Indonesian culture and the gendering processes

Generally, Indonesian culture emphasises heavily the concept of rukun that implies harmonious social integration in the sense of obedience to superiors (manut), kindness, avoidance of conflict, understanding of others, and empathy (Koentjaraningrat, 1985). In achieving consensus, Indonesian deliberations are centred on respect for seniority, and practising rukun or deference to maintain social harmony which plays a major part in the relationship of any employer (superior) and employee (subordinate) in Indonesia (Mann, 1998). A high priority is given to being polite and respectful to others and there is constant effort to accommodate and support others. For example, Indonesians generally feel awkward toward their superiors or someone they respect, seeking not to embarrass them, maintain self-control and avoidance of disapproval. These values are reflected in daily activities in the contexts of family, workplace, schools, and even political organisations (Hutagaol, 1983). They work to reach a consensus, a process of friendly, joint deliberation in order to come up with a consensus to resolve a problem (Wahyudi, 2007).

Indonesian society is described as a collectivist and nurturing society. Generally, a parent-child relationship is the model for the relationships between superiors and subordinates in Indonesian work organisations. The Indonesian employee fits himself/herself into a vertical relationship between superiors whom they consider to be the “Bapak” (father) or “Ibu” (mother), and subordinates who consider themselves their “Anak” (child). The combination of collectivism and hierarchy frequently leads to the development of special ties of mutual loyalty between a certain superior (the academic leader) and a certain subordinate (students, staff). It is therefore not surprising for women leaders to show advocacy for, or champion staff causes, or channel staff voices to management and create a positive influence on staff members’ motivations, commitment and beliefs concerning the institution’s support for employees’ working conditions (Leithwood et al., 2008).

Santoso (2019) argues that gendered in-role behaviors in leadership must be understood through the lens of local cultural influences and communities. In traditional societies, such as Indonesia, the female gender role stereotype is described as subservient to men (Murniati, 2012; Nurmila, 2013; Srimulyani, 2008), even though Indonesia is not as extreme as in other countries in Asia such as India or Japan (Basu, 2008). Gender relationships are dominated by role expectations or the kodrat wanita literally, “woman’s nature” or biologically ordained role) of caring for family and spouses and was promoted by the state during pre-democratic regimes (Robinson, 2009; Srimulyani, 2008). Accepting the kodrat wanita presumes that women recognize the natural patriarchy of the family (Robinson, 2009). Men are leaders of the households because they provide economically for the family (Arimbi, 2010), and women are expected to prioritise caring for their families over their careers (Tjahjono & Palupi, 2010). These notions are rooted in Islamic religious teachings that emphasize women’s subordination to their husbands (Nurmila, 2013).

Kull (2009) notes that Indonesia has problems related to gender representation in leadership positions, illuminating the clear advantage men enjoy in terms of university appointments, with men taking a majority share (89 percent) in school principal level positions from kindergarten to vocational schools, compared to only a few (11 percent) of women in 2009–2010. Another study found that in research and community development activities men are seen to be more productive than women (Indihadi & Karlimah, 2007). These activities provide supplemental income that is important for men; they are regarded as the heads of households and hence, have a significant economic function in the family (Surbakti, 2002).

The powerful social and economic positions of men in the household and in economic life have been challenged by Muslim feminists and prominent male Muslim scholars who argue for equal partnership between husband and wife (Rohman, 2013). Studies have shown that Indonesian women do not want to accept the stereotypes of socially mandated subservience and the perception that they lack the confidence to assert their leadership abilities (Arimbi, 2010; Azmi et al., 2012; Murniati, 2012; Srimulyani, 2008). Studies by Atwell (2006) and Gaus (2011) found that under-represented female leaders who are aware of the barriers elevated their internal drive to succeed by being entrepreneurial, thus enabling their active participation in policy-making decisions normally the domain of men, and have drawn broad attention due to their successful entrepreneurial endeavors and financial successes. In Gaus (2011) study, female leaders who are aware of these barriers remain internally motivated in their own leadership abilities. The determination that women are capable leaders has been advanced by the 1980s women’s empowerment movement and female ministerial appointments to cabinet positions that has resulted in a broader development portfolio and redefined gender roles. Post 1998 empowerment of women has improved with more women occupying ministerial positions as evidenced by the current administration.

4. Methodology

Our study was guided by a critical realist paradigm, a world-view proposing that society is made up of feeling, thinking, human beings and their interpretations of the world. Knowledge about the world is socially constructed (Danermark et al., 2002). Therefore, proponents of critical realism reject a universal claim to truth or generalization of the claims (Scott, 2005). We contend that each leader in this study perceives their roles differently, and these differences in the perception of roles were examined.

In this study, we used purposive criterion sampling and snowball sampling strategies to recruit and select thirty-five (35) academic leaders. The goal of purposive criterion sampling was to represent a specific subset of university leaders rather than the entire category. As a result, we needed to identify academic leaders who met our requirements. Our participants were chosen based on their age, gender, tenure of office (permanent employee), at least two years of experience as an academic leader in their current role, and prior leadership experience of more than three years prior to assuming the current role. These participants were sufficiently information- rich to bring refinement, clarity, and an understanding of experiences (Creswell, 2013; Polkinghorne, 2006, p. 140).

The first step in selecting our participants was to write an official letter to the Faculty Dean of the university we chose based on the criteria (see below) and ask them to recommend a potential respondent to our study. After obtaining the recommendations, we sent email correspondence to forty (40) candidates for the study across five state and two private universities. We also used a snowball sampling strategy. Snowball sampling is a strategy to identify or select cases or people as future participants, where the crucial feature of such a method is that each person or unit is in some way connected with another through a direct or indirect linkage. One can rely on a series of participant referrals to others who have experienced the phenomenon of interest (Nguyen, 2012). Of the total candidates targeted, thirty-fiveparticipated, fourteen (14) females and twenty-one (21) males. The dominance of male participants in this study was not by accident or intent but due to the fact that during the recruitment process many male ULs responded to the invitation. The researchers welcomed this enthusiasm and continued to include them until the required number of participants was reached.

The criteria for selecting the participating universities were: (i) history (how long the institution has been operating) because the study is interested to know how academic leaders in HEIs with an established history of academic leadership have understood and performed their roles through the many socio-economic and political changes happening in Indonesia; (ii) national ranking, because one of the measures of successful academic leadership is how it is instrumental in the growth and progress of an HEI (Ramsden, 1998a, 1998b); and (iii) student population, because the growth in student base population and diversity is now a major challenge facing academic leaders world-wide, and this factor has created an impact on teaching and methods delivery and the management of systems and processes in HEIs (Hallinger & Walker, 2011; Marginson & Sawir, 2006).

Of the fourteen female participants, all were Muslims, aged between 30 and 55. Thirteen of the fourteen participants were married and one was single. Thirteen of them had previous academic leadership experience (5–10 years) before taking on their current positions. Most of them have a PhD; 11) are department heads. None of them have the title of Dean or Vice-Dean, or Professor. Five of the female participants hold associate professor ranking and the rest are senior lecturers and lecturers

The twenty-one (21) male participants were senior academic leaders; fifteen are aged 36–55 years old while the rest are above 56 years old. All participants are married; 15 were Muslim. Most of them have PhD degrees; 14 are heads of department; 5 are deans, and the rest (2) are department secretaries. Five are Professors; 17 have six years or more of academic experience, while 17 of the male participants have previous leadership experience.

Data were collected through semi-structured interviews in Bahasa Indonesia. All participants are Indonesian and are native speakers of Bahasa. Some interviews, however, were conducted in English per the interviewee’s preference and at their request. Interview durations were from approximately fifty (50) minutes to slightly more than one hour. The participants were asked twelve semi-structured interview questions that were confined to the examination of: (i) perceived roles of higher education academic leaders in Indonesia; and (ii) gender differences in in-role behaviours of higher education academic leaders. Within the examination of these perceived roles, the study also probed into the conditions that enable or constrain role performance, and the impact of the conditions on the personal and professional lives of higher education academic leaders.

During the data transcription process, the researchers sought the help fellow Indonesian academic colleagues to understand some of the metaphors and abstractions conveyed in the local language by the participants. A three-tier inductive process was then used to synthesize the data into concepts and themes, and interpretations made from the themes (Grbich, 2013; Thomas, 2006, p. 238). The themes presented were the most vocalized perceptions emerging from the data. Significant statements were presented highlighting the individual accounts and experiences reported. We made an effort to give representation of the views across participants. Some participants were very articulate in expressing their opinions, or had been actively involved in the role for a longer period of time than others, so they were very knowledgeable about the processes under discussion.

Validation activities like focus group discussions, face-to-face interviews, phone interviews, and email correspondence were conducted in order to confirm preliminary findings. These activities enabled participants to give their opinions on the findings. Through the dialogues, we ironed out disagreements on the accuracy of the accounts, enhancing the validity of our findings (Kempster & Parry, 2011).

5. Findings

5.1. Gendering process in conflict resolution

In most Indonesian public and private universities, team-based teaching is a strategy to reduce the lack of qualified personnel. Young lecturers are paired with senior, generally more experienced lecturers. These different orientations bring with them differing social relations, power, and status, resulting in relationships described as competitive and created an unequal power dynamic between the lecturers. In this discourse, ULs came across senior academics who were resistant to change their teaching methods. Predictably, conflicts arose between older and younger academics who have the distinct advantage of being technologically savvy but impatient to learn.

As shown in Table 1, to facilitate conflict resolution, 7 of the ULs and 9 of the male ULs resorted to two different approaches: Male ULs organized formal dialogues or meetings, and female ULs used more informal and personalized approaches. With formal dialogues, male ULs used positional authority shielding them from superiority, directly or subtly, and were dismissive shown by the senior colleagues. Male ULs emphasized that there are other ways of appropriately handling the problem, e.g., “We can do it outside the office, or someplace refreshing, so we can maintain a feeling of camaraderie, of brotherhood with them” (Male UL, #25). According to male ULs, this approach is done to avoid embarrassment between the conflicted parties, especially if one of them is a senior, high-ranked university member.

Table 1. Experiences of Indonesian university leaders in conflict resolution

Gender	Experiences	Power Relations	Approach
Female	Expected to be respectful to senior academics Expected to be polite and gentle in speaking—stereotyped norms of femininity Expected to be less smart than ranked, senior academics Expected to be less emotional in resolving tensions	Age, gender, and university ranking promote perceptions of unequal status and power in the workplace and out of it	Private one-on-one dialogues Use of “soft conversation” Formal meetings
Male	Expected to promote “brotherhood” and “camaraderie”—stereotyped norms of masculinity	Age and university ranking promote perceptions of unequal power in the workplace, yet did not feel threatened by implicit displays of superiority	Used dialogues in recreational/relaxed settings, “someplace refreshing”—an outflanking strategy Public dialogues/hearing

On the other hand, female ULs surmounted this problem differently, through a strategy of subtle deference, expressing their instructions to senior male academics in the softest tone possible using “soft conversation”. One female UL recognized that in her context, female leaders should be careful in handling tensions by not being negatively influenced by emotions. She described her approach below:

A female leader should have the capability to control emotions. This means not being expressive, not being spontaneous, not playing politics, but seeing, and analyzing first. (Female UL, #9)

In their efforts to resolve the differences, the female ULs described how strong power relations were generally displayed during the process of resolving conflicts, more so when they had to engage older, male colleagues. Young female ULs described such one-on-one dialogues as uncomfortable because in her experience older, male colleagues are not easy to talk to and have a tendency to dictate them what they need to do. In their view, they must “appear to be smarter than them” (Female UL, #28) to be seen as credible leaders.

6. Negotiating with people with power

In this study, female ULs appear to be strong and vocal proponents of staff advocacy. The data showed that female ULs mentioned staff welfare problems as one of their immediate concerns and hence would like top management to pay attention to the issues. On the other hand, male ULs do not talk as much about staff welfare issues. They speak in more general terms, such as how they facilitate training and research development by submitting annual budgets for these activities. In the interviews, none of the male ULs mentioned about communicating intensively with management about staff issues unlike female ULs who assertively brought up staff issues with management. Nine of the females ULs advocated for better remuneration, especially timely payment for contract staff. A female UL described being assertive when it came to pushing for better working conditions, saying that she accepts being provocative:

I have to negotiate in an assertive way, giving rational reasons for my actions. I know what I want to be done and I do not wait for anyone’s permission to do so. (Female UL, #5)

The statement above connotes that female ULs would like their top leaders to listen to their needs for better facilities, while others use more persuasive forms of negotiations. These female ULs wanted to be agentic in pursuit of this goal. They understand who has the power to allocate these resources and minimize the demotivation that their staff feels.

Male ULs, on the other hand, perceive their roles as protectors of the interest of the institution, an over-all guardian of rules, facilities, staff, and students. They must ensure that every member of the unit understand, abide by regulations, and perform their tasks well. This is a defining behaviour difference between male and female ULs. It defines an exclusive behaviour that male ULs demand compliance with rules and regulations at the expense of employee welfare. To male ULs, being a protector requires being strict with the staff about following regulations. As the protector of the institution and its study programs, they must ensure that there are no “bottlenecks” in the system that could potentially damage or hinder the programs from succeeding. The male ULs feel they are “father” to constituents. Similarly, female ULs self-constructed the identity of “mother” with their wards. See Table 2 on the similarities and differences of Indonesianuniversity leaders experiences.

Table 2. Experiences of Indonesian university leaders in negotiating with powerful people

Gender	Experiences	Power Relations	Approach
Female UL	Expected to show a caring, nurturing, pastoral, motherly approach	Mocked for being provocative and aggressive yet motherly—“double bind”	Spoke the loudest in terms of advocacy for staff welfare Negotiated assertively Created alliances with finance power-holders
Male UL	Expected to shelter and protect the institution, staff and students like a “father” would do to his wards	Did not feel threatened by the subtle displays of superiority shown by senior academics	Used positional authority to bring up staff issues but not as assertive as female ULs

7. Linking with networks

In terms of their external linker roles, the study found that male and female ULs employ similar approaches to maintaining linkages through attendance at meetings, speaking at conferences, becoming a trainer, doing consultancy, research, and being engaged as a resource speaker in public dialogues, “We need that exposure because it’s time for us to think more strategically”—(Female UL, #8). In linking with external networks, some female ULs in this study were not reluctant to be assigned as conference speakers or resource persons for the press and media. Being exposed in the media circuit is a good opportunity for ULs to be recognised, as one of them claimed, “the institution’s reward system is limited so we have to go out there and find ways to be recognised” (Female UL, #13).

Understanding the wider environment helps ULs become aware of stakeholder needs, For ULs, it is important that representatives from the wider public, the interest groups, especially in industry, are invited to speak genuinely about their aspirations and expectations for skilled graduates. As declared by a male UL:

The industry tells us what’s strong, and what’s weak with our students, and we take note of these feedbacks and inform our lecturers (Male UL, #26)

What can be drawn from the above statement is that ULs believe that having effective links with external networks enable them to improve their leadership roles. This linker role helps them understand how the industry thinks about the quality of higher education delivery. From such networks, ULs have the window to secure grants for domestic and international collaborations, and funding for facilities.

8. Presumption of incompetence

One female UL experienced being confronted by male colleagues during a selection process for a department head position. While they scrambled for the vacant position, she was told that she is not expected to apply for leadership position when there is a vacancy because it is “alright for her if she doesn’t; but for them it is not. It is just the way of things” (Female UL, #9). These experiences implied that women encountered discriminatory treatment in their aspirations for leadership. One female UL commented that she was pressured to show her leadership capability because in the patriarchal nature of her society, there is this stereotype that “because women are perceived to be emotional, we cannot be leaders” (Female UL, #13).

Another female UL noted that in her department, men could not earnestly and whole-heartedly accept their leader is a woman. Because bias and prejudice still remain, they have to work harder to be regarded as leaders. They have to show they are better than others, to use their strengths: having many friends and a wide network they can depend on.

On the other hand, this study also found that it is women themselves who often doubt their competence and capability for leadership because they were brought up by societal tenets that leadership is a male domain. The lack of self-efficacy sometimes leads them to pass over opportunities for leadership. A female UL commented:

Any effort that is given for higher self- development is diminished because women themselves do not believe they have the capability. Why? They were brought up by a society that thinks so. (Female UL, #9)

Female ULs in this study indicated that the experience of university leadership has been transformational because it gave them enhanced self-belief that they have the potential, competence, and capacity to make a difference to organizational outcomes. It has strengthened internal positive feelings about their worth and value. While many of them were supported by their nuclear family, closest friends, and previous mentors thus making leadership complexities bearable, some of them described that they had to struggle to become a leader. Using a metaphor, one female UL described her journey as being similar to climbing a mountain. She described the experience:

… People who have climbed the mountain feels great. What a big achievement this is. But seriously, if you look at the mountain from afar, it looks beautiful, right? But try to climb it, there are so many obstacles (Female UL, #11)

To embolden their spirit that men and women have similar opportunities for growth, the female ULs in this study want the staff to experience their own life transformations and journey to the top. They encourage their staff to take higher studies either domestically or overseas, urging them that after they have finished higher education, they will have better chances for leadership succession. One female UL described her aspiration:

I want my staff to see things differently, bring something new. I need my staff to improve their mindset, to expand their thinking. I don’t want them to be narrow-minded. Because after my term is over, I tell them you will replace me. (Female UL, #9)

Female ULs believe that in order for women to be rid of the presumption of incompetence, they must be given the opportunity to prove themselves. They believe that unit members must think highly of themselves, and if they do not affirm the same belief and confidence, they are going to perform poorly as individuals, and as a unit. However, they cautioned that, in their particular context, to uphold one’s beliefs and be different creates difficult situations for them to be socially-accepted as a leader. A female UL reflected:

Sometimes, I try to appease others. But oftentimes I fail, because for someone with principles and values like I do, it is difficult. (Female UL, #8)

The above quote shows that female ULs do experience conflicts in trying to be true to themselves and still try to be harmonious with others. Male ULs, on the other hand, express self-belief not by engaging in positive self-talk, but by having a higher sense of self-awareness about their own strengths and weaknesses as leaders. As one of them quoted:

Having confidence in yourself, how to face certain situations in the most appropriate way. My weakness as a man is that sometimes I have difficulty saying the right things. I need to keep checking myself. (Male UL, #26)

A female UL added that in order for female leaders to rise above their perceived shortcomings—as many seem to believe they have many shortcomings—they had to develop the capability to be more analytical and to approach issues with better thoughtful judgment:

This needs to be developed. Men and women can see things differently; they can assess things differently. For women, seeing things objectively is more difficult, harder, but in order to become a better leader, she must be able to face situations in a calmer manner. (Female UL, #9)

Another reference group that encourages female ULs’ self-belief is the inspiration derived from the success of other Indonesian female leaders as they give good examples to those aspiring from below (‘If we see a woman become a professor and she’s very successful, we feel highly motivated—Female UL, #9). Female ULs feel inspired by these women’s achievements, more so if they are nationally recognized. She further adds that if women are given the opportunity to break through the perceived “glass ceiling” they could gradually erase the stereotypes about female leaders. It is in this light that one female UL stated that women had to be able to navigate gender relations that entrap and prevent many women from aspiring to be leaders.

9. Discussion

The institutional diversity caused by ranking and inter-generational differences in most higher education institutions in Indonesia create situations of collegial tension and lack of willingness to collaborate on university matters. The study found that male and female ULs display similar approach in facilitating conflict resolution among staff members, and their effort to bridge differences related to important university matters like teaching load allocations, the curriculum that must be applied, and teaching methods. In resolving conflicts, ULs make an effort to link different ways of thinking based on their tacit knowledge of local contexts that may impact on work relationships (Ngo, 2013; Walker et al., 2007). This tacit knowledge relates to the maintenance of social harmony, politeness, and respect accorded to those who are in power or have senior social status (Mann, 1998; Koentjaraningrat, 1985). ULs recognized that while there are differences, they can find a better way of stifling the workplace tension, believing that there are many rooms to manoeuvre and find the best alternatives.

Dialogues facilitated in closed-door scenarios or outside of the office, enabled opposing parties to listen to each other without “loss of face” (Mann, 1998; Koentjaraningrat, 1985) These dialogues lift morale (Harris et al., 2004) as aggrieved members would have the chance to speak (Wahyudi, 2007). Moreover, facilitating these dialogues can activate ULs’ identity salience; it allows them to exercise power yet take a “self-in-relation” stance of accommodating the needs of the more powerful senior academics in resolving conflicts, conforming to the suggestions made by Fletcher (2004). It can be argued, therefore, that despite the emphasis on collegiality, ULs are confronted by unequal power relations in academia as the system puts a premium on the chronological accumulation of knowledge and expertise. In other words, ULs construct their response to interpersonal conflicts in the social milieu with a good understanding of socio-cultural, and religious influences on university leaders’ roles. Furthermore, the many ethnic groups comprising Indonesian university staff are extraordinarily diverse. Therefore, they have to approach each problem and approach each individual need in different ways.

Male and female ULs made similar efforts to treat staff fairly and with integrity (e.g., attempting to be more inclusive in their approach to facilitating consensual decision-making) and to encourage. This is consistent with Gaus et al. (2020) view that Indonesian university leaders exercise leadership with recognition, soft-touch, affection, and care. This results in creating a positive influence on staff members’ motivations, commitment and beliefs concerning the institution’s support for employees’ working conditions (Leithwood et al., 2008).

However, a key difference in approach was advocacy to resolve staff welfare issues. Findings show that very few male ULs advocated for staff welfare issues as assertively as female ULs. Much greater numbers of female ULs were actively communicating, lobbying, and negotiating intensively with top management for better teaching and laboratory facilities, timely payment of staff salaries, and better working conditions, compared to male ULs. Male ULs, on the other hand, were not found to show this type of informal support or personal “reaching out”, but utilized the institution’s formal policies and regulations with regard to securing needed support for staff welfare.

The few male ULs who did reach out to top management came mostly from private universities where there are fewer hierarchical constraints for communication, compared to state universities. From the interviews, most male ULs in state universities indicated their dismay at the lack of institutional responsiveness; yet these are the same ULs who were not communicating intensively with management to obtain needed support. Part of the reason could be that Indonesian state universities receive adequate funding from the national government compared to private universities that solely dependent on student tuitions and other income-generating activities. It can then be alluded that the presence of adequate financial resources implicitly produces a feeling of apathy to the lack of responsiveness—because resources will always be available even if delayed.

Female ULs attempt to advocate strongly for better remuneration and compensation, lamenting the delayed salary payments for contract employees. Negotiating in an assertive way, a form of “identity talk” (Collinson, 2007) to gain visibility and presence could be described as an agentic ability to obtain much-needed resources, even though they are being criticized but they must prevail for it because in their experience access to those with power is difficult in their environment. Female ULs negotiate persistently and boldly with two distinct power sources, operating within power and resource constraints: (a) top hierarchy in the faculty that authorize the approval and disposal of needed resources; and (b) ranked, senior members of the faculty that are resistant to change, or cause confrontations. Therefore, when it comes to navigating through the organizational resource deficiencies, female ULs believe that whoever can get the most attention should keep fighting for those resources.

Female ULs go out of their way to create such networks by representing their institutions as conference speakers, resource persons or trainers, undertaking paid consultancy work, and engaging in public dialogues. University leaders could also support staff exchange arrangements with other overseas university institutions. Maintaining exposure elevates their reputation and image, and opens opportunities for them to be recognized by potential donors, e.g., for research collaborations. These activities also give female ULs the visibility necessary to bring their valuable capital to the attention of parties interested in their area of expertise (Fitzsimmons et al., 2013).

Female ULs encourage their young aspiring leaders to pursue their own development, by supporting their desire to pursue higher postgraduate studies. This encouragement is rooted in studies showing that it is women who reject higher career growth in favour of family responsibilities because they also need to support their husbands. Research shows that compared to men who follow a faster, vertical track to top leadership, women follow a slower route, a key factor for slower routes is work-family issues (Gregory-Mina, 2012). Gleaned from this study, the primordial role of motherhood and wifehood tends to influence the personal motivation to rise to the top, as doing so would mean less time for family. Therefore, they tend to shelve any leadership plans in favour of family duties and rearing responsibilities. If support for higher studies exist, this will somehow alleviate the financial burden that may be added up on the husband if the wife is studying. Thus, the study documented that many female ULs actively lobbied and negotiated with top management for scholarship funds, used their international networks outside to look for scholarships for their female staff, or helped support a candidate financially with travel and documentation expenses for overseas scholarships. Female ULs demonstrate greater understanding of staff problems and issues, showing considerate attitudes when dealing with such issues. Individualized consideration for staff needs is a key dimension of authentic leadership (Adil & Kamal, 2020), and this behavior is shown mostly by the female ULs in this study.

The male ULs in this study reached leadership positions at a younger age because they do not have to delay or abandon their aspirations for leadership due to family care responsibilities. This is not their biological role; their role is economic provider of the family. This was shown by more male ULs being able to pursue higher university ranks (Associate Professors and Professors) than female ULs. The difficulties older female ULs alluded to were, for example, contained in the metaphor of “I see myself as a mountain” and points to the challenging experiences they face in their rise to the top, for example, the lack of support received or being dictated to by senior, ranked academics who were diffusing inter-generational tensions. These difficulties could be argued as not only reflective of their gender, but also their age by the time they reached a higher leadership position. This is consistent with the findings of a recent work by Kholis (2014) who saw the link between age, seniority, and leadership amongst female and male academics in Indonesian universities.

On a personal level, female ULs in this study acknowledge the taxing and exhausting effects of gendered power-plays that affect their performance as leaders, which sometime result in feelings of self-doubt as argued by Burkinshaw and White (2017). However, they are also aware of the strong cultural scripts that glorify masculine ways of leading. Thus, they had to work within this system of unequal power, e.g., social status and gender, and had to adjust their sense of self in relation to the power holders. The 1974 Marriage Law of Indonesia officially designated men as heads of households, thus extending male hegemony from the external environment, e.g., politics, administration, and the formal economy, into the family and the household (Robinson, 2009).

Female ULs rise above the gender struggles because of a) strong self-belief that they have the potential, competence, and capacity to make a difference to organizational outcome; and (b) self-esteem, or positive feelings about their worth and value (Karelaia & Guillen, 2014). This self-awareness enables them to act appropriately as required by contextual situations. Indonesian work organizations are highly complex because of the influence of diverse sub-cultures, different ethnic languages, and diverse religious beliefs. It is important that leaders do not have arrogant attitudes because they are not socially-accepted by society. Female ULs believe that their self-worth depends on their capability to create positive feelings in others and avoid organizational discord.

Female ULs realized that the women’s empowerment movement in Indonesia is progressing well. Due to the Indonesian government’s willful determination to increase gender parity in education there are more females entering universities since 2010, and more female students choosing the science, technology and mathematics (STEM) tracks once the domain of male students. Female students are now out-performing male students in national and international exams (Afkar et al., 2020). This development proves that there are now many avenues for women to be recognized. Moreover, women have become stronger in political representation and there has been an uptrend in terms of political seats won by women since 1997 and this participation has been growing. Surveys conducted in leading industries in Indonesia point out to a general acceptance of many women as business leaders (Tjahjono & Palupi, 2010). More Indonesian women have been appointed as Cabinet Ministers since the late 1990s.

10. Conclusion

This study discussed the gender differences and similarities in the in-role behaviors of female and male university leaders in Indonesia. There are more similarities, in fact, than differences in their in-role behaviors. The similarities occur in how they approached the issue of resolving differences by promoting a more inclusive culture, even though the female ULs are subjected to power plays due to their social position and status. ULs in this study believe that resolving conflict is an important part of their role because of their belief in promoting collective harmony. Other important similarities relate to ULs efforts to develop and maintain external networks to acquire much needed resource capital, intellectual capital, and social capital. The key difference is how female ULs responded to the lack of organizational resources, and how they encouraged staff self-efficacy. Female ULs report being more active using their lobbying skills to advance staff welfare issues to top management than male ULs. Female ULs are more active in pursuing indirect and informal ways of getting colleagues to work together.

The study suggests that top management must be aware of the challenges facing female leaders in their rise to the top, consistent with other studies that highlight the need for greater understanding of the factors contributing to female leaders’ upward career trajectories so that institutions can plan better leadership programs for female ULs. More importantly, top management needs to be responsive and attentive to the conditions of ULs as their leadership is the backbone of the development of higher education in Indonesia. Both genders claim that if there is one area that they feel they have no control over, or are incapacitated from pursuing, it is in the area of staff reward and recognition, because of the lack of organizational resources to support these programs. This area needs attention and reform by Indonesian higher education institutions.

What arises from this study is the need to conduct more research studies on male university leaders. In fact, the literature on male university leaders in Indonesia is very limited. The study of male leaders is often subsumed under the bigger studies on female leaders. In Indonesia, there is a heightened awareness of promoting gender equality, and creating better gender awareness has been the focus of many feminist-based studies over the past decades. The specific study of male leaders seems to have been overlooked. There is a generic presumption that because Indonesia is described as a nation with a patriarchal society, the role of men as leaders is considered a privilege in this specific socio-cultural context, and discursive constructions of female-male identity as university leaders could be argued as following this line of thinking.

Disclaimer

This research obtained ethics approval from the Human Research Ethics Committee, Deakin University with project number BL-EC 4413.

Acknowledgements

The author expresses her gratitude to the Australian Government for funding this research under the Endeavour Awards.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This research was funded by the Endeavor Awards, Australian Government;