Gender Discrimination, Construction, and Glass Ceiling Effects Among Women Academics in a Higher Education Institution in South Africa: Exploring Alternatives for Women’s Empowerment

Abstract

Despite several policies and legislation enactments to address gender inequality in the post-apartheid South African employment landscape, a significant proportion of female academics still face marginalization and underrepresentation in senior executive positions. This paper aims to investigate the glass ceiling effect and gender discrimination in higher education institutions. This qualitative research, built on the assumption of the phenomenology design, interviewed 12 academics (men and women) selected across disciplines to understand their perceptions and experiences of gender discrimination and barriers in women’s career progression and women academics. The thematic analysis employed to analyze the qualitative data shows societal, cultural, and organizational dynamics as constraints to women’s career advancements. Findings show that patriarchal ideology is associated with leadership and masculine traits, with women being disadvantaged. There is evidence of stereotypical behaviours and biassed evaluation in the career progression of women, hinged on cultural perception. Managing barriers in women’s career growth requires training that focuses on women’s leadership skill development for addressing gender discrimination. Higher education must ensure that managing gender discrimination and barriers associated with the glass ceiling are channelled through dialogues and measures that promote opportunities for women’s development, including institutional mechanisms like mentorship programmes and family-friendly policies for women academics.

1. Introduction

Despite having one of the most progressive constitutions in the world, South Africa has a long history of workplace discrimination against women and people of colour (Kela et al., 2024). Black South African women have long been the targets of social and economic oppression, which has held them in economic servitude (Department of Women, Youth, and Persons with Disabilities, 2024). Before the 1994 democratic elections, South Africa was under the apartheid government, which governed the country along the lines of race. Government’s efforts were solely directed at serving the interests of the minority white citizens of the country at the expense of other races (Black, Indian, and Coloured). The history of apartheid was marked by deep-seated cultural norms and patriarchal systems that systematically marginalized women from social, economic, and political life (Musetsho et al., 2021).

Discrimination against women is not only socially unjust but also has economic implications for the women involved. Women still face limitations in the employment world and economic participation (Statistics South Africa, 2017). The South African labour market is riddled with past injustices that were orchestrated to stifle black people. Apartheid was a systemic policy that made it fair to discriminate against people of colour and, more specifically, women, and the effects of this system are still very visible in the current world of work (Mkhize, 2024). The apartheid government used social institutions such as work organizations and higher education institutions to control and stifle black people’s potential, with women more affected by these policies (Mkhize, 2024).

Some of the earliest universities in South Africa were established based on race and gender (Maylam, 2024). During this time, black people, and particularly women, did not have as many opportunities as their male white counterparts. Higher education institutions were used as a legitimate means to marginalize and entrench patriarchal beliefs (Gmerek, 2019, p. 95). Black academics, especially women, were limited and denied equal participation; this was performed to ensure the marginalization of black people and ensure they work for white people (Mkhize, 2024). The issue of the glass ceiling is not a recent phenomenon. From the earliest times, women faced numerous challenges in holding senior and executive positions in the South African workspace, and this is still relevant in today’s contemporary world of work and in the field of academia (Mkhize, 2024). The glass ceiling phenomenon, which is the systemic prohibition of women from progressing to positions of power in organizations (Maylam, 2024), has always been a challenge for women.

Women’s advancement in higher education institutions is hampered by the glass ceiling phenomenon (Moodly, 2024). Although the number of women occupying positions of power in higher educational institutions has increased, this increase is insignificant compared to the number of their male counterparts (Davis & Maldonado, 2015). Ascending to leadership positions for women academics is not a straightforward endeavour. Compared to men, women’s career progression is riddled with challenges, and the path to leadership is a winding one that requires more time and energy to navigate. Career progression for men can be made easy through providing multiple routes, with fewer obstacles (Khunou, 2023). The Global Gender Gap Index (2025) reports ranked South Africa 33rd overall, with challenges in the areas of low women’s labour force participation and leadership representation. For instance, the reports indicate below average (34.4%) of women’s participation in membership boards among South African firms, a staggering low 8.70% of women as firm owners, and 38.50% female managers across firms and institutions. These statistics, among other indicators, suggest that women’s successful navigation of the leadership labyrinth requires persistence, awareness of one’s progress, and careful analysis of the limited options that lie ahead.

The glass ceiling phenomenon is a consequence of various factors that hinder women’s upward mobility in South African higher education institutions (Kela et al., 2024). The amalgamation of factors such as socialization, patriarchy, culture, stereotypes and biases, and social norms is working in unison to prevent women from ascending to leadership positions in the higher education sector (Mkhize, 2024). Cultural and social perceptions still exert a strong influence on gender roles for women. Gender discrimination is heavily influenced by the prevailing culture and how women are perceived. The continued marginalization of women in senior and executive positions has far-reaching consequences for women’s psychological and physical well-being (Elliott & Blithe, 2021). The continued perception of unfair treatment produces feelings of resentment among female academics, and this hinders their performance.

There have been studies conducted to investigate the causes of the glass ceiling in higher education such as the effect of the determining factors on the glass ceiling in higher education (Abbas et al., 2021), the experiences of black women millennials in higher education (Mkhize, 2024), and a close but more specific study that sought to investigate the benefits of mentoring as support for women’s career trajectories (Rampersad, 2024). Mkhize’s (2024) study investigated black women’s experiences in historically white institutions and found that most of the hostility and discriminatory practices they experienced emanated from students of the same race and gender. In contrast to the above, this study contributes to the gender discrimination and glass ceiling literature, particularly from the nuances of higher education institutions, which are considered neglected in the interrogation of these conversations in South Africa. Essentially, this study seeks to understand the different constructions of gender discrimination and barriers in women’s upward mobility in academia. In terms of policy contribution, the study hopes to help policy makers with the remedial interventions that can be initiated to solve the problem of the glass ceiling in higher educational institutions, as well as inform national policy responses to workplace gender inequality. In line with these, the research questions include (a) what are the different gender discrimination constructions and barriers impeding women academics? (b) How can women academics be empowered from the glass ceiling barriers hindering career progress in higher education?

2. Gender Discrimination in South Africa’s Higher Education

South Africa has a population of about 63.21 million individuals, 51.33% of these being women (Statistics South Africa, 2024b). Over half of the entire population is women, yet they are still underrepresented in senior positions (Statistics South Africa, 2024b). According to the Department of Labour statistics, a mere 26.5% of women occupy top management positions in South Africa (Statistics South Africa, 2024a). In contrast, their male counterparts sit at the top with 73.5% (Statistics South Africa, 2024b). This huge gap highlights the little progress that has been achieved since the introduction of the country’s new constitution, which calls for the realization of a non-sexist society. From the earliest days, South African higher education was influenced by the socio-political context. Higher education was a tool with which the government of apartheid employed to systemically exclude and marginalize black people for many years (Khunou, 2023). During apartheid, there were separate educational institutions for all races (white, black, Indian, and coloured people).

The apartheid government used the historically white universities, such as the University of Cape Town and Witswatersrand, to perpetuate the narrative of Eurocentric superiority (Khunou, 2023). Black universities and everything that pertained to them were controlled by the apartheid government. By imposing control over the historically black institutions, the apartheid government was able to push and advance the narrative of a Eurocentric knowledge system, which was positioned as superior to the indigenous Afrocentric knowledge system, a deliberate way to elevate the white as legitimate knowledge agents (Mabokela & Mlambo, 2017). The apartheid government controlled and limited the development of the historically black institutions to limit black people and entrench patriarchal beliefs to curtail women’s development and freedom, and thereby allowing white supremacy (Khunou, 2023).

State funding to Afrikaans and English universities was quadruple what historically black universities received (Gmerek, 2019, p. 100). With the unlimited resources at their disposal, white universities had exceptional institutional and research capabilities. These financial limitations by the apartheid government were deliberately imposed to thwart and curtail the development of the historically black universities by propagating and enforcing white supremacy. The apartheid government’s commitment to create divisions within the higher education sector is still reflected in the differences between the historically white universities and the historically black ones (Department of Higher Education and Training—DHET, 2022). This is responsible for the inequalities that stain South Africa’s higher education many years after the abolition of apartheid.

Statistics dating back to 2017 paint a gloomy outlook about the career progression of women to professorship positions in South African higher education institutions. Overall, there were up to 4% of African professors in all South African higher education institutions; of these, only 0.85% were African women (Mabokela & Mlambo, 2017). Three years later, the statistics from Department of Higher Education and Training—DHET (2022) showed an increase of 19.9% black professors, with black women representing 4.2%. The number of black African professors is a far cry because in all these universities, white people accounted for the majority at 42.7% (Department of Higher Education and Training—DHET, 2022).

Women in academia still face many challenges, and a lot still needs to be accomplished to change the historical composition of people in leadership positions in academia (Khunou, 2023). There is an intersection of factors that serve to oppress women, including racism, sexism, and patriarchy, which accords men privilege, thereby reinforcing the hostile masculinized environment in academia (Nartey et al., 2023). The masculine culture that generally exists in academia is the driving force for the injustice against women; it renders them victims of discrimination and ill-treatment. This masculine culture is inhospitable to women academics as it deliberately upholds the practices, values, and attributes that seek to dominate women.

3. Cultural Understanding of Gender Discrimination and Structural Barriers

Organizational cultural norms and values have become ingrained in people’s way of life. They dictate and unconsciously influence how women are perceived in the workplace (Kela et al., 2024). The South African higher education context is no different; women continue to be subjected to these stereotypes that seek to reduce their worth and contributions in the world of work (Tabassum & Nayak, 2021). These gender stereotypes are responsible for categorizing people as either belonging to the in-group or the out-group. People from the out-group are assumed to all have innate characteristics and traits by virtue of their belonging to these so-called out-groups. These behaviours and beliefs are passed on from one generation to another through socialization.

Men are said to possess an attribute of agency while women are said to have communal traits (Dosunmu & Dichaba, 2024). Some feminist groups have made several calls to bring to light how culture seeks to control and subjugate women. To this end, culture and cultural gender norms, which breed gender stereotypes, are deemed to be a significant influence in denying women equal participation in the world of work (Nartey et al., 2023). Men are believed to possess agentic qualities (assertive, dominant, and confident), and these qualities are strongly associated with, and particularly relevant to understanding leadership (Sczesny et al., 2018). Because men are stereotypically thought to possess the agentic behaviours, they are expected to be providers, to be dominant and competent, be involved in higher positions with power and prestige, while women are assigned to nurturant roles; this, in turn, perpetuates the widely held stereotypes about agency and communion.

Women are said to possess communal attributes, indicating a concern for others’ welfare, warmth, gentleness, being reserved, nurturing, and being interpersonal (Khunou, 2023). Women not only face structural hindrances to equality, but also social factors, such as gender stereotypes, that exert a significant impact on the limitations and barriers to ascending to top-level positions in academia (Tabassum & Nayak, 2021). Structural hindrances are dealt with through policy implementation, but these policies often fail to align with grassroots issues such as societal perspectives on women’s roles. For example, organizations must implement policy frameworks and legislation that help women strike a healthy balance between work–life responsibilities. Such workplace policies will support or enhance national policy frameworks such as the 2013 Women Empowerment and Gender Equality.

Through social construction and stereotypical beliefs, leadership is heavily linked with masculine characteristics such as agency and competitiveness (Garcia & Welter, 2013). Consequently, to succeed in leadership, women are expected to possess male leadership values and qualities. This idea of thinking automatically excludes women from conversations that deal with leadership. For this reason, women in academia continue to experience feelings of resentment because of their perceptions of being ostracized and secluded (Esplin et al., 2025). Organizations have also been found wanting in that they perpetuate the current exploitation of women by blindly following outdated and regressive ideologies, policies, and organizational culture (Dosunmu & Dichaba, 2024).

Men are stereotyped as having confidence, rationality, and aggressiveness that are a prerequisite for leadership, whereas women are stereotyped as being sensitive, emotional and helpful. Society perceives women as only competent in domestic responsibilities such as childcare and household duties. The notion that “women are good” at household duties has serious implications for women’s career progression in the South African higher education sector. For years, South African women academics have been trying to enter the previously men-dominated management positions, but this has not materialized as men still dominate in higher positions (Kela et al., 2024). It has been 31 years since apartheid was abolished, yet black women still face apartheid-era discriminatory injustices (Ramohai, 2019). Those women who do finally access these institutions are met with racism, sexism, and other forms of discriminatory practices in the higher education sector (Ramohai, 2019).

The multiple identities of black women academics make it hard for them to be acknowledged and respected in the workplace (Nartey et al., 2023). This is especially true with the implementation of the Affirmative Action legislation, which was designed, among other things, to redress and rebalance gender representation in the workplace. However, this had a serious ripple effect in which men assume that black women have entered the previously male-dominated institutions because of Affirmative Action. Women are now not considered or evaluated based on their academic background. The continued experience of discrimination has significant consequences regarding organizational outcomes such as productivity.

4. Liberal Feminist Theoretical Understanding

The theoretical grounding of this paper stems from the Liberal Feminist perspectives. The origin of Liberal Feminism can be traced back to the civil rights movement in the 1960s in the USA. Liberal feminism posits that unequal gender relations exist because of the societal traditions and institutions riddled with patriarchy. Liberal feminists further argued that women’s rights, interests, and needs are not sufficiently represented in the circumstances in which they live and work. At the core of the Liberal Feminists’ goals is the protection of women, which entails formulating and passing enabling policies that will redress all forms of inequality in society and the world of work (Parry, 2018). According to Liberal Feminists, equality starts by redressing the flawed, biassed social institutions and the implementation of fair and just laws for all, irrespective of gender. To this end, the State must play a crucial role in the emancipation of women.

The oppression of women, their experiences of inequality and unfair treatment in society, necessitated the emergence of feminism to challenge the societal traditions and institutions that discriminate against women (Enyew & Mihrete, 2018). Liberal Feminism fought for the protection of women and the representation of women, and made women’s voices audible, who for a long time had been silenced by gender inequality in political, social, and economic spheres of society. Given the complexities of the South African labour market, marked by skewed allocation of opportunities, Liberal Feminist ideology and principles are appropriate in exploring and determining forms of oppression against women (Jenkins et al., 2019). Modernization and globalization have triggered a social reawakening on the oppression and exclusion of women in the world of work. According to liberal feminists, women not only experience inequalities at work but also experience them in the institution of marriage, where women are not treated as equals (Law, 2019). This power dynamic reenacts itself in the employment context, where not only are women different from, but also not equal to, men (Schwartzman, 2006; Ferguson et al., 2004). The class structure and oppression of women are intertwined, and successful intervention must focus on the ideologies of capitalism and patriarchy.

Liberal Feminism believes that the emancipation of women and advancing the interests of women can be achieved through restructuring patriarchal systems (Schwartzman, 2006). These systems could be reformed using proper channels, such as the implementation of gender-appropriate legislation that seeks to eliminate the whole system of patriarchy and its values. The subtle forms of patriarchy are evident in various spheres of life, such as in education and in the labour market. The Liberal Feminism thesis is crucial to uphold the arguments in this study to determine whether the legislations, policies, and programmes that have been put in place have had the expected outcomes in terms of gender representation in the South African higher education sector (Jenkins et al., 2019). The South African government’s response was through enacting various laws to redress past injustices and ensure a level playing field. These are of affirmative action, employment equity, pay equity and equal representation in leadership. The state, according to the Liberal Feminists, has an obligation to empower women through the enactment of enabling policies and inclusion in the economic institutions that have exclusionary policies.

While Liberal Feminist postulations have been instrumental in its quest to advance the rights of women and redress the injustices that are aimed at women, there have been critics, including a limited focus on individual rights, overemphasis on equality in existing systems, and the neglect of intersectionality. For instance, Liberal Feminist theory’s overemphasis on individual rights while failing to tackle systemic and structural barriers that stand in the way of gender equality. The theory has also come under scrutiny because it seeks to integrate women into existing power structures. Critics argue that instead of trying to integrate women into these structures, the focus should instead be on challenging the underlying systems and institutions that maintain and reinforce gender inequality in society (Schwartzman, 2006; Stopler, 2021).

5. Methodology and Methods

The interpretivism philosophical assumption is suitable for exploring the life experiences of people. These are subjective realities which need to be tapped into to make sense or uncover the hidden impacts of the glass ceiling effect. The study was designed on the assumption of the phenomenology design for an in-depth exploration of respondents lived experiences and the perceptions of gender discrimination and associated barriers of the glass ceiling (Greening, 2019). The sample population is made up of academics from four faculties, including the Faculty of Arts, the Faculty of Commerce, Administration and Law, the Faculty of Education, and the Faculty of Science and Agriculture, with three from each faculty. A total of 12 academics were recruited for the study (see Table 1). The sample distribution includes both men and women. This is important to uncover diverse perspectives from both genders for a rich understanding of the research problem. Thus, the integration of women’s and male academics’ perspectives seeks to provoke multiple perspectives to unravel the constructions of gender discrimination and associated barriers in women’s career progression. For instance, men’s inclusion can significantly contribute to the understanding of patriarchy and gender norms of gender discrimination.

Table 1. Sample distribution and demographic.

Respondents	Gender	Age	Position	Experience	Education
P1	Female	54	Professor	20 years	Masters
P2	Female	48	Senior Lecturer	15 years	MBA
P3	Female	57	Professor	19 years	PhD
P4	Female	35	Lecturer	11 years	Masters and CA
P5	Female	45	Senior Lecturer	21 years	Masters
P6	Female	36	Lecturer	14 years	PhD
P7	Female	33	Lecturer	9 years	Masters
P8	Female	62	Professor	22 years	PhD
P9	Male	55	Associate Professor	16 years	Masters
P10	Male	49	Senior Lecturer	19 years	Masters
P11	Male	58	Associate Professor	15 years	PhD
P12	Male	38	Senior Lecturer	13 years	Masters

Recruitment of respondents was based on their knowledge of the subject matter. To ensure accuracy in the recruitment of respondents with the appropriate quality and knowledge on gender discrimination and glass ceiling barriers in the higher education context, a referral approach was utilized for the identification of the most suitable respondents. Referral bias was mitigated by clearly defining the characteristics of respondents who can provide insights to the research questions, by selecting only respondents who represent a wide range of experience and perspective needed to answer the research questions, and by ensuring that the respondents represent a wide range of metrics (disciplines, age, academic cadre, and age) for a balanced representation. The inclusion criteria include a full-time academic with sufficient knowledge of gender discrimination discourse with at least 3 years’ experience in the higher education sector. Exclusion includes non-academics and individuals with less than 3 years’ experience. Interviews were conducted face-to-face, and all interviews were recorded with the consent of the respondents. The interview guide included questions like ‘Can you describe any personal experiences or observations of the glass ceiling effect in academia? How does it affect women involved and the overall academic environment?’ and ‘In your view, what can academic institutions do to foster a more inclusive and supportive environment for underrepresented groups and ensure they have equal access to opportunities for career advancement?’ All interviews were conducted in the private offices of selected academics between 5 and 19 May 2024, lasting between 35 min and 53 min. All interviews were conducted in English.

Member checking was employed to ensure accuracy and authenticity of the data and analysis. For instance, respondents were allowed the opportunity to review the transcripts and preliminary interpretations. This is to ensure that the subjectivity of the researcher was managed through flexibility and transparency by minimizing the risk of over-identification with respondents’ experiences or researchers’ assumptions based on prior knowledge. These were performed by keeping a reflective journal throughout the entire research process to account for researchers’ assumptions during the data collection process and analysis, avoiding the imposition of researchers’ experience onto respondents’ narratives, and the regular review of coding, theme development and interpretation to ensure consistency and analytical depth to mitigate bias. In ensuring that the results of this study can be transferable to other similar contexts or situations, thick description was employed to provide detailed and contextual descriptions of the research setting, respondents, and the methods used in the study. Confirmability was ensured by having other researchers check the consistency between the collected interview data and the resultant interpretation of the results to ensure that the study’s conclusions were drawn from the reported data. Peer debriefing sessions were conducted by engaging academic colleagues and research mentors in reflective discussions during the data analysis phase to challenge interpretations and ensure the findings are grounded in the data. These steps were employed to manage possible threats such as referral sampling bias and power dynamics during the interviews. Lastly, the dependability of the data was ensured by maintaining an audit trail and taking notes of all challenges encountered during data collection.

In terms of ethics, all respondents were informed of their willingness to participate or not in the study, including the right to withdraw from the investigation even as the study progresses. The confidentiality and anonymity of all respondents were strictly concealed. The study was approved by the Scientific Research Committee with reference UZ-REC 0691-008 PGM 2023/58. Thematic Analysis procedures were employed. The first phase consists of repeated readings of the interview transcripts to build initial understanding, depth, and patterns of the data. The second phase followed with the generation of codes. In the third phase, codes were generated into groups where patterns, relationships, and meanings were identified as themes. Subsequently, the themes were evaluated and refined for clear relevance and significance at the fourth stage. This was to ensure themes related to the objectives were identified for discussion. Lastly, the findings were reported based on the identified themes.

6. Data Analysis and Interpretation

6.1. Gender Discrimination and Glass Ceiling Effect in Higher Education Institutions

6.1.1. Societal Constraints

Societal constraints encompass sociocultural factors such as norms, values, attitudes, biases, and stereotypes that impact women’s employability and career advancement (Jayachandran, 2021). The respondents referred to the socio-cultural factors as negatively impacting their struggle in terms of their human potential and economic freedom. The struggles that women in the world of work face are making it difficult for them to make a worthwhile contribution in labour market. The below sub-themes emerged from the theme of social constraint.

Patriarchal Oppression

The study established that family and domestic responsibilities are not sufficient to explain why women are often overlooked when it comes to career progression. Patriarchy was found to be the cause of the mistreatment of women in society, and by extension, in the workplace. Some of the reasons have to do with the nature of the organizations that are found. Organizations exist in societies embedded in a culture of patriarchy. Patriarchy seeks to relegate women to submissive positions in society, and one way of accomplishing this is by withholding women’s chances of equal participation in all spheres of life.

The patriarchal mindset carries with it a sense of entitlement. Men enjoy these privileges at work and feel they are entitled to power and opportunities due to the patriarchal worldview. Men expect to dominate women in the workplace, while women are expected to be subservient regardless of their status in organizations. Patriarchy is present throughout society. To change patriarchy, one must focus on redefining how society perceives the role of women. Patriarchy, as a socially constructed ideology, has ensured the promotion of male privilege and interests, while marginalizing women by creating gender roles and expectations. From most of the respondents, there was consensus that the unequal power relations that exist between men and women are the product of societal patriarchal ideas that allow men to enjoy a privileged status both in society and in social institutions.

“University can do so much, although it can’t change society, patriarchy is still evident in subtle forms”.

From the response above, it is evident that the patriarchal mindset is the root cause of all the problems that women find themselves in. Patriarchy is one of the causes of gender disparities in society, and why women find it difficult to progress to leadership positions in organizations. The patriarchal mindset carries a sense of entitlement to power, which justifies men’s overall accumulation of power and resources. Respondent five had this to say about the patriarchal mindset that gives men unrestricted power and privileges in society and in the world of work. Respondent five talks about the power dynamics that are evident in society and the workplace, where men expect to dominate women.

“I cannot exclude our societal traditions and norms when looking and understanding this issue. The challenges of accepting of the female figures into leadership roles stems from the traditions that male figures are expected to lead whereas women are seen as belonging to a more support functions”.

Respondent eight supported the views of respondent five by echoing the sentiments of respondent five that the culture of patriarchy is to blame for the challenges that women are confronted with in the workplace. That focus must be directed at changing societal attitudes around gender inequalities that manifest in the workplace.

“For me, it has always been about the culture of patriarchy that we all have been socialized in from an early age. Our societal prescriptions of what it means to be a woman and what is expected of women has always been the reason women are facing discrimination in society and the challenges they face in the work context. The glass ceiling effect is not only seen in academia, but is evident in all forms of work, where women are seen as not deserving of the status that is enjoyed by their male counterparts. So, yes, these challenges reflect the broader societal issues”.

What is evident from all the above respondents’ extracts is that the discrimination and curtailment of women in the workplace is the outcome of socialization linked to traditions and conventions. Higher education institutions, or any other place of work, are patriarchal. Women are not seen for what they can offer in terms of work output, and promotions to senior management positions are not given to deserving individuals according to the requirements of the positions (Toparia & Lenka, 2022). Women are always perceived through the faulty, patriarchal lenses that diminish their value. The findings are in line with the words of Perez (2019), who said, “Although the jobs that men and women do is different in all societies, but in all societies the work that women do is less valued”.

In agreement with the above view, most of the respondent states that the patriarchal mindset influences all the decisions in the workplace in terms of work assignments. Men are always trusted with certain roles, as the patriarchal mindset insists that they are highly competent when it comes to technical roles. According to respondent nine, this is disempowering to women because it limits their chances and results in their exclusion and discrimination in the workplace.

“Men have always been given priority when it comes to getting promoted in certain roles compared to women. They are trusted in driving certain projects, most technical ones are given to men. It has always been like that. It is as if men will do better at technical projects compared to women regardless of their qualifications and levels”.

The majority of the respondents argued that patriarchy is the product of socialization, which has elevated the position of men above that of women. These respondents argued that patriarchy in organizations reflects society at large. The patriarchal mindset that labels men as the “heads of households” is responsible for the gender inequalities that women face in the workplace. Respondent 10, for instance, states the following:

“I believe they reflect the broader societal issues that we have been socialized, patriarchy is still alive has its roots in society and manifests itself in these institutions of employment. Women are not seen as rational being capable of managing people and influencing organizations success. Our societies are not ready for women leaders, man, especially are threatened by successful women”.

Most respondents pointed to society as the primary culprit in perpetuating patriarchy, suggesting that societal structures, norms, and expectations play a significant role in reinforcing gender-based discrimination and inequality. These findings indicate that addressing societal attitudes and beliefs is crucial to dismantling patriarchy and promoting gender equality. But addressing and challenging societal attitudes is proving to be an issue, as factors such as the ideal worker, leadership, and performance are all built on masculine ideas. This gendered perception of women contributes to fewer women in upper management positions (Tabassum & Nayak, 2021). The findings showed that, despite patriarchal standards, women have continued to be assigned to jobs with less status compared to men. In support of the views of the respondents, Moodly (2024) note that the prevailing male-dominated institutional cultures in various higher education institutions are to blame for the injustices that are thwarting women’s career advancement. What is evident from all the respondents’ extracts is the outcome of socialization linked to traditions and conventions wherein men are ‘brought up’ with a sense of privilege and superiority.

Gender Bias and Stereotypes

Most respondents mentioned how it is difficult for women academics to achieve promotions because of biases and stereotypes associated with women. Specific references to how culture, traditions, and religion have an impact on exploiting patriarchal norms to control women. A great proportion of respondents blamed culture and traditions for the biassed and unfair position that women find themselves in. Respondents blamed society and the prevailing values that seek to reduce the role of women in society. Society has created and sustained these barriers through the many biases and stereotypes about women. They further mentioned how gender stereotypes are working against women because of what society views as women’s primary roles (supportive and nurturing), whereas men’s roles are decision-making and leadership

Gendered processes in evaluations can influence the career advancement of women in academia. When compared to men, women in the workforce experience many biassed evaluations in their careers because of persistent gender stereotypes that relegate women’s status below that of men (Kela et al., 2024). A previous study that investigated recommendation letters for faculty positions found that women were more likely to be praised and evaluated in terms of their “communal” skills (i.e., collaboration), while men, on the other hand, were evaluated in terms of “agency” (Madera et al., 2009). Work accomplishments, and therefore, the suitability for advancement is perceived in terms of these subtle gender expectations.

“I have had experiences of the glass ceiling where I was not given the opportunity to be a head of department merely because I am a woman. When I arrived in that institution, I was very young and was very motivated to grow as a young woman junior academic, I took up all the opportunities I was given and pushed myself to further my studies which culminated in me obtaining my PhD when I was just 29 years of age. I believe my male superiors at the time were not ready to be led by someone who was younger than them, let alone that I was a woman. That position ended up going to a male colleague instead, even though I had all the requirements for the role”.

Respondent five, supporting the view of respondent 10, argued that the career trajectories of men and women are never the same. For men, it is always easy to be considered for promotion in the workplace. Women are often sidelined for reasons unrelated to their work and educational attainment.

“it’s just a little thing that make it harder for us to get promoted, so you get a woman and a man, same age, same career trajectory but when the promotion opportunity comes, the woman is always going to be in the slightest disadvantage and that promotion will go to the man”.

A few of the respondents shared that there is a certain bias in the people tasked with decision-making in organizations. This biassed outlook of women is maintaining the gender skewness in the senior-level positions. This puts women in a very complicated position where they are susceptible to exploitation and abuse by their male counterparts.

“You find that those who are in decision-making are also very biased and hold various stereotypes against women, so it becomes difficult for women to prosper in this kind of environment. Women are not considered for what they can offer but are viewed in terms of these biased stereotypical lenses”.

Respondent eleven had this to say about the bias that is often visible, and that women themselves put themselves through to make up for the time that they will not be available at work due to domestic and child-rearing responsibilities.

“There’s a little bit of bias that causes women to spend just a little bit more time in the teaching and learning administration because of the course coordinator roles. Because these roles become the purview for women for many reasons, one of them is because women have children, home responsibilities, we want more flexible hours. So, we take these positions that have more responsibilities to kind of back off, to counterbalance the fact that we are not always going to be in the office and always be available for the students as our male colleague. So, we are trying very hard to be very helpful in our departments but as a result there is a slight discrepancy and over a large enough scope”.

The responses from the respondents show that biases and stereotypes against women play an important role in who receives consideration for advancement to leadership positions in organizations. The responses reveal that women’s careers are struggling with little to no room for growth and development. Previous studies are in support of these findings that women are still facing societal stereotypes and gendered norms, which, in turn, curtail women’s career progression (Tabassum & Nayak, 2021). Women have always encountered challenges to career development and advancement due to societal stereotypes and prejudices that relegate the role of women to that of homemakers (Khuzwayo, 2016).

Intersectionality

Intersectionality kept recurring in the respondents’ responses. Gender distribution in academia still faces persistent challenges; women continue to experience fewer opportunities when it comes to ascending the leadership hierarchy. In the context of women in the world of work, intersectionality acknowledges that women’s experiences are shaped by multiple factors such as gender bias, racism, homophobia, transphobia, classism, ableism, and ageism. The findings demonstrate that there is an interplay between sexism, racism, and classism that has exerted a negative ramification on women’s careers. Women of colour and those who are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Intersex (LGBTI) and the disabled have often experienced discrimination as far as promotions are concerned in academia (Muukkonen, 2023).

The majority of the respondents argued about the forms of discrimination that women encounter in the workplace. The respondents mentioned that discrimination against women is based on a variety of things, such as race, gender, sexuality, age, level of education, and class. This points to the layers and intersections that gender inequality often assumes. Often, age provides a crucial lens through which gender discrimination can be considered. In a patriarchal society, men do not want to be led by young women.

“I don’t think it is only gender. It is not restricted to gender. Its age as well. So, I think it’s lot of politics, it’s also about tenure in the organization. There are individuals who have been here longer and who tend to like things done in a certain way. I think it is also colour, the fact that they have been here longer than others, they feel like no one person, especially new recruits, can speak their mind. Some people would rather collaborate with white females or white males as opposed to the other way around”.

A minority of the respondents alluded to the fact that race shapes their experiences in the workplace. Respondent five acknowledges that race poses serious challenges for women aspiring for management positions in organizations. This respondent acknowledges that being White presents one with many privileges that are not so easily attainable for people of other races.

“It is more complex for a black woman than a white woman. Because there is that racial undertone as well. I think what is happening at this stage of my career, as white women, we experience quite a lot. Chances of me progressing to another position are quite slim, I’m aware that. I do not think there is room to grow. The system will not allow me to move up. There are a lot of cultural things that come into play within the work environment. In fact, if you are of a certain age, certain culture, it will be going against certain things you have been brought up to believe and think, not to challenge a man”.

Respondent nine shared the same sentiments that the intersection of experiences produces different forms of discriminatory practices for various people. Stating that the sexuality of an individual has a significant impact on whether that individual will ascend to executive or positions of power within the organizational hierarchy. According to this respondent, people with alternative sexual identities are often sidelined when it comes to career progression in organizations.

“We can start with our women in research initiative, but what worries me is that people of queer or who have alternative sexualities are not given the same attention, and therefore, the same opportunities that are given to female and male genders”.

In support of respondent nine, respondent ten stated that the feminist movements have solely focused on the plight of women, with the exclusion of the LGBTI+ community and that this repeats the very same exclusionary practices that various policies tried to root out.

“There is a strong culture in society of supporting women, women supporting women, which is fantastic. I have often grappled with the question of how people who have alternative gender sexualities can be aided and given due opportunities in the world of work”.

Most respondents supported respondents nine and ten by stating that the patriarchal mindset does not consider alternative identities, which makes people of the LGBTI find it extremely difficult to be accepted and considered for promotions in their organizations. Society, with its biassed outlook, has made it challenging for people with alternative identities to break through the glass ceiling.

“The issue of sexual orientation and how one identifies is a thorny one because one must consider the geographical location of our institution first to make sense of everything. The surrounding environment and community are embedded in patriarchy, so it makes sense if the university does not fully embrace people with alternative identities or sexual orientations”.

Chellappa (2023) concurred with the views of the respondents by stating that women who are different from the majority on multiple dimensions face the greatest inequalities in the workplace. A very small number of the respondents were in consensus and argued that, in addition to gender, there are other dimensions on which hate and discriminatory practices may be directed when you are a woman in the world of work. The issue of sexual orientation featured prominently in the topic of intersectionality. A few respondents shared how the issue of sexual identification is still an issue in academia. Because gender equality propaganda has been focused on cisgender males and cisgender females, people with alternative genders have not been considered and have been largely excluded (Chech, 2022).

The marginalization of people with alternative identities is a serious concern for some respondents. According to these respondents, this overt neglect contravenes the values and ideals enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. The majority of the respondents were very optimistic about the attention and efforts that are aimed at closing gender discrepancies in the world of work but were not content with the pace at which institutions are dealing with the issue of the LGBTI+ communities.

6.2. Managing Career Barriers for Women’s Empowerment in Academia

6.2.1. Policies and Practices

The broad implication of this theme is to understand the appropriate mechanisms required for empowering women against discrimination in the workplace. Following the interrogation, respondents argued for initiatives aimed at closing the gap between male and female representation in upper management positions in academia. From the responses, the study identified two major recurring mechanisms. It also identified appropriate legislation, practices, and continuous engagement. The following sub-themes were identified from the broad theme of policies and practices.

Training and Workshops for Women

Workplace training is seen as a tool with which inequalities could be tackled in society, and more specifically in the workplace. Many respondents recommended that workshops should be used to fight the issue of gender inequality in the workplace. The respondents mentioned awareness-raising training as important in fostering an environment where discrimination is explicitly condemned, such as unconscious bias training and the promotion of diversity and inclusion. This sensitization and education about gender equality were cited as an important enabler for women regaining their confidence in the workplace. These training workshops are aimed at preventing stereotypes from influencing decision-makers’ decisions in the workplace. The basic premise behind these trainings and workshops is that if an individual is made aware that stereotypes create gender bias, that individual may voluntarily change their biassed thinking (Corell, 2017).

“Institutions must have policies and procedures that challenges this, create safe and respectful work environment for women. Establishing writing retreats in this institution proved to be very successful, interventions such as the leadership indaba are also one of the success stories. The university established this to cater for women who aspired to be in leadership roles”.

Respondent seven expressed the positive side of having these workshops and training opportunities for women academics. The respondent stated that it afforded women the opportunity to network and build relations that were hard to establish, given their hectic schedules.

“These offered women the opportunities to network and build relationships that are important for their career progression. Another important initiative would be policies that foster inclusive departmental cultures that value diversity, equity, and tolerance of difference”.

The large constituents of the respondents shared their opinion that the fight against gender-based discrimination starts with training. Training helps women to identify even the subtle forms of discrimination in the workplace. Training in diversity and inclusion is essential if higher education institutions are to eliminate gender discrimination in the workplace.

“If people are provided enough training in issues surrounding gender, I don’t see why gender relations and the emancipation of women academics could fail. It all starts with setting time aside and educates people on the subtle forms of discrimination and allowing women to share their experiences, I am sure this could have the desired effect in the end”.

These trainings and workshops are an important source of knowledge about inclusion and equality matters. The networks and coalitions formed are built on a foundation of solidarity. Solidarity, in this sense, is akin to ‘political solidarity’. That is, not based on similarity but on common goals such as opposing oppression and inequality. The workers come together from different backgrounds and identities for shared goals such as cooperation and the advancement of gender equality. According to Dickens and Womack (2018), training on issues such as diversity and inclusion is effective and allows employees to identify more with their organization.

Family Friendly Policies

Women’s aspirations for advancement to senior management are hindered by a range of structural, societal, and cultural barriers. For example, the sole responsibility of taking care of domestic responsibilities rests with women. This skewed allocation of domestic responsibilities is problematic for women as it deprives them of opportunities for career advancement. The onus lies on the organizations to design family-friendly policies and initiatives that help women with the vast responsibilities imposed on them. The need to reconcile work–life balance for women is important, especially for those women entering the labour market for positions that men predominantly hold.

Human resources must remove all the gender-based barriers that prevent women from flourishing in the workplace. Women remain primarily responsible for their families. The burden of having to balance the two most important spheres of life, including women’s careers and domestic duties, exerts an added pressure on women, leading to women not having time for themselves, suffering from elevated levels of stress and burnout, and being unable to realize their full potential in the workplace. Hence, it becomes important to have family-friendly workplace policies that ease the burden that women must deal with in their striving for executive positions.

The majority of the respondents expressed their disappointment about the lack of policies that are designed to alleviate the struggles that women academics must go through. Human resources should implement these family-friendly policies so that some burden could be lifted off the shoulders of women academics. This will allow women to receive undivided attention for their careers, which will open many doors for them in terms of career progression. Respondent three had the following to say:

“As women we carry a lot of responsibilities, we cannot be fully present at work as most organizations lack family-friendly policies that could make life much easier for us to compete on an equal footing with men. The expectation that women must be the guardian of the domestic sphere is putting a strain on our aspirations for leadership. Had the organizations implemented policies such as flexible working hours and policies that allowed women to work from home, only then would we be free”.

The implementation of family-friendly policies ensures that women can fully participate and accumulate the necessary experience needed to be considered worthy of career progression. For women, it is demotivating to have no policies that deal with this issue. Men are always present, accumulating all the necessary experience and being exposed to organizations, which makes it easier for them to be considered for promotions should there be any vacant positions. This sentiment is shared by respondent six:

“What would make life easier for women right now? I believe having companies implement family-friendly policies such as maternity, paternity, parental leave, and childcare support is the first step to go. I mean women deal with a lot of challenges in their pursuit for acceptance and recognition in the world of work and it becomes difficult to be on the same career trajectory as men as most women at some stages of their careers must be away from work tending to other domestic responsibilities”.

Having these guidelines or procedures in the workplace is one way of offering support to women employees to strike a balance between their work and family responsibilities. Policies such as childcare support are important as almost all women will eventually be away from work to focus on child-rearing duties. Having on-site childcare could be vital for women academics, as this allows them to be fully engaged and present. As many domestic responsibilities lie solely with women, initiatives that help them balance the two opposing spheres are important, such as telecommuting, flexible hours, and compressed workweeks.

Mentorship and Sponsorship Programmes

Most respondents interviewed identified mentoring as an essential project structured around the single promise of empowering women to challenge and question established norms, such as the unfair distribution of labour and leadership. Mentorship has gained significant attention in feminist literature over the years. It is viewed as an important enabler of women’s growth and career advancement. Mentoring is a learning relationship between a mentor and a mentee. Usually, the mentor is a senior, more knowledgeable person in the organization who offers support and guidance to enhance the mentee’s personal and professional development (Rampersad, 2024).

Of crucial importance is the fact that women-to-women mentorship is a much-needed initiative to support the career development of junior women academics in reaching leadership positions in the higher education sphere. As Nickeson (2020) argues, female mentorship is important in enhancing the sense of belonging and confidence of young women. Women-to-women mentorship has been shown by the respondents to be important as they share a social identity with the other women in leadership positions. In line with the above testimonies of respondents, White (1995) noted that organizations must have a pool of senior female mentors; these senior women mentors act as role models for young women entering the workforce. The majority expressed the need for mentorships in pushing for the interests of women academics. According to these respondents, mentorships allow employees to familiarize themselves with the organization and its policies and culture. The respondent also mentioned the need to have women-to-women mentorships.

“Mentorships are important as they allow the new employees to have a feel of the organization and what to expect, but I feel more women must take part in offering women to women mentoring”.

Respondent two shared that women-to-women mentorship is important as women mentors can serve as role models to younger or junior academics. Having a woman mentor helps aspiring women leaders by inspiring and motivating them to pursue their goals. The respondent also mentioned the importance of women who have already broken through the glass ceiling sharing their experiences, adding that this could give valuable insights and guidance for younger women looking to break through the glass ceiling.

“Mentorship is a big one, especially women-to-women mentoring, for example, women already in higher academic positions taking on younger or junior lecturers to follow in their footsteps. Because these women have accomplished and gone through all the hoops and passed all the barriers, it’s more an insight of what to expect so junior academics can be better prepared when they come across the barriers or challenges”.

Respondent four states that women-to-women mentorship is vital for the support and guidance of young women. Few numbers of respondents mentioned the benefits of such an arrangement, including preparing the mentee for the many huddles that will stand in their way. Women-to-women mentorship is essential for addressing gender-specific challenges. Female respondents feel this kind of mentorship could prove to be invaluable, as it gives young mentees the opportunity to receive guidance and ways to navigate gender-specific challenges and biases in the workplace without having to go through it themselves.

“You must have mentorship among women, and you must have women to women mentorship even if the women have a male supervisor. There is a very important reason for this, it’s because of the mental divide we have been socializing into”.

Respondent twelve expressed the need to have female mentors teach and share information about the struggles that will stand in the way of young women’s dreams of ascending to senior management positions. The respondent also mentions the need for mentors to create a safe space where young women mentees could thrive and reach their full potential.

“Mentorships must be provided by women who have successfully negotiated the challenges, these women must create environments that are safe for other women to be adopted into it instead of creating the very same challenges they have experienced themselves”.

Most of the respondents believed that having women leaders participate in mentorship programmes could produce good results for the young women in academia. It could help mentees relate better to the mentors. Many respondents regarded this as a powerful tool with which young women academics could be assisted in aiming for senior leadership positions in organizations. Respondents mention how this relationship could be beneficial for the young mentees; women mentors can inspire and motivate young women to pursue their goals and dreams. They can share experiences and their own personal experiences, successes, and challenges that may inspire other young women academics (Kuagbedzi et al., 2022). Higher Education Resource Services South Africa (2022) agrees with this by viewing mentorship as a platform where both learning and knowledge sharing are crucial for the advancement of women into top leadership positions. Uen et al. (2018) concur with the respondents’ views by stating that women’s mentoring helps to both challenge the deeply entrenched negative views of women and promote gender equality. Women’s mentoring programmes aim to inspire, encourage, and empower young women in all forms of work.

Open Dialogue

A scant number of respondents mentioned the need to have a social dialogue that aims to promote gender equality for women academics and rebuild their lost confidence. Gender equality could be addressed through collective bargaining, where various good practices for dealing with horizontal and vertical occupational segregation affecting women could be discussed and adopted (International Labour Organization—ILO, 2012). One of the respondents felt that one way of breaking the cycle of inequality in the workspace is by having these open dialogues where men are also included, particularly regarding discrimination against women. The only way that this fight could be won is by involving men as part of the solution (Liu, 2023). Respondent two highlighted the importance of having open dialogues about the struggles that women face in the workplace. The respondent believes there is a need to allow women opportunities for free speech and engagement around issues of gender inequality in the workplace.

“It is by having more dialogues but non-judgmental ones and allowing people to articulate what they really feel, whereas everybody is subdued and silent, and I’ve got to be part of the pack. And if you stay out, you will be challenged and won’t get promoted. So, if somebody is different, they are seen as troublemakers, as we saying we are following the SDGs, we are lobbying behind the inclusive policies, but this is not a reality”

A small number of respondents shared the same sentiments by sharing that young women and recruits must be given platforms where they can share their experiences with other employees. This allows women the opportunity to discuss and find ways to minimize the effects of gender-based inequalities that are hampering their career progression in organizations.

“So, institutions got to have their interventions targeted for new, young women as soon as they graduate before these barriers are in place because once they are there it’s difficult to break them down. One way of doing this is by having dialogues where young women can be taught about the struggles that they will face in the workplace. Such honest and open dialogues are meant to equip women with knowledge on how to identify discriminative practices and ways to protect themselves”.

Respondent eight mentions the need to offer women open dialogues as this will help them recognize and understand their own biases, and these have a bearing on others’ behaviours. Open dialogues in this sense foster empathy and understanding. For women to develop a deeper understanding of the challenges they face, they must share their experiences and perspectives.

“More information is to be made available to women, addressing these issues requires that women themselves start viewing themselves in a more positive light. Patriarchy operated by instilling self-doubt and self-degradation in women, so strategies must be focused on reawakening the sense of worth and confidence of women. Open, honest dialogues must be the norm, institutions must invest in offering psycho educational workshops that mainly focuses on women. For a long time, we have been told that we can’t amount to same level as men, in a way, this has sort of been ingrained and left a mark in us. So, to rid of this mentality, women more information and dialogues are needed”.

The majority of the respondents advocate that having proper channels to vent and share experiences is one way of fighting the inequality that affects women academics. A neutral and enabling space for dealing with grievances and finding common ground among women is a positive step toward realizing a just society and, therefore, an equitable workplace.

“The big benefit of these women can talk to each other about our experiences, and we can reflect. Once we reflect, then we can help each other to say if a woman manages to break through the glass ceiling, she can say ‘I did it, and this is how I did it’, it really helps in giving us the confidence to forge forward in the face of the challenges”.

Open and honest dialogues are seen as an effective way to eliminate segregation, gender stereotypes, and promote gender equality in the workplace. The respondents mentioned how these dialogues could be an important tool with which organizations, unions, and other social institutions could address the issue of inequality (International Labour Organization—ILO, 2012). Women respondents felt that the negative stereotypes and beliefs that men and society hold about women have been internalized by women to the point where women must seek the approval of men in everything. The workshops will be aimed at training these women academics, especially new graduates, to instil a sense of pride and assertiveness among them.

7. Discussion of Findings

The ongoing commentaries on gender discrimination and barriers in career progression for women academics in the higher education context have continued to persist without a clear solution to the prolonged marginalization of women in higher education leadership. This challenge, particularly in the African context, is rooted in cultural norms that do not appreciate the progression of women to leadership positions, perhaps hindered by socio-cultural barriers. The study established that gender-based inequalities that prevent women academics from breaking the glass ceiling in the higher education sector, several conclusions can be drawn from the respondents’ perspectives, which pertain to the first objective. The findings indicated that a vast majority of challenges that prevent women from advancing in their careers emanate from the larger society and socio-cultural factors that are intricately linked with patriarchy, gender bias, and stereotypes (Berdahl et al., 2018).

The study showed that gender discrimination is intricately linked to the prevailing patriarchal mindset, which suggests that women are not natural leaders and therefore are expected to be subordinate to men (Khuzwayo, 2016). Commentaries from the findings support that the patriarchal mindset is an extension of societal and cultural norms that expect women to submit to men. Makhuba (2017) thesis cements the ideology of patriarchy infused in the social institutions such as schools, religious organizations, and work organizations. Social structural arrangements of society are largely to blame for gender inequalities that are crippling women’s contributions in the world of work. Patriarchal ideology has led men to believe that they are the custodians of all power and that women must allow men to take the reins of headship.

Women struggle to advance in the world of work because of the patriarchal beliefs about women not being adept in certain roles outside the home. Considering the above sentiment, Makhuba (2017) argued that women are made to feel like second-class citizens because they are often relegated to positions that are not fulfilling. The findings suggest that patriarchy is deeply entrenched in tradition and culture, and as such, is ingrained in social institutions such as work organizations. This finding is consistent with previous research findings on the intersection between patriarchy and gender inequality (Moodly, 2024). This implies that achieving a just and equitable gender representation in management positions requires a thorough interrogation of these social institutions using democratic and legal avenues, as suggested by the liberal feminism ideology.

Another interesting finding concerns gender bias and stereotypes that have been levelled against women in society and, by extension, in the workplace. These stereotypical lenses through which women are viewed not only deal with the supposed differences but also influence how women are treated. The findings suggest that women are left in the margins because of biassed ideas about what it means to be a woman. The respondents shared that compared to men, women in the workforce experience many biassed evaluations in their careers because of persistent gender stereotypes that relegate women’s status below that of men (Davis & Maldonado, 2015).

The study also recognized the importance of applying an intersectional lens to fully understand gender discrimination and the impact it has on the lives of women. When it comes to gender discrimination, the respondents were in unison that discrimination is not only about gender. Findings indicated that women are impacted by different forms of social inequalities such as racism, sexism, age, homophobia, and classism. These different forms of social inequalities intersect and overlap, creating unique experiences of discrimination and marginalization (Kela et al., 2024). The study further revealed that in the context of women in the workplace, an intersectional lens acknowledges that women’s experiences are shaped by multiple factors.

What is interesting is the recognition that not all gender inequality is a result of men discriminating against women (Abbas et al., 2021). The respondents agreed that there are instances where women discriminate against other women in the workplace. Masculine culture and gender stereotypes can be attributed to the reasons why women leaders often move away from other junior women in the workplace. The decision by women leaders to work against other women can be attributed to their own experiences of discrimination and their need to demonstrate that they are not soft and emotional, as women have been stereotypically described. It was also recognized that the organizational cultures in male-dominated environments promote women who adhere to masculine leadership characteristics (Francis & Stulz, 2020).

The findings also painted a picture of a gap in terms of leadership and management training in the higher education space. There have been initiatives that have been implemented, such as the Higher Educational Leadership and Management and the Women in Leadership programmes, but the findings of this study revealed that this is not enough, as training for women has been a recurring theme in the findings. The findings revealed there is a need to offer women academics support in terms of mentorships and training tailored to the promotion and empowerment of women in the academic space (Francis & Stulz, 2020). Providing training would enhance and nurture the leadership capabilities of women to address the systemic barriers that have been at play in the marginalization of women in higher education institutions.

The lack of female role models and mentorship opportunities for women is perpetuating the gender inequalities that are affecting women in academia. This sustains and maintains the glass ceiling, as women are often marginalized even in the informal networks where they could learn a lot from their peers. Powell (2018) agrees with this, stating that male mentors in higher education are prejudiced against women mentees. This raises a serious question about where women should receive mentorship, especially when the men who are entrusted with the provision of mentorship are the ones who possess stereotypes and prejudices against women employees in academia.

While a previous study by Blanchard and Blanchard (2022) argued that women are least represented in higher education institutions’ senior management positions because of their attitudes and psychological traits. In contrast, this study’s findings found that the lack of women in senior management positions is a result of factors such as socio-cultural and organizational dynamics. These factors work in unison to hinder women’s career progression and prevent women from climbing the hierarchical ladder in the workplace. Reis and Grady (2020) affirm the above sentiments by arguing that mentorship is important in the higher education sector as it equips women with knowledge and skills to overcome gender-related challenges.

The results reflect that women’s responsibilities do not end when the workday is over, as women must face the difficulties of striking a balance between work and life responsibilities. The study takes the locus that this concern warrants the implementation of family-friendly policies that would help women employees navigate through this maze of responsibilities. The study noted that the difficulty in reconciling the work–life roles is negatively impacting women’s ability to excel, grow, and move upward in their careers. Women are expected to be primary caretakers of the family, and this hinders their ability to be fully invested in their work roles (Chech, 2022). This study’s findings revealed that the lack of family-friendly policies is hampering women’s chances of ascending to upper management positions is consistent with the findings of various studies that have investigated the challenges that hinder women’s career progression (Feeney & Stritch, 2017).

The importance of having social dialogues and sensitization forums that would help women challenge the gender disparities in the workplace. One of the recommendations by the respondents was that this coming together will deliver the much-needed gender-equality outcomes, as it would force men to realize just how they perpetuate the gender inequalities in the workplace. In support of the above finding, Moodly (2024) emphasized that the fight against gender inequality should be a collaborative and concerted effort from both men and women.

While women’s emancipation from patriarchal and gender norms remained one of the salient pathways for addressing cultural barriers in career progression, it is important to understand this through the Liberal Feminist theoretical framing. We argued and anchored the findings on the Liberal Feminist perspectives, which recognize the democratic and legal institutions as having the legislative power to guarantee women equal access to previously male-dominated positions of power and leadership, through policies and legislation enactments. We argued that for gender inequality to evolve, the tenet of the Liberal Feminist ideals must be directed at societal practices and social institutions like education, government, organizations and the economy, as they play a significant role in perpetuating gender inequality. This is important since these organizations are a microcosm of the larger society in which they are found.

We also argued that higher institutions’ policy on training programmes must be flexible for women and build confidence as they navigate the complex relationship between work and life. For instance, our argument is anchored on granting the same capacity development initiatives for women and men for clear career path progression. While family responsibilities are evidence of a glass ceiling barrier for women, especially in a patriarchal society, the Liberal Feminist supports ending these unequal responsibilities and calls for equal responsibilities that are sustainable for women’s career progression. Lastly, we argued that if real change in gender equality is envisioned, concerted effort by all stakeholders must be directed at changing the ideologies, attitudes and beliefs of social institutions through appropriate policies and laws.

8. Conclusions

The work environment, as a microcosm of society, is infused with fallacious, sexist, and biassed gender norms that make it difficult for women to break through the glass ceiling. Gender bias and stereotypes exert a significant impact on how women are viewed in society and, to an extent, in the workplace. This stereotypical and biassed outlook of women was highlighted as posing a significant contribution to women not being given equal opportunities in leadership roles in the workplace. Factors such as race, class, gender identity, age, and sexual orientation were noted as equally responsible for the discrimination that is being directed against women. The study established that patriarchy is responsible for the discrimination that is projected against women in society and the workplace. The slow progression of women academics is attributable to the deeply entrenched gender norms and stereotypes that are perpetuated by patriarchal systems. Stereotypes such as the notion that women are not suitable for leadership roles pose a significant impact on women who aspire to leadership roles in organizations. Intersectionality was found to be one of the factors that contribute to the inequality that affects women in academia. Accordingly, it is not only gender but a host of other factors that present women with challenges in breaking the glass ceiling. The study found that there is an intersectionality of factors that create a complex myriad of oppression for women in academia. Related to the theme of intersectionality is the challenge of hostility and degradation from other women in positions of power. The study concluded that mentorships form an important component in women’s careers. There is an important need for the introduction of mentorships in academia to successfully address the low numbers of women in leadership positions. It was established that women in academia face challenges that make it difficult for them to build effective mentoring relationships with male mentors.

The study recommends the provision of training that focuses on gender issues, leadership skills, legislation, and ways to mitigate the impact of gender inequality. Continuous education and training are important in enlightening employees about different forms of discrimination and the various ways to minimize the impacts on women’s careers. Higher education must ensure that managing gender discrimination and barriers associated with the glass ceiling are addressed through dialogues and measures that promote opportunities for women’s development. Organizational policies and strategic plans must provide clear and concise guidance on how to respond to gender inequality problems that women experience in the workplace. The mentee-mentor relationship is crucial in imparting and sharing vital organizational information that is a prerequisite for women leaders to succeed. For instance, mentors help women to acquire the confidence needed to tackle various tasks that improve their chances for career progression. The South African government, through the Department of Education, can develop a nationwide programme in higher institutions of learning that supports peer mentorship groups for women to collectively share experiences and strategies that support one another against cultural and gender barriers in career progression. The department should also develop institution wide standardized framework that defines mentorship goals and expectations towards addressing inequality against women in the higher education space.

Policies such as flexible working arrangements could be important for women who seek a balance between their family responsibilities and their work. This freedom allows women to attend both work and important life spheres without compromising either. The human resource department must be willing to do more regarding policies that support women balancing work and other family responsibilities. For instance, the human resource management department must give women academics consideration that supports investing in quality and affordable childcare services, including workplace child centres, promote work cultures that normalize caregiving responsibilities for women academics and promote programmes that support women re-entering the workforce after caregiving breaks. The success of these initiatives can be evaluated periodically by assessing the rate of promotions and leadership roles for women academics, the growth in mentees, grants, awards, publications, and general career progression, as well as a decrease in gender discrimination complaints.

9. Limitations of the Study and Further Studies

The use of a single university is narrowed to a demographic group. As a result, findings may not be easily generalized to different contexts and/or to other universities in the country. Future research can focus on more than one higher education institution in South Africa. This will provoke divergent views and perspectives from different institutions. The study relied on a small sample size for in-depth exploration of the research phenomenon. While this is in support of the traditions of qualitative research, it no doubt introduced a limitation in terms of the breadth of perspectives. In essence, the small sample size raises the risk of bias, with the views and perspectives of the broader population not being fully represented. Future studies can attempt this challenge through a quantitative approach where a large sample size can be employed, or a comparative analysis of both the qualitative and quantitative approaches. Lastly, the study recognizes the limitation of referrals for interviews and the challenge of social desirability bias, where responses might have been provided in respondents’ own thoughts rather than the true nature of events. Despite these limitations, the study hopes to contribute to the intricate issue of gender discrimination and the glass ceiling effect, particularly from the prism of women academics’ career progression.