In many research and academic environments, traits traditionally associated with masculinity, such as competitiveness and dominance, are often valued more highly than criteria like collaboration, empathy, and inclusivity. In these environments, "success" is typically measured by criteria like the number of papers published in top conferences or journals, receiving research grants, and winning individual awards. This narrow-minded approach can influence how research is conducted and the significance of individuals' work, marginalizing those who do not conform to these standards.
We often hear that science is a meritocracy, meaning that an individual's success is proportional to their abilities and personal achievements. However, this is not always true. Michael Sandel, in his book "The Tyranny of Merit", argues that meritocracy can actually reinforce existing inequalities because it overlooks structural disparities, gives a false sense of equality and fairness, and downplays the role of collective work. Moreover, this approach can foster a sense of superiority and inherent privilege among those who succeed while creating feelings of humiliation and inadequacy among those who do not meet the existing criteria for success. In academic and scientific research environments, what is considered "merit" and "success", such as a strong publication record or obtaining research grants, is often heavily influenced by factors beyond an individual's control, which is overlooked by the meritocratic approach.
We can investigate this issue from the lens of intersectional feminism. Intersectional feminism helps us understand how the intersection of various forms of discrimination, such as gender, racial, class, and other forms of discrimination, affect individuals' experiences and success. Recognizing these barriers, discriminations, and their intersections can help us create more equitable and inclusive research environments and challenge the prevalent and restrictive definitions of "success" shaped by masculinist and meritocracy criteria. In their book "Data Feminism," Catherine D'Ignazio and Lauren Klein, from this perspective, propose the idea of "co-liberation" in data science and present the concept of mutual empowerment and collective success as opposed to individual success or meritocracy. This approach shifts the focus from individual achievements to collective outcomes, enabling us to redefine the concept of "success" in scientific research. Success that goes beyond individual honors and achievements to consider other criteria such as collective results, building trust, and promoting collaboration and empathy.
To redefine the concept of "success" in research groups based on an intersectional feminist approach and with the goal of co-liberation, we must address power dynamics and dominance in working relationships. Patricia Hill Collins introduces the factors influencing power in society through the "matrix of domination" and considers the intersection of four domains—disciplinary, hegemonic, interpersonal, and structural—as forming power relations in society. In order to make effective changes in research groups toward creating a more equitable and inclusive environment, we need to define targeted activities in each domain, some of which are discussed below.
Disciplinary Domain
This domain refers to how laws and procedures are implemented and enforced, which maintain or reinforce power dynamics and inequalities. In a research group, addressing this domain involves reshaping the implementation of procedures that determine how things are done, how people are involved in projects, and how their success or failure is evaluated. Some practical steps in this domain to address these issues include:
Redefining what is considered research success and expanding it beyond criteria such as increasing accuracy or efficiency to include factors such as the social impact of the research, its outcomes for marginalized groups, the level of community engagement, consideration of justice-oriented and anti-discrimination criteria, and the trust it can build within the team during the work and between society and researchers after completion.
Establishing regular workshops to encourage the creation of research practices focused on critical thinking about one's position, biases, and power dynamics to raise awareness of how dominant backgrounds and norms influence research outcomes.
Creating platforms and networks that promote equal collaboration within the research group, such as providing opportunities for sharing knowledge, opinions, and criticisms, and ensuring that all members, especially those who are often marginalized and from underrepresented groups, can have a fair role in decision-making.
Creating intragroup platforms and networks to expand education on equitable, anti-discriminatory, inclusive, and critical research methods.
Creating safe and inclusive research spaces and ensuring that the physical and social environments within the research group are usable and accessible to all, e.g., facilities for people with physical disabilities.
Hegemonic Domain
This domain refers to the common beliefs and behaviors that justify or normalize unequal and discriminatory treatment of different groups. The following steps can help dismantle these disorders and move us toward a more just and equitable environment.
Encouraging and supporting individuals from underrepresented groups to participate in leadership roles to ensure that diverse perspectives are included in shaping the direction of research work.
Implementing transparent and fair policies to recognize the contributions of all individuals involved in projects and writing papers so that the roles of all members are recognized and valued.
Creating mentoring programs that connect younger individuals, especially those from underrepresented groups, with more experienced individuals to build a support network to identify and address the challenges these individuals face.
Providing training workshops on topics such as unconscious biases, equality, and inclusivity for all group members to raise awareness of how hegemonic norms operate.
Encouraging participatory research methods and challenging existing traditional hierarchies in research to produce more inclusive knowledge.
Interpersonal Domain
This domain encompasses how people behave and interact with each other in daily life and work based on their identities, which often reflect broader structural inequalities in society. In a research group, addressing the interpersonal domain involves promoting mutual respect, equality, and inclusivity in everyday interactions. Some practical steps in this domain include:
Strengthening open and respectful communication and establishing norms and procedures so all members can express their ideas, experiences, and concerns without worry.
Developing mentoring programs that address the specific needs of individuals from underrepresented groups, such as providing advice on raising awareness about racial, gender, and other identity issues.
Promoting a culture where contributions and collaborations, even the smallest ones, are recognized and valued.
Educating and encouraging members to extend solidarity, where individuals with privilege or higher positions actively support their less-privileged colleagues in various situations (e.g., during discussions).
Organizing regular informal gatherings or activities that help build relationships among group members, such as social and recreational events that focus on topics outside of work.
Structural Domain
This domain refers to how laws and structures are organized and how they shape and reinforce unequal opportunities among individuals. Practical actions in this domain should address systemic inequalities that affect participation in research projects, success evaluation, and access to resources. Some practical steps in this domain include:
Making recruitment and hiring processes fairer and more inclusive, so that in addition to evaluating specialized skills, factors such as equity, inclusivity, and prioritizing underrepresented groups are also considered.
Establishing transparent and equitable processes for resource allocation among group members, with special opportunities considered for individuals from underrepresented groups.
Implementing policies that consider individuals' specific needs, such as flexible working arrangements and parental leave.
Providing opportunities for career promotion that are accessible to all, such as offering mentoring programs and defining clear and fair criteria for promotion that account for the diversity of individuals and forms of scientific contribution.
Implementing quotas or guidelines to ensure the representation of individuals from various groups, particularly underrepresented ones, in decision-making bodies.
Conducting regular evaluations and reviews of the group's procedures, structures, and outcomes in relation to diversity, equity, and inclusivity.