This brief reviews the Case Western Reserve University Women Staff Leadership Development Institute, including participant evaluation data and national experiences of women staff in higher education.https://commons.case.edu/mathercenter-briefs/1001/thumbnail.jp

Clark-Taylor, Angela

Creamer, Emily

Regan, Hannah

Robinson, Alicia

English

Scholarly Commons@CWRU

Case Western Reserve University Scholarly Commons @ Case Western Reserve University Mather Center Research Briefs Flora Stone Mather Center for Women 11-2023 WSLDI: Women Staff Leadership Development Institute Hannah Regan Emily Creamer Angela Clark-Taylor Alicia Robinson Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.case.edu/mathercenter-briefs WSLDI: WomenStaff LeadershipDevelopmentInstituteFlora Stone Mather Center forWomen Research Brief SeriesHannah Regan, Emily Creamer, Angela Clark-Taylor, and AliciaRobinsonNovember 2023Contact Number: 216.368.0985 Address: Tinkham Veale UniversityCenter, Suite 24811038 Bellflower RoadCleveland, OH 44106Email: centerforwomen@case.edu Website: https://case.edu/centerforwomen/Women Staff Leadership Development InstituteThe cohort and alumnae connections of WSLDI persist, as the creators identified strong participants among theearly cohorts and brought them on as board members and coaches for future cohorts. Today, the programcontinues to attract trainers and coaches from the graduates, and alumnae work with campus partners to selectthe next cohort among the applications received each year. As described below, the cohort experience is one ofWSLDI’s biggest benefits, and this persists well beyond their graduation day, as evidenced by their continuedenthusiasm and support for the program in new roles.The Flora Stone Mather Center for Women (Mather Center) at Case Western Reserve University is a communityspace and a social innovator empowering women and advancing gender equity through research-informedaction. The Mather Center developed the Women Staff Leadership Institute (WSLDI) in 2008 as a program toequip women staff members with the tools they needed to lead. WSLDI was developed by CWRU employeeswho had previously attended the HERS (Higher Education Resources Service) Leadership Institute (HLI) andbenefitted greatly from the training. HLI was expensive, however, and CWRU would only be able to fund oneattendee per year, which would likely prohibit attendance by the most underserved women staff. The HLIalumnae decided to take advantage of existing resources on campus through the Weatherhead ExecutiveEducation program to develop their own version of HLI. Inspired by Weatherhead, the alumnae added coachingalong with elements of the HLI programming, and WSLDI was born.Women Staff in Higher EducationThese disparities highlight a need to equip women staff members on campuses with the tools they need to leadauthentically. Universities across the country have implemented women’s leadership development programs in aneffort to support women staff members as they pursue their career goals. Studies show that to effectivelydevelop women leaders in higher education, leadership programs should focus on the personal, interpersonal,and organizational levels. They should also emphasize relationship-building as a central outcome in thecurriculum, teaching methods and evaluation (Selzer et al., 2017). Ely, lbarra, and Kolb (2011) view leadershipdevelopment as identity work and propose that successful women’s leadership programs should consider topicsin light of gender bias, support women’s identity work, and focus on leadership purpose. Given these findings,the Flora Stone Mather Center for Women at Case Western Reserve University launched a Women’s StaffLeadership Development Institute to help women staff members excel in their careers. Although women make up the majority of staff in higher education (National Center for Education Statistics,2021), they must overcome structural and personal barriers that their male counterparts do not have to face(Toutkoushian, 2000). Women staff in higher education face wage disparities, implicit biases, uneven workloads,and are more likely to fall victim to unfair hiring/promotion practices (Ho, 2021).  A recent study showed thatwomen employees in Higher Education were not satisfied with their career development and social adjustment(Parveen et al., 2021). These hurdles have been proven to hinder the career advancement of women staff inhigher education. Women hold the least senior administrative positions and are the lowest paid (Whitford, 2020). Table 1: WSLDI Demographics Compared to CWRU and National Staff DemographicsCategory Program %(a)CWRU Women Staff %CWRU Staff %National Women Staff %National Staff %All Women -- -- 59% -- 60%Asian Women 3% 11% 6% 6% 4%Black Women 12% 22% 13% 13% 8%Latina Women 1% 11% 2% 12% 7%Native AmericanWomen-- >1% >1% >1% >1%White Women 71% 61% 36% 61% 37%Multiracial Women 1% >1% >1% 2% 1%Source: CWRU Office of Institutional Research; U.S. Department of Education IPEDS Human Resources Survey 2021-22. a: Totals do not add to 100% due torounding; 13 participants (13%) are missing or unknown.Asian women are under-represented in WSLDI compared to the percentage of CWRU and national womenstaff[3] they make up; they are overrepresented as a portion of CWRU staff compared to national. Black womenwere represented in the program at approximately the same level as the national demographic of women staff,but underrepresented compared to their percentage of CWRU staff. Black women are also overrepresented onCWRU staff compared with the national percentage. Latina women are significantly underrepresented in WSLDIcompared to their CWRU and national percentages, but they are represented at about the same rate at CWRU asthey are nationally. White women were overrepresented compared to the national percent and the CWRUpercent, but are represented in the same percent at CWRU as they are nationally. Finally, multiracial/ethnicwomen make up a very small percent of WSLDI, as well as CWRU and national women staff; they arerepresented at CWRU at about the same percent as national women staff.The purpose of WSLDI is to provide a university resource and support system for professional staff seeking tofurther their personal and professional career development. The program is meant to complement the staffdevelopment offerings already provided by other departments at the University. Since inception, WSLDI has had155 women-identified staff members complete the program (through the 2021-2022 cohort). These staffmembers came from over 60 departments, and were at various levels in their career journey. As of August 2022,103 were still employed by CWRU, and included in demographic data.[1] Of these participants, 71% identified aswhite, 12% identified as Black or African-American, 3% as Asian/Asian-American, 1% identified as Latinx, and 1%were multiracial/ethnic. No women who identified as Native American or Alaska Native have participated inWSLDI that we are aware of. Table 1 shows this breakdown, as well as the proportion of women staff at CWRUand nationally that each group represents, to assess how WSLDI compares in representation. The table alsoshows the proportion of all staff, regardless of gender, that each group represents.[2]Today, WSLDI is a year-long eighty-hour program offering women-identified staff an opportunity to enhanceand energize leadership and career development skills through education, coaching, and the building ofprofessional networks. WSLDI participants work to grow their confidence when making effective career decisionsand generating positive outcomes in relation to career advancement goals. They achieve this by developing adeeper awareness of themselves as a leader, a deeper awareness of the diverse needs of others in leading, agreater understanding of the impact of institutional context, and an ethic of service as a change agent withinhigher education. Upon completion of the program, participants will have received a 360 evaluation, a learningstyle assessment, a career development plan, updated professional documents, and an executive leadershipcertificate.WSLDI Participant Demographics[1] Provided in aggregate by the Office of Institutional Research; did not specify international staff separate from their US-recognized racial/ethnic category.[2] Group names in table are abbreviated for space[3] Defined as all full-time, non-instructional staff on IPEDSTo explore additional impacts of the WSLDI program and learn more about our participants, the Mather Centerlaunched a retrospective survey. We received 39 responses, which was sent to all 155 alumna of the WSLDI program.Thirty-seven participants (95%) identified as cisgender women, 2 (5%) preferred not to respond. Thirty-three (85%)participants were white, and 6 participants (15%) were Black/African-American. Participants did not report any otherracial/ethnic identities. The data from this follow up survey is used to present the program implications in this brief.“This was one of the most valuable aspects for me. I think about this all the time in relation to how I function, but alsobeing constantly aware that other people have different learning styles and approach things in different ways.”Changes In EmploymentOf the 39 participants, 28 responded to questions about any changes in current job status since WSLDI. Sixteenparticipants (57%) reported a new position that was a step-up. Two other participants reported multiple job changessince completing the program. One made a lateral move followed by a step-up, and the other reports that they havechanged several times, have significantly increased their salary, and feel deeply fulfilled by the work in their current role. Participants also reported other changes in their career after WSLDI. Eleven participants (39%) reported a promotion.Another 11 reported a new leadership role within the university and 3 reported a leadership role in a professionalorganization. Seven participants (25%) reported a leadership role elsewhere, including roles at another university, work ina local non-profit, and the Staff Advisory Council (SAC) on campus. Nine participants (32%) reported other forms ofpromotion or leadership, including taking on new responsibilities in their existing role in pursuit of promotion andmentorship roles. Twelve participants (43%) are now supervising more people than they were prior to the program.Fourteen participants have pursued additional degrees or certificates since completing the program, including Master’sdegrees and PhDs, coaching certificates, and DEI certifications.Psychological and Skill-Based ImprovementsWe asked participants 25 questions regarding these psychological/cognitive outcomes, skills, and their overall opinions ofthe programs, based on the target program outcomes, and asked them to rate their agreement on a scale from stronglydisagree (1) to strongly agree (4). The majority of participants said they “agreed” or “strongly agreed” with all thestatements, indicating positive change as a result of the program. Participants reported improvements in their confidencein their leadership skills, awareness of issues regarding diversity and institutions, and ability assess their own skills andneeds and the needs of others. All evaluation measures were summed into one total evaluation score, with a possible score from 25 (the absolute lowest,strongly disagreeing with all elements) to 100 (the highest possible, strongly agreeing with all elements). This measure wasthen centered, so it ranged from 0-75. Participants who were missing on all questions were excluded from the total score.The average score is around 45, so largely positive (responding “agree” to all statements would provide a score of 50). Successful ElementsOne of the most successful elements of the program was the 360° feedback review. Participants felt they received goodfeedback which helped them identify areas for improvement, while also building confidence in the areas in which theywere doing well. Below are two selected quotes from their responses:“This survey helped solidify my thoughts on areas where I excelled and needed some improvement.”“While hesitant to receive the feedback at first, it gave me more confidence. I realized I had to be more confident inmyself, and the areas I needed to work on.”Many participants also responded well to the learning styles assessment. Not only did participants feel it helped themunderstand themselves better, but they also felt it helped them work better with their teams through acknowledging thedifferent learning styles of others. Program Impacts“I really loved the cohort model of learning alongside other women at the university.”WSLDI participants have said that sessions have helped them to have a better understanding of valuesidentification, risk-taking, and managing change through managing up as part of career management.Participants have also stated that the career visioning session made them feel “very enlightened,”“optimistic about moving forward,” “less alone,” “hopeful,” and “more connected with my cohort.”Participants shared that the session made them feel more clearly about their past, present, and future,and that they appreciated the level of comfort and support that was provided. Program findings alsoshowed that participants had a better understanding of where they are on their leadership journey, howto view leadership as a mindset and not a position, and learned some tangible ways they can advancetheir leadership mindset. A past WSLDI participant stated the following about her experience in the WSLDI program: “The WSLDI program gave me the opportunity to create a career plan that really focused on what Ihope to accomplish as a leader here on campus. By providing tools like the ECSI and the Kolb LearningStyles Inventory, I have been able to pinpoint my strengths and areas of needed improvement. Byidentifying and focusing on these areas, I believe that I’ll be able to better navigate my career and how Iplan to show up as a professional in the world.”The Importance of the CohortThe ability to be part of a cohort of other women staff was both a significant draw for initial applicationsto the program, and one of the most widely cited favorite parts. When asked why they chose to apply toWSLDI, one participant told us:"I wanted the cohort feel. To meet other women who were looking for professional support."Following completion of the program, many participants emphasized the importance of the cohort, and itwas one of the things most missed during the year of virtual meetings because of Covid-19.“The most influential part of the program [was] our cohort connections.”WSLDI Cohort 2021-2022The Mather Center would also like to make an effort to not only empower women leaders on campus, but alsowork to ensure that systemic barriers on campus are removed so that women can flourish. Researchers suggestthat to create an environment that fosters a sense of belonging in women employees, companies need torecognize women leaders who are driving progress and do the cultural work required to create a workplacewhere all women are valued (Burns et al., 2021). Companies can also put practices in place that ensurepromotions are equitable, track and ensure inclusive hiring practices, and have accountability systems in place tohold leadership accountable (Burns et al., 2021). Senior level sponsorship and high employee engagement hasalso been found to create more inclusive environments where women can thrive. At an institutional level, theMather Center would like to continue to advocate for policy change and develop gender equity trainings to helpeducate the campus community on their role in creating inclusive space for women to succeed. The Mather Center is dedicated to effectively evaluating the WSLDI program for continuous improvement. Pre-and post-evaluations have been implemented to measure the change in participants’ career decision-makingefficacy and self-efficacy. Recommendations from these evaluations are used to guide improvements in futureiterations of the program.Many studies highlight the even larger disparities that women with intersecting identities face (e.g. Byrd et al.,2019; Toutkoushian et al., 2007), so it is also a goal to engage more woman of color in the program. It issignificant to note that while women are only slightly over half of the percent of staff overall, there are alsoconcentrations by gender within specific occupations. For example, at CWRU, nearly ten times as many womenas men serve in office and administrative support occupations, while thirteen times as many men as women workin natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupations. Similarly, there are twice as manyBlack/African-American employees in service occupations as white employees (regardless of gender); this is infact the only occupational category in which Black employees outnumber white employees. Thus, it is importantas we move forward, when considering, how to make sure our programming feels beneficial to those working in avariety of settings, and not only white-collar employees. Future ImplicationsReferencesWhitford, E. (2020, April 15). College Presidents’ Cabinets Still Far From Gender Parity. Inside Higher Ed.https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/04/15/pay-and-seniority-gaps-persist-women-and-minority-administrators-higher-educationBurns, T., Huang, J., Krivkovich, A., Rambachan, I., Trkulja, T., & Yee, L. (2021). Women in the Workplace.McKinsey & Company.Byrd, W. C., Brunn-Bevel, R. J., & Ovink, S. M. (2019). Intersectionality and Higher Education: Identity andInequality on College Campuses. Rutgers University Press.Ely, R. J., Ibarra, H., & Kolb, D. M. (2011). Taking Gender Into Account: Theory and Design for Women’sLeadership Development Programs. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(3), 474–493.https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2010.0046Ho, M. (2021). Beyond Leaning In. Strategic Imagination.National Center for Education Statistics. (2021). The Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System [Data set].National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/use-the-dataParveen, I., Uzair-ul-Hassan, M., & Zainib, H. (2021). Professional and Social Adjustment of Women Employees inHigher Education Institutions: A Regional Perspective. Research Journal of Social Sciences and EconomicsReview, 2(1), 343–351.Selzer, R., Howton, A., & Wallace, F. (2017). Rethinking Women’s Leadership Development: Voices from theTrenches. Administrative Sciences, 7(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci7020018Toutkoushian, R. K. (2000). Addressing gender equity in nonfaculty salaries. Research in Higher Education, 41,417–442.Toutkoushian, R. K., Bellas, M. L., & Moore, J. V. (2007). The Interaction Effects of Gender, Race, and MaritalStatus on Faculty Salaries. Journal of Higher Education, 78(5), 572–601. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2007.0031Email: centerforwomen@case.edu Website: https://case.edu/centerforwomen/Contact Number: 216.368.0985 Address: Tinkham Veale UniversityCenter, Suite 24811038 Bellflower RoadCleveland, OH 44106Suggested Citation:Regan, H., Creamer, E., Clark-Taylor, A., and Robinson, A. (2023, April 14). WSLDI: Women Staff LeadershipDevelopment Institute.  Flora Stone Mather Center for Women.

WSLDI: Women Staff Leadership Development Institute

https://commons.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=mathercenter-briefs

WSLDI: Women Staff Leadership Development Institute

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Scholarly Commons@CWRU