Tag Archives: organizational psychology

Hypermasculine organisations and barriers to women’s career progression in Nigeria

Dr Vanessa Iwowo shares the findings from her latest research into gender inequality in the workplace in Nigeria.

Discussions around the barriers to women’s career progression are not new to the public agenda, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, which has highlighted the unequal division of domestic labour and caring responsibilities in the home.

However, the majority of research in this area has been developed in the global north and thus overlooks the significance of specific economic, social and cultural conditions that exist in other contexts.

With my colleagues Toyin Ajibade Adisa (University of East London), Chima Mordi and Ruth Simpson (Brunel University), I sought to uncover the specific barriers facing women’s career progression in Nigeria.

Why Nigeria? Often referred to as the “giant of Africa”, the country is notable both for its economic prosperity and entrenched patriarchal values. The barriers to women advancing their careers in Nigeria could have wider implications for gender equality in the global south.

Gender inequality and Social Dominance Theory

Despite legislation which supports gender equality and Nigeria’s participation in international agreements to eliminate gender discrimination, the problem persists. Prior research into 190 Nigerian companies found that just 10.5% of board seats are held by women. In the civil service, where women account for 24% of the workforce, they hold less than 14% of overall management positions.

Examined through the lens of Social Dominance Theory (SDR), which purports that social groups are hierarchically positioned, we see how cultural ideologies and institutional discrimination work together to produce group-based inequality. A gender-based hierarchy dominates, where men are consistently favoured, gaining disproportionate positive social and material value at the expense of the subordinate group, women.

This group-based oppression is driven by systemic individual and institutional discrimination and supported by stereotypes, attitudes and beliefs which dictate the norms that govern institutions. These hierarchies are especially hard to break down as they are embedded in social systems.

Challenges to career advancement faced by women in Nigeria

Entrenched stereotypical attitudes about the role of women in Nigeria means that management and leadership are viewed as the exclusive domain of men, while women are seen to belong in the domestic sphere.

This hypermasculine context only serves to exacerbate the barriers faced by women in their careers. In interviews with 43 women working in the five major administrative capitals of Nigeria, we identified three key barriers to progression at work:

Systemic and excessive male-group-based domination

Every woman that we spoke to identified a bias in recruitment and promotion decisions in their organisation, which inhibits women’s progression to more senior roles. An approach based on merit is overruled by a preference for a male candidate, regardless of capability. What is more, this bias is openly acknowledged, with the allocation of male candidates to senior roles seen as a foregone conclusion.

Corruption and the exchange of favours

The vast majority of women that we spoke to (39 out of 43 interviewees) had personally encountered corruption in the workplace in the form of “godfatherism”, the practice wherein a woman is expected to exchange money or sexual favours for progression in the workplace.

The consequences of godfatherism are both devastating and wide-reaching: either a woman is cut off from career advancement, or she is coerced into a sexual relationship in order to progress. Such is the commonality of this practice, that the promotion of a woman is often associated with this exchange in the eyes of employees.

Domestic responsibilities

The expectation that women will take full responsibility for domestic arrangements is entrenched from a young age, when girls are made to take on household responsibilities while boys are left to play. A few women also reported being overlooked for a university education in the family, due to the assumption that this was an unnecessary expense for them to fulfil their predetermined roles as wives and mothers.

A unique national context

Our research suggests that Nigerian women are being held back in their careers by discrimination and corruption particular to their national context, such as entrenched patriarchal values, assumptions about the role of women and ingrained cultural and religious beliefs.

While male dominance and barriers to women’s career progression are not unique to Nigeria, the way in which patriarchal structures are embedded across all systems and institutions is particular to the national context.

For example, there are some potential commonalities to be drawn between godfatherism and the western #MeToo movement. However, where corruption in the west is widely challenged, godfatherism is normalised. Indeed, it forms part of a wider cultural context in which it is seen as fundamentally “un-African” for a woman to lead.

Aside from denying women the right to self-actualization and economic independence, hypermasculine organisations which exploit and enforce entrenched gender roles are limited by a lack of diversity in the workforce. Social Dominance Theory would suggest that the way to overcome these barriers is through challenging the status quo and “mainstreaming” hierarchy-attenuating attitudes from non-dominant groups. A deeper understanding of these attitudes and how they manifest in the workplace may go some way towards challenging entrenched beliefs and practices and working towards a more equal future.

This blog is based on the paper ‘Social dominance, hypermasculinity and career barriers in Nigeria’ in Gender, Work & Organization.

Further Information

Health education for classical musicians

1 Reply

Could compulsory health education at UK conservatoires improve the health and wellbeing of classical musicians? Dr Raluca Matei of Birkbeck’s Department of Organizational Psychology shares the findings of two studies conducted with Jane Ginsborg, Juliet Goldbart, and Stephen Broad.

Picture of classical musicians

Despite rating job satisfaction very highly, many classical musicians also suffer for their art. In the largest survey to date (Fishbein et al., 1988), 76% of players reported a medical problem severe enough to impair performance. The most prevalent were musculoskeletal, affecting the shoulder, neck and back, however, they also reported acute anxiety, depression, and sleep disturbances.

More recent research shows that musicians experience hearing loss (O’Brien et al., 2014), visual problems (Beckers et al., 2016), and eating disorders (Kapsetaki and Easmon, 2017). There is a higher prevalence of insomnia and psychological distress among musicians than in the general population and they may be more likely to use psychotherapy and psychotropic drugs such as sedatives, antidepressants, hypnotics and/or medication for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (Vaag et al., 2016a,b,c).

Compulsory health education for music students

Our studies (Matei et al., 2018; Matei & Ginsborg, 2021) sought to find out if we could empower musicians to improve their health through a conservatoire-based health education course. The course was delivered to first-year undergraduate music students at a UK music conservatoire. The aims of the studies were:

To explore students’ hearing and use of hearing protection
To design an evidence-based health education course
To assess the effects of the course on primary outcomes (perceived knowledge of course content and knowledge and awareness of potential risks to health) and secondary outcomes (including general health, health-related quality of life, health-promoting behaviors, self-efficacy, emotional state, perceived stress, frequency and severity of playing related musculoskeletal disorders (PRMDs), and perceived exertion)
To assess the students’ feedback on the overall impact of the course; its perceived benefits and limitations; changes in students’ views and behaviours; and suggestions for improvements to the course
To identify the topics within the course that were most salient to students

Unlike previous studies, which provide little information as to how curricula were designed and whether formative methodologies were used, the course curriculum was informed by findings of research on music performance anxiety (MPA) and PRMDs; the findings of evaluations of other courses designed to improve musicians’ health; theories and models deriving from health psychology (Taylor, 2012); discussions with the Acting Head of Undergraduate Studies at the institution where some of the authors are based; and members of the Healthy Conservatoires Network.

The course formed the major component of a module entitled Artist Development 1, compulsory for all first-year students at a tertiary-level music conservatoire in the UK. The module took place over the first and second terms of the academic year and consisted of ten weekly 1-hour lectures delivered to the whole cohort (104 students) and eight weekly 1-hour seminars delivered to ten small groups of 10–15 students. The course covered not only physical and mental health, but also effective strategies for practicing, memorizing and rehearsing, and life skills and behavior-change tools inspired by health psychology.

Students were required to submit a portfolio of assessments including a 1,000-word essay in response to both the following questions: (1) Looking back on the Health and Wellbeing component of Artist Development 1, what new information, useful for your own music-making, have you learned from one lecture or one workshop/seminar?; (2) How have you been able to put this information into practice when making music (e.g., practicing, rehearsing, performing or studying more generally)?

Course evaluation

A mixed-methods approach to evaluation was adopted: quantitative analyses of data gathered at baseline and post-intervention, and between-group data (intervention vs. controls) (Matei et al., 2018); and qualitative, semi-structured interviews (Matei & Ginsborg, 2021).

In terms of hearing, tinnitus and hyperacusis were reported by both groups of respondents, with a higher incidence in the (third-year) control group than in the (first-year) intervention group. Ten percent of the intervention group had been diagnosed with hearing loss, although minorities of respondents in both groups reported having had hearing tests in the previous ten years.

Although respondents were more likely to use hearing protection when rehearsing with others and attending concerts, comparatively few members of either group used hearing protection, or, if appropriate, the mute on their instrument, while practicing alone. This could affect hearing, since private practice can cause over-exposure to risky levels of sound.

The qualitative analysis showed that respondents viewed the programme as relevant and informative and appreciated the intimate nature of the seminars. They reported increased knowledge of the topics covered in the course, including the sound intensity levels associated with hearing loss and how to deal with the health and safety issues associated with learning and playing a musical instrument. They also reported increased awareness of performance factors related to potential musculoskeletal injuries. The ratings of students who had taken the course and those who had not did not differ significantly, perhaps because the control group had had informal exposure to the other topics covered in the course, with the possible exception of life skills and behavior change techniques.

Students who had taken the course also rated their ability to deal with relevant health and safety issues significantly higher than controls. The programme seemed to widen their perspective on musicianship, and students also reported instances of change in their behaviours relating to both lifestyle and management of music practice.

In contrast, the only desired secondary outcome to increase significantly from baseline to post-intervention was self-efficacy, which may or may not have been the result of the course. Other significant increases were in the wrong direction: sleep problems, distress and lack of vitality all increased significantly from baseline to post-intervention, and controls experienced more severe depression, distress and lack of vitality.

We attribute these negative findings to the cumulative pressure on students over time. The first time the intervention group completed the questionnaire, they were in their second week at the conservatoire; post-intervention, they were facing deadlines for assignments to be submitted and recitals to be given. They may, however, have fared better than the control group simply by virtue of being a year younger. What we cannot know is the extent to which the health education course may have mitigated the demands perceived by the students in the intervention group.

Finally, from the topics covered in student assignments, it appears that managing MPA and behavior change techniques are of most interest or relevance to them at this point in their studies. In terms of improving the course further, students expressed a preference for an even more practical and thus less theoretical approach.

Conclusions

In the absence of a national curriculum for health, all institutions of higher education must develop their own approaches to health education, as do many university music departments and music conservatoires. The questions posed by Ralph Manchester in 2006 remain pertinent: “Who will develop this course? What topics will be included in the syllabus? Who will teach it? Will it be offered to freshmen or seniors, or can it be taken during any year? Can one course meet the needs of performance majors, music education majors, and others? Should we develop some minimal national requirements?” (Manchester, 2006, pp. 95–96).

Further questions could be asked, such as: When can a course be considered successful? What are its desired outcomes? How should they be measured? Once the content and delivery of a course have been evaluated, how should they be adjusted, if necessary? To what extent should students’ requirements and feedback be taken into consideration, given the available evidence and the need, on occasion, to challenge their beliefs? Very few health courses have been formally evaluated to date, and reports of those that have been evaluated do not say how the course was improved as a result.

Although it has been argued for the last 25 years that health education for musicians should be evidence-based (Zaza, 1993), the declarations and recommendations fail to mention the importance of evidence-based teaching. There is now a wealth of research on musicians’ playing-related health problems, and their management, but unless this is disseminated effectively to senior managers and educators, instrumental and vocal tutors, and students, there is a risk that conservatoires will maintain traditional practices rather than responding systematically to the best evidence available.

The topic of how music students, too, can be convinced that health education is a vital part of their training remains largely unexplored. Framing the objectives of health education courses as “performance-enhancing” rather than “preventative” is likely to be more attractive to students.

Although the course described in the present studies did not have the hoped-for impact on secondary outcomes including reported health-related behaviors, reduced PRMDs and stress, it was associated with improvements in primary outcomes relevant to health education, namely the perceived knowledge of topics covered in the course and awareness of health risks.

Furthermore, the studies themselves represent the first evaluation of a health education course for musicians that documents the process of designing the course on the basis of a rigorous assessment of the available evidence, and its incorporation in the “real world” context of a music conservatoire.

Further Information

Supporting sustainable return to work

Understanding the barriers to sustainable return to work

Our study was the first to our knowledge to follow workers post-return using a qualitative approach. We used the recently developed IGLOO framework in our research: examining the Individual, Group, Leader, Organisational and Overarching (IGLOO) contextual factors (Nielsen, Yarker, Munir & Bültmann, 2018) that influence workers with CMDs’ ability to remain in employment throughout working life.

We conducted interviews with 38 workers who had returned from long-term sick leave due to CMDs, the majority of whom we spoke to at multiple points following their return. We’d originally planned to follow workers in the first months after return, however, after being contacted by workers who still experienced challenges long after return, we decided to include these too. We also spoke to twenty line managers with experience managing returning workers.

Our findings

Participants reported a number of resources, in and outside of work, that helped them stay and be productive at work.

Resources at work across the five IGLOO levels help employees stay and be productive at work:

Individual: Creating structure within their working day to help maintain focus and concentration.
Group: Gaining feedback on tasks from colleagues, help with challenging tasks and being treated as before, not as someone with a CMD.
Leader: Agreement of communication to colleagues, continued support and access to work adjustments, and signaling (and being) available but not intrusive.
Organisational: Flexible working practices and leave policies, accommodating absenteeism policies, work-focused counselling, and demonstrating care through support.
Overarching context: This level was not applicable as we only examined UK workplaces.

Resources at home across the five IGLOO levels help employees stay and be productive at work:

Individual: Prioritising self-care and the establishment of clear boundaries between work and leisure.
Group: Understanding and non-judgmental support from friends and family.
Links to services: Consistent point of contact and facilitation of links to external services and treatment.
Organisational: Access to work-focused counselling.
Overarching context: Those who were financially independent were able to make choices that better suited their needs; the majority reported the positive media attention around mental health enabled them to ask for help.

The main results of our study point to important avenues for future research and practice. Within the workplace, the findings highlight the need to:

Consider resources at all IGLOO levels and implement multi-level interventions.
Train returned workers in how to structure their day.
Train and support line managers, both in having difficult situations but also on how to support workers creating structure and support them manage their workload.
Develop more information about appropriate work adjustments that can be implemented and how these can be accessed.
Offer flexibility to the returning employee, in relation to work schedule, ad hoc flexibility when depleted to prevent further decline and aid recovery, and flexibility in tasks.
Adopt an individual approach as there is no off-shelf-style that works for all.
Adopt a long term approach, ensuring that employees are able to access adjustments in the months and years that follow.
Conduct further research to enable us to understand the contribution of these features and their synergistic effect on enabling returned employees to remain productive at work.

Outside the workplace, the findings highlight the need to:

Conduct further research to better model the impact of support received from friends and family, GP services and those within the voluntary sector.
Equip GP services with the skills and knowledge to support return to work.

We developed guidance for employees, colleagues, line managers and HR professionals to support returned workers to thrive at work. This and our full report can be found on the Affinity Health at Work website.