EGOS Women's Network Meeting 2017


Wednesday, July 5, 2017, 15:00–17:00

Copenhagen Business School (CBS) – Kilen, Kilevej 14 A/B, Copenhagen-Frederiksberg
 

Encouraged by the very successful meetings of the EGOS Women's Network in Amsterdam (2008), Barcelona (2009), Gothenburg (2011), Helsinki (2012), Montréal (2013), Rotterdam (2014), Athens (2015), and Naples (2016), another Women's Network Meeting will take place at the EGOS Colloquium 2017 venue, the Copenhagen Business School.
 

Coffee/tea, soft drinks and pastries will be available in the atrium of the Kilen building from 15:00 onwards.
At 15:30, four parallel Round Table sessions will start (cf. below).

Round Table A: Publishing Strategies

  • Room: K s43 (ground floor)

  • Chair: Regine Bendl (WU – Vienna University of Economics and Business, Austria)

‘Originality’, ‘relevance’,’ rigor’, ‘clarity’, ‘logical progression of argument’, ‘readability’, ‘theoretical and practical implications’, ‘generalizibility’, ‘credibility’ – amongst many others, these are notions with which authors are confronted with when receiving feedback from journal editors. However:

  • What makes a paper submission successful?

  • When does it fail?

  • What are positive/negative experiences of publishing?

  • How to develop publishing skills?

  • How to handle pressure from supervisors/faculty?


In this interactive session, participants will reflect on these and other questions based on their own experiences and knowledge about the publishing process.
This Round Table A is an invitation for scholars to exchange their publishing experiences for succeeding in academic publishing.

Round Table B: Work Life Balance

  • Room: K s48 (ground floor)
  • Chair: Inge Bleijenbergh (Radboud University, The Netherlands)

Academia has been called ‘a greedy organization’ and ‘a calling’ that leaves sparse room for a private life. Nevertheless, many scholars combine working in academia with caregiving for children, dependent parents, relatives or simply their own selves.

  • What are your experiences in combining academic work and private life?

  • What happens when a balance is absent?

  • What strategies do scholars use to unite seemingly contradictory claims?

  • What are the consequences of considering academia and private life as separate spheres?

 
In Round Table B with with colleagues from different national and disciplinary backgrounds, we exchange experiences, strategies and ideas and try to rethink academic work from a caregiving perspective.

Round Table C: Working towards Gender Equality in Hostile Environments

  • Room: K s54 (ground floor)
  • Chair: Mieke Verloo (Radboud University, The Netherlands)

This Round Table explores the practices of working for gender equality and social justice as academics engaged in research and consultancy:

  • When our own or other organizations do not welcome our findings, how do we deal with it?

  • What is the best way of action when only actors with little power in the organizations welcome our advice?


We will explore questions such as:

  • How do we notice that (parts of) an environment is (becoming) hostile? How do we identify those parts that are not?

  • How can we anticipate and react to increasing opposition and dwindling support?

  • What organizational rules or structures, the academic roles and positions that provide shelter against hostility?

  • How do we secure allies and where can we find them?

 
This Round Table C invites participants to engage creatively with their everyday practice. Drawing on their personal experiences and research, participants will be invited to learn from each other.

Round Table D: Methodology: Alternatives and Alterity

  • Room: K s71 (ground floor)

  • Chair: Florence Villesèche & Minna Paunova (Copenhagen Business School, Denmark)

This Round Table focuses on experience with methodological choices and their intersections with researcher gender, research topics, and the aspiration to inclusion and legitimacy in research communities. Questions to be considered include, but are not limited to:

  • Are you employing mainstream or rather alternative research methods? What or who guided your choice?

  • Is your local research environment favouring specific methods – and if so, what are the consequences for your local vs. international inclusion in the research community?

  • What are the opportunities and challenges in multiple intersections of ‘otherness’ (minority gender status; non-mainstream methods choices; non-mainstream research topic, etc.)?

  • Have you experienced that female researchers working with gender and diversity-related topics face specific challenges or reviewer expectations with regards to subjectivity in data analysis?

  • Is the institutionalisation of new methodologies gendered?

 
We invite participants to share their experiences and opinions, as well as to bring up questions for example about methodologies they are considering for a future project.