Stumbling backwards

The Integrity Office has done an excellent job in bringing the Mindlab theatre production – a play about social safety in academia – to TU Delft. It resonated with those who have personally experienced socially inappropriate behaviour, while confronting others. After the performance, someone asked me in disbelief whether such things really happen. The play reminded me of the documentary Picture a Scientist, which tells the disheartening stories of several women in science. If the report by the Dutch Inspectorate of Education does not answer the question, then this documentary certainly does.

The Plan for Change submitted by TU Delft to the Inspectorate devotes only nine lines to gender issues. There is no acknowledgement of the undeniable link between social safety and the so-called glass ceiling, where a predominantly male culture at the top hinders female scientists from progressing into leadership positions. As long as this culture remains unchanged, they will remain in a vulnerable position. Many leave, some quit altogether. It is not without reason that the Works Council advocates for better gender balance in management teams, and that the Dutch Network of Women Professors (LNVH) is committed to increasing the percentage of female professors.

In this context, I do not find the response of Hans Hellendoorn – who is temporarily taking over the duties of former Executive Board member Rob Mudde – particularly encouraging. When asked what advice he has for female colleagues not breaking through the glass ceiling, the answer wasn’t really encouraging: “If something doesn’t seem right or fair, you need to discuss it with a colleague, manager or confidential advisor.” He urges patience as “careers tend to develop slowly, mostly over a period of about 40 years.”

The Irene Curie programme has proven effective and could be directly transferred to TU Delft

The TU Delft gender equality plan also gives little cause for optimism. It is nothing more than a webpage with a statement lacking any real vision. And when you compare it to the formal requirements set by the Horizon 2020 European research and innovation funding programme, it is clear that TU Delft does not meet these standards (see the box below). The only target figure – the 25% norm for female professors – is effectively meaningless. While the overall balance among academic staff is improving, the percentage of female professors has barely increased in the last five years, from 16.1% to 18.6%. TU Delft has lagged behind the rest of the Netherlands for years.

Thanks to the successful Irene Curie programme, the percentage of female professors at TU Eindhoven increased from 15.4% to 22.7% over the same period. It is not just a well-designed programme, there is also genuine, broad-based commitment. Just take a look at Eindhoven’s detailed gender equality plan and the comprehensive onboarding programme in the Irene Curie initiative.

In a recent interview, Mudde stated that he did not see the need to introduce an Irene Curie-like programme at TU Delft: after all, things are going well and we have the Delft Technology Fellowship (DTF). In contrast to Groningen, which has a comparable programme, the Executive Board is not transparent about the effectiveness of the DTF programme. The Irene Curie programme, on the other hand, has proven effective and could be directly transferred to TU Delft. Unlike the DTF, it is a tool that allows gender diversity to be actively managed at the departmental level.

The DTF programme has been discontinued due to budget cuts. But leadership vision and decisiveness are needed precisely in times of financial constraints and a growing anti-gender movement. The Executive Board never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

TU/e has confirmed that the Irene Curie programme will continue.