Study title

In total, 69 engineers (40 men, 29 women) were studied, through observation and/or interviews. (A further 6 background interviews were conducted with University of Edinburgh engineers and HR staff in engineering companies.) 50 of these engineers were interviewed (26 men, 24 women), 15 of whom did not work in the case study firms. Of the 54 engineers who were studied as part of the ethnographic cases (34 men, 20 women), 23 were job shadowed (14 men, 9 women) and 28 were closely observed without being job shadowed (18 men, 10 women). In total, 28 interviews were taped and transcribed. This research sought to investigate any ‘taken-for-granted’ gender dynamics which may impair the retention and progression of women engineers. It asked: (how) is engineering more comfortable to, and supportive of, men engineers than women engineers? 69 engineers (40 men, 29 women) were studied using ethnographic methods of observation (job shadowing, in three sectors) and/or interviews. The central contribution of this work lies in the detailed evidence about how engineering practices, cultures and identities are gendered/gendering. Gender is performed and constituted as an integral part of complex processes of becoming and belonging in engineering. Membership is manifest not only in shared socialisation into the profession, but also in workplace cultures, in ways that extend far beyond the job and professional identity. These cultures tend to favour particular masculinities – for example, through topics of conversation and humour and marginalise other genders. Alongside very real gender change and diversity within engineering, the gender norm of the man engineer remains influential. I have coined the term gender in/authenticity to capture these normative pressures and the extra ‘identity work’ they require of women engineers. One of these is the ‘in/visibility paradox’, whereby they are so visible as women that they are often invisible as engineers. Another is the enduring gender...