Memories and Reflections from 
the Gender Research Group
21 Years of Collaborative Action
FORSKNINGSRAPPORTER 
RESEARCH REPORTS
EDITORS
JEFF HEARN, CHARLOTTA NIEMISTÖ 
AND MARGAUX VIALLON 
Forskningsrapporter från Svenska handelshögskolan
Hanken School of Economics
Research Reports
79
Editors
Jeff Hearn, Charlotta Niemistö 
and Margaux Viallon 
Memories and Reflections  
from the Gender Research Group
21 Years of Collaborative Action 
Helsingfors 2021
Memories and Reflections from the Gender Research Group  
21 Years of Collaborative Action 
Sökord: collaboration, gender, gender equality, management, 
organisation
© Svenska handelshögskolan & Jeff Hearn, Charlotta Niemistö and 
Margaux Viallon, 2021
Jeff Hearn, Charlotta Niemistö and Margaux Viallon
Svenska Handelshögskolan
PB 479, 00101 Helsingfors, Finland
Svenska handelshögskolan
ISBN 978-952-232-457-3 (printed)
ISBN 978-952-232-458-0 (pdf)
ISSN-L 0357-5764
ISSN 0357-5764 (printed)
ISSN 2242-7007 (pdf)
Hansaprint Oy, Turenki 2021
iABSTRAKT
Samarbetets betydelse understryks i de flesta organisationer, men att 
förverkliga och genomföra dessa samarbeten kan ofta vara utmanande. 
Hankens Research Group on Gender Relations in Organisations, Mana-
gement and Society, ofta även kallad Gender Research Group, bildades 
i slutet av år 1999 och lanserades offentligt i början av år 2000. Denna 
samling av reflektioner har skapats för att hylla de 21 åren av samarbe-
te och samhörighet. Publikationen samlar 31 minnen och reflektioner 
från 32 nuvarande och tidigare medlemmar i gruppen. Bidragsgivare 
ombads att skriva ”en författad reflektion om vad gruppen har betytt 
för dig, eventuella minnen du vill dela, hur gruppen har påverkat ditt 
arbete eller liknande, på mellan 300 och 1000 ord, på engelska, svenska 
eller finska.” Tillsammans med bakgrundsinformation om forskning och 
samverkan med det omgivande samhället är denna Hanken Research 
Report-publikation resultatet av den processen.
ABSTRACT 
In most organisations, ideas of collaboration and collaborative action are 
often lauded, but often in practice more challenging to carry into effect. 
The Hanken Research Group on Gender Relations in Organisations, Ma-
nagement and Society, often referred to as the Gender Research Group, 
was established late 1999 and launched publicly in early 2000. This 
collection celebrates 21 years of collaborative action. It brings together 
31 memories and reflections from 32 current and former members of 
the Group. Contributors were asked to write “an authored reflection of 
between 300 and 1000 words, in English, Swedish or Finnish, on what 
the Group has meant for you, any memories you want to share, how the 
Group has influenced your work, or similar.” Together with background 
information on research and outreach, this Hanken Research Report 
publication is the result of that process.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PREFACE  ...........................................................................................1
2. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. 2
3. CONTRIBUTIONS .............................................................................8
3.1 Ling Eleanor Zhang, An enriching journey of self-discovery 
with GRG ......................................................................................8
3.2 Hertta Vuorenmaa, “… the way I view” ................................ 9
3.3 Margaux Viallon, A research group with a special 
significance ................................................................................. 11
3.4 Annamari Tuori, Memories and sense-making in a period 
of change .....................................................................................12
3.5 Janne Tienari, The Group is still here! .................................13
3.6 Inkeri Tanhua, Gender group memories  ............................14
3.7 Teemu Tallberg, Gender Research Group: people with an 
interest ........................................................................................16
3.8 Kamilla Sultanova, From haggling books to confronting 
cherished beliefs ..........................................................................17
3.9 Guje Sevón, Some reflections ...............................................19
3.10 Beata Segercrantz, Feminism, support and laughter .......20
3.11 Charlotta Niemistö, What does the Gender Research Group 
mean to me? ................................................................................21
3.12 Jean Helms Mills and Albert Mills, Fond memories ......... 23
3.13 Linda McKie, The outsider, insider: standing back, 
reflecting, smiling ...................................................................... 25
3.14 Anna Maaaranen, First impressions ................................. 26
3.15 Jonna Louvrier, Fragments from a tape – a story of 
community .................................................................................28
iii
3.16 Sari Lappi, Onnea täysi-ikäisyyden johdosta, Gender 
Research Group! ........................................................................ 29
3.17 Anne Kovalainen, Intersectionality, gender, social 
class and the neoliberal self-governance of institutions and 
individuals ..................................................................................31
3.18 Carolyn Kehn, We were not our titles, but rather our 
invidual selves ........................................................................... 36
3.19 Mira Karjalainen, Amongst academic tribes – reflections 
on the Gender Research Group at Hanken .............................. 37
3.20 Marjut Jyrkinen, Some reflections membership of the 
Gender Research Group ............................................................ 39
3.21 Marjana Johansson, I didn’t know it at the time … ...........41
3.22 Liisa Husu, Warning: Serious research development 
going on ..................................................................................... 43
3.23 Minna Hiillos, ‘Application agents’ ................................... 44
3.24 Jeff Hearn, It is not so easy to know what to write … ..... 45
3.25 Pernilla Gripenberg, Belonging, learning in a context or 
growing and learning in dialogue with your context..............48
3.26 Leila Gharavi, In all honesty ... ..........................................51
3.27 Martin Fougère, The GRG and its constructively radical 
discussions ................................................................................. 56
3.28 Katja Einola, A community to lean on .............................. 58
3.29 Hanne Dumur-Laanila, Yksi ryhmä – monta  
näkökulmaa ...............................................................................60
3.30 Stephanie Clark, Reflections from a zygote .......................61
3.31 Valentina Carnali, Reflection of a newcomer and early 
leaver  ......................................................................................... 63
3.32 Ingrid Biese, My home away from home ......................... 64
iv
4. APPENDICES ..................................................................................66
Appendix 1: Completed PhDs .................................................... 66
Appendix 2: Ongoing PhD projects ...........................................68
Appendix 3: Gender Research Group brochure (2003) ............ 69
Appendix 4: Genusforskning med internationell prägel .......... 70
11. PREFACE 
It is with great pride that I write this preface for the collection of mem-
ories and reflections celebrating the 21 years of the Gender Research 
Group. The journey, which is still a young journey, shows that this group 
has already done a marvelous job during the last two decades. This is 
manifested in the amount of PhDs produced, conferences and public 
events organised, funding received for various projects from, for example, 
the Academy of Finland and the EU, and the many publications, books, 
articles, chapters, research reports and blogs. But not only that, other 
things I would like to mention are the spin-offs, for example, the creation 
of the FLO GenderEXCEL Group and contributions to the development 
of both the five-university GODESS institute (Gender, Organisation, 
Diversity, Equality and Social Sustainability in Transnational Times), 
and Hanken’s ‘Responsible Organising’ Area of Strength. 
The themes covered by these initiatives could not be more relevant for 
the world we are living in today and I think they will grow to become 
even more important in the future. I would therefore like to congrat-
ulate all of you who have been working to build up this area, you have 
surely been forerunners in the field, and I would also like say thank you 
to all of you contributing to this collection. Reflecting on the journey is 
important not only for the history books, but also for future generations 
of researchers and educators to understand how this important field 
emerged and remembering those who were part of this journey. I wish 
you many more productive years, the journey has only begun! 
Karen Spens, Rector
22. INTRODUCTION
In most organisations, ideas of collaboration and collaborative action are 
often lauded, but often in practice more challenging to carry into effect. 
This collection of memories and reflections is a celebration of 21 years 
of the Gender Research Group or as, we usually say, the GRG, or, if you 
prefer, the more official, but rather rarely used, Hanken’s Research Group 
on Gender Relations in Organisations, Management and Society – or 
just simply the gender group!
The immediate impetus for founding the Group came from the presence 
in Hanken, in the Department of Management and Organisation (FLO), 
of a critical mass of researchers with a strong interest in and commit-
ment to feminist and gendered approaches to organisations, building on 
established teaching on gender, management and organisations, funded 
research projects, and doctoral studies. 
Looking back to the context of the wider society in the late 1990s, Fin-
land had emerged gradually from the early 1990s depression (lama), 
joining the European Union in 1995, and becoming, with restructuring 
of the economy, a leading country in information and communication 
technologies, and high research and development investment. Finland 
became a signatory in 1986 to the UN Convention on the Elimination of 
all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), with the fourth 
national report published in 1999 (The 4th periodic report ... 1999). The 
Finnish Act on Equality Between Men and Women came into force in 
1987, with major revision in 1995 (Bruun and Koskinen 1997). The Act 
prohibited discrimination, i.e., unequal treatment of individuals on the 
basis of their gender, and obligated both the authorities and employers 
to promote equal opportunities. The Act also stated that employers with 
a regular payroll of at least 30 staff members must incorporate effective 
3equality-promoting measures into their annual personnel and training 
plan or labour protection action programmes. The Equality Act prescri-
bed that at least 40 percent of the members of governmental committees, 
advisory bodies, corresponding public bodies, and municipal bodies must 
be women and 40 percent men. The Gender Barometer 1998 (Melkas 
1999) was the first national survey-based publication measuring the 
implementation of gender equality as experienced, with special reference 
to personal relations, work, employment and society. Significant diffe-
rences between men and women were found in almost all societal areas. 
Equality between men and women was generally accepted in principle, 
with support for women having the right to wage work whatever the 
family situation, and men taking more part in domestic work. However, 
it was more common for women to experience inequality at work: 57% of 
women employees and 43% of women entrepreneurs felt that their sex 
was a disadvantage, compared with 20% and 10% respectively for men.
Specifically, the Research Group started August 2000, with a quite inten-
se and almost unaminous meeting of Minna Hiillos, Anne Kovalainen, 
Guje Sevón, Anika Åkerberg, Mia Örndahl and Jeff Hearn, with Guje, 
Anne and Jeff agreed as co-convenors at its conclusion. The initial aims 
of the Group were listed as:
• To facilitate research on gender relations in organisations, 
management and society;
• To produce social and societal analyses that place organisations, 
management and gender relations at the centre;
• To develop transnational and national research (doctoral, 
project and long-term) and scientific analyses of organisations 
that management that place gender relations at the centre; and
4• To facilitate interventions in organisations and management 
development that place gender relations at the centre.
The Group was launched more formally in a public event – The Interna-
tional Seminar on Gender, Entrepreneurship and Change – in September 
2000 based around the Academy of Finland Lama project headed by 
Guje and including eminent speakers such as Joanne Martin. 
Other early Group members included Pernilla Gripenberg, Minna Hiillos, 
Marjut Jyrkinen, Emmi Lattu, Marina Owren-Lindholm, Vesa Peltokorpi, 
Denise Salin, Andrea Sjöblom and Teemu Tallberg.
Following the initial convenors, first, Minna Hiilos and, then, Marjut 
Jyrkinen became co-convenors, followed by Charlotta Niemistö, Anna-
mari Tuori, and now the current co-convenors, Jonna Louvrier, Anna 
Maaranen and Inkeri Tanhua.
We should say that while the GRG started in FLO (the Department of 
Management and Organisation), it has also included members from other 
Hanken departments, people who then have left Hanken but stayed in 
touch, and some people, for example, from Aalto and Helsinki Universi-
ties or from those working in the Gender Equality field, who have been 
interested and welcomed. There have been many visitors, some brief, 
some for up to a year, and some recurring over many years, notably Lin-
da McKie, Jean Helms Mills and Albert Mills. A special visit was from 
Joan Acker, when she was made an honorary doctor at Hanken in 2009.
There have been many members, many PhDs produced (see Appendix 
1), many ongoing, (see Appendix 2), many postdocs, many friends and 
colleagues, many funded and unfunded projects. Over the years, there 
have been about 60 members of the Group, and 32 have contributed here. 
Three postdocs – Denise Salin, Marjut Jyrkinen and Beata Segercran-
5tz – were the first three from Hanken to gain the prestigious Academy 
of Finland individual postdoctoral research funding, followed by Ing-
rid Biese and Paula Koskinen Sandberg. And three – Marjut Jyrkinen 
(University of Helsinki), Denise Salin (Hanken School of Economics), 
and Teemu Tallberg (National Defence University) have been made full 
professors, albeit in different disciplines.
Project funders have included the European Commission, European 
Social Fund, Nordic Council of Ministers/NIKK, Academy of Finland, 
Finnish Strategic Research Funding, Finnish Ministry of Education, 
Gender-Net (for example, CROME, NASTA, NaisUrat, QUEST, New 
Generations, WeALL, EqualCare), as well as some early more modest 
support from Kaute, Wihuri and Wallenberg Foundations (Appendix 3). 
Many publications – books, articles, chapters, research reports, blogs 
and the rest – have followed.
A number of conferences and large public events has been organised, for 
example, Gender and Power: Organisations in Flux? Conference, May 
2003 (see Appendix 4); Finnish National Women’s Studies Conference, 
November 2005 (with Aalto University); Leadership Through the Gender 
Lens, International Conference, October 2009; Finnish National Gender 
Studies Conference, November 2014 (with Aalto University). 
In addition to research collaborations with many businesses, state orga-
nisations and third sector organization, there have been significant joint 
research venture with other universities, including: Aalto University, 
Helsinki University and Jyväskylä University in Finland; Royal Instititute 
of Technology (KTH) in Sweden; St Mary’s University in Canada; and 
Stellenbosch University, University of Cape Town, University of South 
Africa, and University of Western Cape in South Africa. 
6The substantive research focuses of the Group have ranged widely, as 
can be seen from the list of previous and current doctoral projects, but 
have also included attention to gender questions in academia, careers, 
research funding, methods and methodology, teaching, and the relations 
of work and life more generally. In addition, it should be said that the 
focus on gender and gender relations is broad not narrow, so that gender 
is understood as intersecting with, for example, age, class, ethnicity, 
generation, and racialisation.
There have also been various spin-offs or close link-ups, for example: 
the creation of the FLO GenderEXCEL Group, co-chaired by Pernilla 
Gripenberg and Jeff Hearn, which also carried out a gender equality 
survey and workshops in the department; the hosting of the EQ-UNI 
Gender Equality in Higher Education list; and contributions to the de-
velopment of both the five-university GODESS (Gender, Organisation, 
Diversity, Equality and Social Sustainability in Transnational Times) 
Institute as a separate research and development institute from the GRG, 
and Hanken’s ‘Responsible Organising’ Area of Strength. 
An online celebratory event was held on 16 June 2021 to celebrate the 
21st anniversary with 25 participants located in several countries. 
In compiling this document, we simply invited asked current and pre-
vious members to write:
“an authored reflection of between 300 and 1000 words, in 
English, Swedish or Finnish, on what the Group has meant for you, 
any memories you want to share, how the Group has influenced 
your work, or similar. These will be collected for an online 
co-authored publication.”
7This text – with 31 authored and co-authored contributions, ordered 
counter-alphabetically – is the result of those reflections, memories and 
accounts of influences. We are very grateful to all who have contributed. 
We also gratefully acknowledge the support of: Research Dean David 
Grant; Peter Björk; former FLO Head of Department Ingmar Björkman; 
Barbara Cavonius; and current FLO Head of Department Sören Kock. 
We give special thanks to Rector Karen Spens, for writing the Preface, 
and Professor Anna-Maija Lämsä, Jyväskylä University, and Professor 
Emeritus Karl-Erik Sveiby, Hanken School of Economics, for reading 
and reviewing this text so swiftly and so generously.
*****
We warmly thank Valentina Carnali for the valuable work she has done in 
assisting with the formatting of the manuscript for publication. Valentina 
is currently a trainee at GODESS Institute, while being an undergraduate 
student in Contemporary and Gender History at University of Bologna.
The Editors 
The 4th Periodic Report by Finland to the Convention on the Elimination 
of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. 1999. Helsinki: Ministry 
of Foreign Affairs.
Bruun, N. and Koskinen, P.K. 1997. Tasa-arvolaki, 3rd edition. Helsinki: 
Lakimiesliiton Kustannus.
Melkas, T. 1998) The gender barometer: Equality between men and 
women in Finland. Helsinki: Statistics Finland.
83. CONTRIBUTIONS
3.1 Ling Eleanor Zhang
Ling Eleanor Zhang completed her PhD at Hanken in 2015, and was 
an occasional member of the GRG, and is now Lecturer at Institute for 
International Management, Loughborough University London campus.
An enriching journey of self-discovery with GRG 
As I am writing this from my home in St Albans shortly after the end of 
Covid-19 lockdown 3.0 in the UK, I realise that my life and the centrality 
of my work could have been very different without Gender Research 
Group (GRG). 
My first encountering with GRG colleagues was back in 2006 when I 
started working as a research assistant for FLO. I felt utterly ‘foreign’ 
then. I had just learnt Finnish, and I immediately ended up in a Swedish 
environment! I was back to square one – once again, I did not understand 
a word in my surrounding. The insecurity further caused by my visible 
ethnicity and juniority in academia had left me no breathing space to 
reflect on gender. I rejected thinking about gender inequalities, which I 
was clearly part of it. I simply could not handle it if that made sense. The 
gender inequalities GRG colleagues were criticizing in Finland sounded 
like a utopia to most women in China. I was lost. I must have attended 
many GRG seminars, as I took my first job very seriously fearing that I 
might not be able to deliver. Sadly, I do not remember a thing from the 
seminars. But I have vivid images of the GRG community laughing and 
hugging often with the smell of coffee, buns and occasionally champagne! 
When I started working on my PhD a few years later, I had already 
moved back to China and then to the UK. “How about gender?” was 
9constantly on my mind – thanks to the countless reminders from my 
supervisor Professor Jeff Hearn. But it did not become a major theme 
in my dissertation in the field of micro international business studies. 
This second time around, the obstacle between me and gender research 
was still my insecurity around ethnic and cultural identity. I needed 
to complete the search of who I was by researching the identities of 
male Nordic expatriates in China. Gender is clearly part of any identity 
construction, but psychologists mostly treat it as a control variable, so 
it ended up as a separate reflection in my thesis. 
I eventually found my way to writing about and researching gender al-
most 10 years after my first contact with GRG. I moved back to Finland 
in 2017 for maternity leave, and embraced GODESS, or rather GODESS 
and GRG colleagues tucked me under their wings. I surprised myself by 
remembering so much about GRG activities during a life phase that I 
had little sleep – stimulating seminars on gender research, conversations 
about raising feminist children, productive working lunches, and joyful 
celebrations with GRG colleagues. Gradually I had my first publication 
on gender followed by my first funded project on gender.   
Once I have made the first step to incorporate gender into my research, 
I know it is here to stay. Today I proudly position myself as a researcher 
working on global mobility from a gender, language, and identity pers-
pective. A heartfelt thank you to GRG and Professor Jeff Hearn. 
*****
3.2 Hertta Vuorenmaa 
Hertta Vuorenmaa is Research Director in the Future of Work research 
project and University Lecturer at Aalto University School of Business. 
Her current research focuses on the changing nature of work and chan-
10
ging people management, HRM in public and private organizations, 
digitalization, gender and qualitative research methods including 
ethnography. She was member of the Gender Research Group from 
2001, completing her PhD in 2010, and working on various Academy 
projects and teaching at Hanken till 2014.
“… the way I view …”
The Gender Research group, my academic starting ground.
I have started my academic life working as a research assistant at Han-
ken/FLO and immediately also as a participant in the Gender Research 
Group. I did not really think about being a member of the gender re-
search group back then – I was simply participating in interesting dis-
cussions and enjoying the newness of it all.
I have since realized that those early years were in many ways the making 
of me as an academic. The kind of thinker I am, even if my thinking still 
continues to evolve and change (or so I hope), there is always this base 
that was formed during those early years of working within academia 
and with the gender group. 
Being a member of the gender research group formed the way I view the 
world and any research problem / teaching dilemma in it. I am forever 
thankful for having learned those various different critical approaches 
and readings of research, text, data, doing, being. 
My warmest thank you goes to everyone who was part of the group at 
the same time with me, thank you for teaching me and sharing with me.
*****
11
3.3 Margaux Viallon
Margaux Viallon is a master’s student in sociology at the Ecole Nor-
male Supérieure Paris-Saclay (France). She carried out a 8 months’ 
internship at the GODESS Institute (Hanken School of Economics) in 
2020-2021. 
A research group with a special significance
When I was asked by Jeff Hearn and Charlotta Niemistö, my internship 
supervisors, to participate in the organization of the Gender Research 
Group 21st anniversary, I didn’t know the group well yet. I had just 
arrived in Helsinki from France, for my 8 months’ research internship 
at GODESS Institute, and was working remotely from my student ac-
commodation due to the COVID pandemic. In this context, the GRG was 
just a research group among others for me, with no special significance. 
To celebrate this anniversary, we contacted former and current members 
of the group in order to invite them to participate in an online publication 
and celebration. Shortly after, I started receiving various contributions to 
the publication, where people shared their memories and what the GRG 
had brought them during the years. All of these enthusiastic messages 
gave me a very positive image of this research group. 
At the same time, I was myself discovering the GRG, especially during 
the monthly meetings. In the context of a pandemic, where everyone 
was working from home and I had not been able to discover Hanken 
and its atmosphere, the group really made me feel like I belonged to the 
school and more precisely to a community of researchers. It enabled me 
to exchange with researchers on their projects, to share ideas and to 
shape my own master project in sociology of gender. This way, I began to 
understand why all the contributions were so eloquent about the group!
12
Finally, the online celebration happened on June 16th. What a pleasure 
it was to meet all the former members I had been writing to for months! 
The celebration was a joyful moment of shared memories and anec-
dotes, and really emphasized how much the GRG meant for everyone, 
including me.
*****
3.4 Annamari Tuori
Annamari Tuori completed her PhD at Hanken in 2015 and worked as 
Post-doctoral researcher at Hanken until the end of 2020. She acted 
as a co-convenor of the GRG between 2017 and 2020, and was an ac-
tive member of the group from 2007. Since January 2021, Annamari 
has been working in child protection and continues to be an affiliated 
researcher at Hanken.
Memories and sense-making in a period of change  
I thought for a long time if I should write at all. Not that I did not want 
to, but I was uncertain if I was able to. What to say about 14 years that 
are in my past but at the same time so close in time that you cannot see 
them clearly yet? I left academia four months ago and am still making 
sense of it all. However, I decided to give it a try. 
For me, like for any of us, the gender group is many things. It is a series 
of meetings over the years that get blurred into each other in my mind. 
It is exciting seminars and conversations that I could feel in my heart. 
It is attempts to, together, navigate academia. Above all, it is the people.
I remember different periods in gender group through the people who 
were actively involved or were no longer involved. The different people 
and combinations of people created somewhat different kinds of gender 
13
groups. Yet, something remained the same. I also remember myself 
growing through these periods and, with the “gender groupers”, first 
becoming an academic and then finally leaving academia.
Now, in the middle of intensive professional identity work, being im-
mersed into something new, I am curious about the future and the kind 
of meanings that the gender group will take in my life.
*****
3.5 Janne Tienari
Janne Tienari is Professor of Management and Organization at Han-
ken. His research and teaching interests include gender and diversity, 
feminist theory, strategy work, managing multinational corporations, 
mergers and acquisitions, branding and media, and changing academia 
from a critical perspective.
The Group is still here!
My memory is notoriously bad, and I prefer a good story over the strict 
“truth,” but I recall attending the famous workshop in the Autumn of 
2000 when the (emerging) Gender Research Group at Hanken hosted 
some prominent scholars as well as hang-arounds like myself. I had fi-
nished my PhD the previous year and was employed in the Lappeenranta 
University of Technology. I was developing my academic identity and 
looked around for people to associate with. I enjoyed the workshop, and 
I was impressed because Joanne Martin was there. I had read her work 
and I have a lot of respect for what she has achieved. And then there were 
some men, too, attending the workshop, and I found that refreshing. We 
all had dinner and then some of us went drinking together. I had a great 
time. I got to know new people and the experience overall convinced me 
14
that gender studies is not only relevant, but it can be fun, too. I haven’t 
looked back since, and after many twists and turns I ended up at Han-
ken. The Gender Research Group is still here, and that is just fantastic!
*****
3.6 Inkeri Tanhua 
Inkeri Tanhua is a researcher, learner, consultant, activist interested 
in feminism, inequalities, society, organisations – and currently a PhD 
student in Management and Organisation at Hanken. In her PhD, she 
examines the reasons for educational and occupational segregation, 
focusing on vocational education. She is one of the three convenors of 
the Gender Research Group in 2021.
Gender group memories
Before the pandemic, the gender group meant sunny mornings in the 
corner room with friendly colleagues 
long lunches and deep talks after the meetings
a guilty feeling of spending so much time “just talking” (not writing, 
doing research)
the fear of missing out when I forgot the meeting!
a place to learn how researchers think, to ponder who I am and 
where I am going
Now that all seems like a distant memory 
although we are still here! having online meetings, trying to make 
them as warm as possible
and I need a group more than ever
the pandemic has made me understand how important it is for me 
(for most of us?) to do identity work together
15
it is not just talking but, instead, a crucial ingredient of 
meaningful work
Us feminists (the Swedish speaking feminists?) are the coolest 
persons in Finland 
At least according to the TV series Aikuiset 
There is this Ylva, she is pictured as hot, intellectual, always 
surrounded by her feminist group
She makes the main character feel clumsy, honoured to even talk 
to her
Our group is certainly hot, too, but… we don’t talk about that much
often, we gather to discuss feminism as a struggle, 
a struggle to get into the business studies mainstream, male-stream, 
always somewhere
Some of us are afraid that gender topics are marginal, put them in 
the margins
I just feel lucky! I have such an interesting position to observe the 
world, to live, have my personal and shared privileges and struggles
Gender topics are like a lift, a possibility to get involved in 
amazing conversations
But the clumsiness, you might ask… If you are you one of those who 
feels clumsy
Don’t worry, most of us do sometimes! It’s a pleasure and 
discomfort combined
no one is ever ready as an intersectional feminist
Let’s support each other in the journey! 
*****
16
3.7 Teemu Tallberg
Teemu Tallberg joined Hanken as a research assistant in Academy of 
Finland and EU projects in January 2001, before commencing his PhD 
at Hanken, a few years later, on ‘The Gendered Social Organisation of 
Defence: Two Ethnographic Case Studies in the Finnish Defence For-
ces’, which he defended in 2009. He is Professor of Military Sociology, 
Department of Leadership and Military Pedagogy, National Defence 
University, Finland. 
Gender Research Group: people with an interest
As a young man, I found my time as a conscript in the obligatory military 
service fascinating, frightening and frustrating. Late during the service, 
a fellow officer candidate with whom I lived at the garrison listened to 
my Weltschmerz and provided me with the book I needed to read for 
applying to university to study a science that I had hardly heard of before: 
sociology. During my studies I noticed that the thoughts and questions 
I had had in conscript service resonated with many thinkers and had 
attracted the attention of many scholars, especially around gender and 
organisations. It was amazing that after I graduated, someone with an 
interest in something as marginal (in the late 1990’s Finland) as critical 
studies on men would end up doing exactly that as his first real job – and 
at a business school. An even greater stroke of luck was that during the 
ten years I spent at Hanken as a research assistant, PhD student and 
post-doc researcher, a group/collective/network evolved among people 
interested in similar issues. Of course, the lucky strike was heavily as-
sisted by active attempts of certain key persons to develop such activity 
and linkages. In addition to the great many things I learned about gender 
and organisation studies during that time, the Gender Research Group 
was an important lesson on how the heart of organising lies in people 
17
with an interest. GRG was a forum, where substance mattered most and 
the structures (flexible enough) supported many kinds of actions. This 
and many other lessons I have carried with me with deep gratefulness 
and warm memories of all the people in GRG.
*****
3.8 Kamilla Sultanova
Kamilla Sultanova, public speaker, trainer, mentor,
www.kamillasultanova.com
From haggling books to confronting cherished beliefs!
Researchers are amazing people, helping practitioners cement their work 
and be confident in making change. Objectively speaking they have the 
best job in the world provided they have access to funding to do the job 
and share the truth (subject to political mockery which we see in many 
spheres). Leila Gharavi introduced me to the community, later I saw 
myself working with Janne Tienari, Charlotta Niemistö, Malin Gusta-
vsson, Jonna Louvrier and Inkeri Tanhua on various equality-themed 
workshops and events. In 2019 I joined as a consultant to grow Hanken 
International Talent and it’s been a great learning journey but also to 
make impact.
Looking back, it all started with participation in gender-research group 
meetings back in 2018 and it was a warm welcome to a community one 
could be easily intimidated by. Think about it, all with PhDs, published 
authors and scholars. Yet, having a common area of interest, people 
turned out to be curious to hear your point of view on anything from 
norm-critical approach to design-thinking solutions to achieve equality 
with Nordic Equality project. Such community created a safe space to 
also cherish own beliefs, for example, on various topics. 
18
Fun fact: I have haggled my first book from the author in Gender Re-
search Group! Yes, it was from Jeff (pure coincidence) which I thought 
was a lottery win; the book was: Engaging youth in activism, research 
and pedagogical praxis: Transnational and intersectional perspectives 
on gender, sex, and race.   
Engaging youth in activism, research and pedagogical praxis helped me 
understand why we do what we do in a global youth-empowerment NGO, 
Global Dignity, on the use of voice methodology to activate youth agency, 
and so on. We are living in truly exciting and trying times in the world 
of post-#Metoo and rise of Black Lives Matter, a second year of corona-
virus pandemic which increased inequality, isolation and she-session.
I hope such communities prosper, continue to bring research for better 
policies, solutions and engage other people in debates as well as fact-ba-
sed activism, where a solid discussion and conversation must take place 
and include people who want to learn and able to change their point of 
view. I thank the Gender research community for infused optimism to 
stay on course in our journeys to create fair and equitable societies and 
working across sectors and utilizing research in doing so.
Hope to meet soon in person.
Stay safe and awesome!
Reference
Shefer T., Hearn J., Ratele K., and Boonzaier, F., eds. 2018. Engaging 
youth in activism, research and pedagogical praxis: Transnational and 
intersectional perspectives on gender, sex, and race. London: Routledge.
*****
19
3.9 Guje Sevón
Professor Emerita of Economic Psychology, Stockholm School of Eco-
nomics, Sweden. Earlier Professor of Management and Organisation, 
Hanken School of Economics. Her research is currently focusing on 
individuals and organizations in a world of travelling management 
ideas and changing resources.
Some reflections
At its very core, the academic research career is – and should be – a very 
lonely venture indeed, where the full responsibility for ethical decisions, 
data accuracy, choice of methods, and formulation of results falls on the 
individual researcher.  This professional obligation cannot be transfered 
to a bureaucracy or a group. However, being part of a larger supportive 
research group may be of great help to confirm that the research domain 
and topics at hand are important and meaningful because they are sha-
red by others. Also, in times of self-doubt and uncertainty, a research 
group may verify to you that you are on to something worthwhile pur-
suing. Still the most important take out of a research group might be the 
personal attachments and commitments to other group-members that 
develop and last over time. As years pass by, one might even find that 
these community bonds become equally important as the intellectual 
contribution from the research undertaken. 
The International Seminar on Gender, Entrepreneurship and Change in 
2000 which was the starting point for the Gender Research Group was in 
a similar way an important event for me at a time when gender research 
was not yet on the main research agenda within the social sciences.  The 
event itself as well as the later formation of the research group confirmed 
my experience that sharing knowledge and ideas in the gender research 
community opens the view and understanding of gendering processes 
20
in our society. A similar eye-opening occasion is rather unique in the 
scientific search for important domains to study, and seldom possible 
without the active support of a research group. 
Now, looking backward to the 21 years of the Gender Research Group 
I also find that this community of researchers with similar interests in 
improving research and society has also served as a hotbed for lasting 
friendships. I am thus deeply grateful to all my friends in the Research 
group on Gender Relations for 21 years of work and companionship and 
for the support and friendship you have provided over the years.  
*****
3.10 Beata Segercrantz
Beata Segercrantz completed her PhD at Hanken in 2011 and worked 
as Post-doctoral research at Hanken up until 2015. She was an active 
member of the GRG from 2002 to 2015, and still collaborates with the 
group. Since 2015 Beata is University Lecturer in Social Psychology 
at the Swedish School of Social Science at the University of Helsinki.
Feminism, support and laughter
The Gender Research Group (GRG) was the first feminist group that I 
joined and it quicky became an important community for me and my 
research. The group provided me with an intellectual space where I 
could explore concepts and theories that helped me better make sense 
of issues that I had reflected upon probably since I was a young girl. I 
gained a new vocabulary, explanations and a multi-level perspective on 
social reality, everyday experiences and society. 
When reflecting on what GRG has meant to me, the first thing that comes 
to my mind is that the involvement in this community has greatly influen-
21
ced the trajectory of my research and teaching. The group has provided 
me with a safe place for learning, presenting my research, receiving 
feedback and experimenting with ideas. It is the comments and ques-
tions that I have received from this community that often have helped 
me to explore new territories. I have also truly enjoyed the opportunity 
to listen to countless interesting presentations by group members and 
invited guests. The discussions are always encouraging, and I leave every 
seminar smiling and feeling inspired. In sum, I feel the GRG has acted 
as a supportive community for me, which has resulted in co-authored 
conference papers, articles and research projects. I still collaborate with 
and regard many members of GRG as my close colleagues although we 
work in different organizations today. Without these collaborations, 
both my research and teaching would look very different. In addition, 
GRG has been an important entrance to many other feminist networks 
that I have joined later. 
On a personal level, I am grateful for all the friends I have made within 
the GRG community. Our friendships have meant cheering each other 
on. The academic career can be highly challenging, competitive and/or 
insecure and at the same time immensely rewarding. Without my GRG 
friendships the researcher role-coaster experience would not have been 
the same and definitely not as rewarding. With no one else do I laugh 
as much while working. 
*****
3.11 Charlotta Niemistö
Charlotta Niemistö is co-Director of the GODESS Institute at Hanken, 
since 2018. She was co-convenor of the GRG between 2013 and 2017 
and 2019 and 2020, and has been a member of the group since 2005. 
She completed her PhD at Hanken in 2011.
22
What does the Gender Research Group mean to me?
What does the Gender Research Group mean to me? I have been well 
aware of the anniversary of the Gender Research Group for more than 
a year now, but I haven’t had much time to reflect upon the Group’s 
meaning for myself. Somehow, it has always been there, since the Gender 
Group was founded before I returned to my alma mater for my PhD. I 
think I gradually became a member of it. But it has been my safe space 
ever since, an environment where even early academic ideas and work 
can be presented without fear of judging by others; where research ideas 
are exchanged in confidence; where (for me) new areas have been intro-
duced, for example through reading seminars; and where even personal 
professional (or personal-personal) situations have been discussed, more 
occasionally than regularly, but still. 
The Gender Research Group has gone through different phases that I 
remember very well. When I started, the active group was relatively large. 
I was fascinated by more experienced colleagues’ work but sometimes 
both devastated and furious by how unfairly they could be treated in 
academia; how discriminating the structures were and how hopeless 
many felt about it. I was a doctoral student without those experiences 
and with somewhat naïve and individualistic expectations of how hard 
work brings success. Besides knowledge sharing in research in general, 
and within the partly overlapping research topics we had, we have also 
shared a lot of lived experiences of the academic world – I have cherished 
both, but especially the latter kind later on, when facing similar situations 
in academia as colleagues before me, but not feeling completely alone, 
as I can recall the feelings of loyalty and support throughout the years, 
and feel strengthened by them.
The Gender Research Group has also had more inactive phases, with 
a lot smaller group of active people, but even then, having a perhaps 
23
symbolic meaning by reminding the “mainstream” about the importance 
to look even in the margins, to listen to quieter (or suppressed) voices 
and to try to see behind the structures. And to apply this even outside 
of the own organisation is important. As many have moved on to new 
organisations, I hope they have spirit of the Group has followed them 
and that new safe havens have been born.
The Gender Research Group has continued to be active despite Covid-19. 
This has been a good time for reflection. How should we organise our-
selves in the future? Is it more inclusive to be online in late afternoon 
than it was before the pandemic, when we met on Monday mornings 
every month? Is something of the distinct spirit lost when going viral? 
One thing remains the same: the need for a group like this. A group 
where solidarity is stronger than individual gain. Thank you for being 
and thank you for remaining. Thank you to all past, present and future 
colleagues in the Gender Research Group!
*****
3.12 Jean Helms Mills and Albert Mills
Jean Helms Mills is Professor Emerita, Saint Mary’s University, Sobey 
School of Business, Halifax, Canada and Guest Professor, Swedish 
School of Social Sciences, Helsinki. She is Co-Editor of Qualitative Re-
search in Organizations and Management. Jean’s research interests 
are in the areas of Historiography, Gender, Critical Sensemaking, 
Intersectionality and the Sociology of Knowledge. 
Albert J. Mills is Professor Emeritus of Management at Saint Mary’s 
University (Canada) and O2 Professor of Innovation Management at 
the University of Eastern Finland. His central interests include gender, 
24
diversity, and history in management in organizational studies. He is 
the author of over 40 books and edited collections, as well as 200 book 
chapters and journal articles. 
Fond memories
It is hard to believe that the Gender Research Group is already 21 years 
old! Over the years the Group has become an important collective for 
social change – joining other gender research groups in academia in 
various countries. Personally, for us, the group became an island of 
support, not only for the exchange of ideas but also for friendship as we 
were invited to become part of the vibrant and supportive environment. 
Our first association with the group was in 2009, when we started our 
association with Hanken. As Jeff Hearn was our host, we quickly became 
involved in the group and our connection has been ongoing ever since.
Through the years, the research group has provided a safe and welcoming 
environment to present our research and get constructive feedback from 
like- minded academics. It has also provided an outlet for PhD students 
to present their cutting edge research and given us all an opportunity 
to hear it first. 
In fact, it is this connection with established academics and new PhD 
students that has been a highlight of our visits to Helsinki over the 
years. New friendships have led onto long lasting friendships; existing 
friendships have deepened; and the group has offered research and work 
collaborations. To us the Gender Research Group represents a close-knit 
circle of scholars and friends.
*****
25
3.13 Linda McKie
Professor Linda McKie is Dean of Social and Political Science, Uni-
versity of Edinburgh and Visiting Professor of Gender Studies at the 
University of Helsinki. From January 2022, she is Executive Dean for 
the Faculty of Social Science and Public Policy, King’s College London. 
The outsider, insider: standing back, reflecting, smiling 
My abiding memory of the Gender Research Group is one of a support-
ive welcome every time I arrived at the department. Across a decade I 
returned two or three times a year to Management and Organisation 
Studies to teach on the Quality in Qualitative Research Methods course, 
research with a range of energising colleagues, and to mentor colleagues 
and friendships at various stages of their careers. My journeys from 
Scotland to Finland were ones of eager anticipation of a dynamic envi-
ronment in which we could reflect on gender. 
The group brought us into contact with a range of theories and ap-
proaches to research. Students, colleagues, and visitors shared their 
work and ideas. For myself, it awakened me to the possibilities of inter-
sectionalities in theoretical and research practices. Ageing, disability, 
ethnicities, identities, and sexualities; we discussed all of these as they 
cut across lively debates on gender. Added to this were the geopolitical 
events taking place around us in Finland, Estonia, Russia, UK and much 
wider afield across the globe. I recall being in FLO during the financial 
crisis of 2008 and our concern at the impact of inequalities across many 
communities and countries. 
We shared our research at various stages aware that feedback would be 
offered by “critical friends” and we could return with further iterations 
as we progressed. Several of us applied for research grants, with some 
26
success. A number of us wrote articles which were eventually published, 
all the better for our many debates. The Gender Research Group pro-
vided a forum in which we discussed drafts and fine-tuned ideas. Whilst 
much took place in the seminar room it was the after discussions with 
the all important pulla and coffee when we clinched ideas and divided 
up tasks. Fun! That said, my undying love for the infamous cinnamon 
bun made every visit to FLO a challenge for the waistline as well as the 
“old grey matter”. 
The Gender Research Group was an oasis in Hanken; perhaps it still is? 
We created this amazing space for creative thinking, research and writ-
ing on gender and yet around us there was limited progress on equality, 
diversity, and inclusion. Perhaps that has changed in recent years? For 
myself, a decade ago my career took me to new roles and time became 
short limiting visits to once a year and often in the summer months. 
Fond memories and delighted to be part of this 21st anniversary as we 
continue to pursue the power of research on gender to enhance the 
possibilities for change. 
*****
3.14 Anna Maaaranen
Anna Maaranen is currently a PhD student in Management and Orga-
nisation at Hanken, where her research focuses on the expanding role 
of social media in contemporary organizations and society. She is one 
of the three current convenors of the Gender Research Group in 2021.
First impressions
The day in 2019 was cold and snowy, the kind of day in January when 
the world goes a bit off the rails even in Finland. So did my tram that 
27
morning (not literally, to be fair, but it was very late), and that is why 
I was now running towards Hanken, late from what would be my first 
ever meeting there as a new PhD student. I had been invited to attend 
the Gender Research Group, because I was planning on doing research 
on gender equality issues on social media. Upon arrival, I was met with 
what, at that moment, seemed like a Hogwarts-worthy maze of corridors 
I had to figure my way through. When I finally got in, the meeting had 
already started and I felt terrible about the out of breath, windswept, 
arrives-late-to-meetings kind of first impression I had just given ev-
eryone. However, as the meeting went on, the embarrassment slowly 
faded as the conversation pulled me in. I felt a sense of ease and, most 
importantly, I felt welcome.  
Since that first day in January, I have met many more new people, been 
to many more meetings, and the focus of my research has gradually 
shifted from gender to social media more generally. Nevertheless, GRG 
remains a valued community for me not only because it was the first one 
to welcome me to Hanken, but also because I find the space it creates for 
discussion truly important. Each monthly meeting is a reminder of the 
many inequalities, biases, and other issues present at workplaces and in 
society – the kind of topics that are often left outside of the mainstream 
organization research. And even though the topics are often heavy, the 
atmosphere in the meetings is not: there is a comforting sense of hope 
in knowing that these themes are brought up, discussed, and researched. 
This year, I am lucky to be one of the people convening these discussions 
with Inkeri and Jonna.
*****
28
3.15 Jonna Louvrier 
Jonna Louvrier was a doctoral student at the department of Mana-
gement and Organization and defended her dissertation “Diversity, 
Difference and Diversity Management. A Contextual and Interview 
Study of Managers and Ethnic Minority Employees in Finland and 
France” in 2013. She has been a member of the Gender Research Group 
since 2003 and has been a co-convenor of the Group since 2017. She is 
the founder and CEO of Includia Leadership.
Fragments from a tape - a story of community
Thinking back at all the many memories related to the gender group is 
like rewinding an old video tape. (I wonder why it is an old video cassette 
that comes to my mind, and not a dvd!) There are many different mo-
ments, different years and different people on the tape.Where should I 
stop and press play?
Maybe at the start?
Here we have a morning meeting in the seminar room in Casa. It is a 
rainy and cold day, the seminar room seems full of people. This must 
have been in the early 2000s, many doctoral students are present, but 
also faculty. We discuss articles, totally new theories to me. New ways 
of seeing and mapping things. Bewildering, there and then. 
Or should I stop towards the end? Here we sit in the meeting room of Ar-
kadia. We have a discussion around academic work from the perspective 
of time, or maybe the body? The group is smaller, the doctoral students 
in the casa seminar room have turned into postdocs and research dire-
ctors, many have moved to other universities or out of academia. New 
doctoral students have joined. 
29
I rewind the tape. To that session when I presented my first research 
plan about diversity and ethnic minorities. What could have become a 
memory of stress and anxiety, is one of community. I was welcomed and 
supported, and while I was a beginner with so much to learn, a senior 
member took the time to show me my strengths. 
For me the gender research group first and foremost is about this com-
munity. A community where at all stages of an academic career one can 
exchange ideas, challenge, support and encourage each other. 
*****
3.16 Sari Lappi
Sari on toiminut Hankenilla eri tehtävissä ja osallistunut aikavälillä 
2016-2020 aktiivisesti ryhmän toimintaan. Hän on valmistunut 
Itä-Suomen yliopistosta pääaineenaan sosiaalipsykologia ja nykyään 
hän työskentelee työn ja työhyvinvoinnin kehittämisen tehtävissä 
julkisella sektorilla.
Onnea täysi-ikäisyyden johdosta, Gender Research Group!
Täysi-ikäisyyden raja on Suomessa nykyään 18 vuotta, joissakin mais-
sa täysi-ikäisiksi tullaan sen sijaan 21 vuoden iässä. Gender Research 
Group on siis tullut täysi-ikäiseksi viimeistään nyt vuonna 2021 ryhmän 
viettäessä 21-vuotispäiväänsä. 
Hankenilla vietettyjen vuosien mittaan olen myös itse tietyllä tavalla 
kasvanut, sillä oma tieni on noina vuosina käynyt korkeakouluharjoit-
telusta valmistumisen kautta työelämään. Alussa olevalla uudella työu-
rallani toivon pääseväni toimimaan erilaisissa tehtävissä työyhteisöjen 
hyväksi, ja olen vakuuttunut siitä, että toimintaani työn kentällä vaikut-
30
tavat myös kokemukseni gender-tutkimusryhmästä. Erityisen merkityk-
sellisenä seikkana koenkin sen tiedollisen perustan erilaisista sosiaalisen 
kestävyyden aiheista, joita ryhmässä on monipuolisesti käsitelty ja joista 
olen saanut oppia. Lisääntynyt ymmärrys monimuotoisuuden teemoista 
on tukenut kykyjäni toteuttaa myös opintojen kautta hankittuja tiedollisia 
perusteita käytännön työssä.
Teemoja on käsitelty monissa tapaamisissa huomattavasti syvemmin 
ja monipuolisemmin kuin muissa yhteisöissä, mikä tulkintani mukaan 
kumpuaa ryhmän akateemisesta taustasta sekä siihen liittyvistä toimin-
taa määrittävistä arvoista.
Mielestäni onkin paikallaan kiittää ryhmän toiminnan kulloisiakin jär-
jestäjiä ja tilaisuuksien kokoonkutsujia. Taustalla on ryhmälle omistau-
tuneita henkilöitä, joiden sitoutuneisuus on mahdollistanut säännölliset 
tapaamiset. Tuon omistautumisen seurauksena myös minun voi aja-
tella päätyneen uudelle työuralle piirun verran tietoisempana monesta 
tärkeästä aiheesta.
Edelleen voi kuvitella ryhmän toiminnan kumulatiivisia vaikutuksia; 
ryhmä on ollut osaltaan lisäämässä tietoisuutta monimuotoisuudesta, 
yhdenvertaisuudesta ja tasa-arvosta niin pitkään, että tuon tietoisuu-
den voi ajatella tänä päivänä levinneen jopa ympäri maailmaa. Yli 20 
toimintavuoden aikana tietoisuutta monimuotoisuuden teemoista on 
siis hippunen kerrallaan levitetty, ja kuinka moniin yhteisöihin, or-
ganisaatioihin ja perheisiin tuo tieto on voinutkaan vaikuttaa! Toivon 
tämän teoksen tekevän osaltaan näkyväksi tuota tehtyä työtä ja sen 
mahdollisia vaikutuksia.
Alun perin suunnitelmissa oli juhlia ryhmän 20-vuotispäivää vuonna 
2020. Vuodesta 2020 muodostui kuitenkin erityinen koronapandemian 
31
vuoksi ja tästä syystä ryhmän taipaleen äärelle pysähdytään nyt vuotta 
myöhemmin. Toivottavasti vuosien jatkaessa vierimistään ryhmän ole-
massaolo jatkuu. Kiitän ja onnittelen 21-vuotiasta!
****
3.17 Anne Kovalainen
Professor, School of Economics, University of Turku, Finland. Anne 
is an economic sociologist, with positions as invited faculty fellow at 
Harvard University, Stanford University School of Sciences and Hu-
manities, and LSE. Currently she analyzes gendered forms of work in 
the new platform economy, rise of the entrepreneurial university, and 
professionalism and entrepreneurship. She is member of the Finnish 
Academy of Science and Letters and the Finnish Society of Sciences 
and Letters. Among her latest books are Poutanen, S. & Kovalainen, 
A. & Rouvinen, P. (2020) Digital Work and the Platform Economy, 
Routledge, NY, and Vallas, S.P. & Kovalainen, A. (2019) Work and 
Labor in the Digital Age. Emerald, and Poutanen, S. & Kovalainen, A. 
(2017) Gender and Innovation in the New Economy - Women, Identity, 
and Creative Work by Palgrave Macmillan, shortlisted for 2019 global 
Agarwal Prize. 
Intersectionality, gender, social class and the neoliberal 
self-governance of institutions and individuals
Prologue
The Swedish School of Economics in Helsinki, where I was nominated 
for a fixed-term gender professorship in 1997 probably differs in many 
aspects from today’s Hanken School of Economics. Equally though, 
I assume some things have not changed. The size of Hanken has not 
32
dramatically changed. It was smallest of the 19 universities at that time, 
with c. 150 research personnel - a size of a small faculty. Despite the size, 
it is still governed as any university by a board consisting of impressive 
external members and a highly prominent chairperson, alongside the 
academic leadership.
Hanken maintained its independence in the university merger wave of 
the early years of the 21st century. Looking back, what has endured in the 
university turmoil is that Hanken of the 21st century has been able to wi-
thhold its independence, and strengthen the image and position of being 
the strong defender of Finnish-Swedish business elite and its values.
Along with the value preservation, I believe there are also other things 
that have not changed over time: it would be difficult to imagine that 
the elite identity-building, social class and the ethos of ‘us’ vs. ‘them’ as 
inescapable institution-strengthening discourses would have evaporat-
ed or disappeared over time. How did the intersectionalities of social 
class, gender, silence, otherness and neoliberal university assemblage 
at Hanken c. 20 years ago?
Narrative
In the mid-1990s, the Ministry of Education allocated funding for fixed-
term gender professorships to seven universities. Unfortunately, there is 
no space to describe the important work of gender researchers’ national 
collective and TANE. The funding for fixed-term professorships grant-
ed by the Ministry came with the ‘wish’ – no sanctions followed - that 
professorships were to be made permanent after five years. In the 1990s 
universities were part of the civil servant machinery of the state in their 
planning and rule-following. Universities were supposed to obey with 
Ministry. Five of seven obeyed with Ministry’s wishes in this matter.
33
I accepted the nomination to Swedish School of Economics’ fixed-term 
gender professorship in the Autumn 1997, moving from Åbo Akademi 
University fixed-term post of an acting professor in sociology. Prior to 
that, I was visiting research fellow at the Gender Institute at London 
School of Economics and Political Science, and research fellow at Aca-
demy of Finland project, analysing gender, NPM and privatisation of the 
welfare society. I had finalized my PhD in economic sociology during a 
short stay at Bradford University, UK, invited by the late professor Sheila 
Allen, due to our interests in gender and entrepreneurship. By the time 
I moved to Hanken, I had had my share of academic nomadism. Upon 
arrival to Hanken I opened up negotiations with Rector of the possibility 
to fund a visiting fellow, a prominent colleague who was working short-
term at Åbo Akademi University. I was successful in securing visiting 
fellow funding for Jeff Hearn for 2 years, and able to welcome him to 
visiting position, after his fellowship at ÅAU came to end. 
By 2000 I had been successful in receiving Academy of Finland large 
multidisciplinary project on ‘Knowledge Creation’, analysing gender, 
economy and epistemic questions, and was part of an international 
project on ‘Disability and Labour Markets’. I was also one of the authors 
of Academy of Finland’s Liike-programme, and at Hanken, I designed 
with colleagues the Gender research programme, conducting research 
and planning future activities for and within gender studies. At the time 
when 4 years’ worth of the funding had been consumed, I assumed I 
had earned the permanency ‘credentials’ by bringing in ‘highly valued’ 
external funding very early on of my fixed-term period. These, along 
with other activities and invitations, should surely be enough to initiate 
discussions with leadership, following Ministry’s wishes and prior the 
end of the funding.
34
Epilogue
At hindsight, my rather naïve assumption was that the clearly articu-
lated - but non-sanctioned - wish by Ministry of Education to make the 
professorships permanent would materialize by itself at Hanken when 
the output would be sufficient. That materialization did not happen. Fol-
lowing a move abroad and resignation of one professor, the leadership 
prioritized to open that vacated post at the deparment, decision which 
left gender professorship undecided. Being token – and alone with my 
request – materialized to me rather quickly.
It is here where the assemblage of social class, gender, silence, otherness 
and neoliberal university can be scrutinised and dissected. Intersectio-
nality as a concept has become to mean in feminist studies the ability to 
search for the complexities of lived experiences embedded in systems of 
power and privilege (e.g. Carbado et al. 2013). Indeed, intersectionality 
enables us to understand how an array of socially constructed dimen-
sions of differences such as social class, power, gender and neolibera-
lism intersect to shape experiences and actions. It is crucial though, as 
in this case, to understand intersectionality as a work-in-progress. As 
e.g. Misra et al. (2021) and Tomlinson (2018) remark, it makes little 
sense to frame intersectionality as a single ‘contained entity’ but rather 
consisting of processual elements on the move. This understanding 
enables capturing the dynamics of power beyond the narrow terrain of 
articulating identities.
How do social class and gender assemblage with minority elite culture 
and neoliberalism? Thinking intersectionality as a method, as a heuristic 
and an analytic tool, the analysis – here with only few sentences available 
of the 1,000 word limitation – looks as following. For the first-generati-
on working-class academic such as me, stepping into the first post, the 
background gives no a priori knowledge of how to navigate within the 
35
privileged culture and self-interest preserving institution. This, combined 
with the otherness produced by not having ties to the Finnish-Swedish 
business elite culture of Hanken, were the key processual elements on 
the move, that intersected with the neoliberalist competition that seeps 
into researchers’ ways of being in academia, strengthened by “us and 
them” –thinking.
Looking back, the decisions made by the leadership were decisions of 
a rational economic (man) agency: why pay for two when you get one 
into the professorship that can service both jobs. 
The assumption that institutions such as universities where we work, 
are moral agents to the extent that their actions and decisions would be 
decisions of ‘a humane man’ against ‘a commercial man’ (Nussbaum, 
2017) is beautiful but naïve. The privilege and power of institutions such 
as universities is governed not by ‘a humane man’ but by leaders entang-
led in their reference groups, connections, competitions, hierarchies and 
knowledge limitations, in Nussbaum’s terms, by ‘a commercial man’.
References
Carbado, D.W., Crenshaw, K.W., Mays, V.M. and Tomlinson, B. 2013. 
Intersectionality: Mapping the Movements of a Theory, Du Bois Review: 
Social Science Research on Race, 10(2): 303-312.
Misra, J., Curington, C.V. and Green, V.M., 2021. Methods of intersec-
tional research, Sociological Spectrum, 41(1): 9-28.
Nussbaum, M.C., 2017. Not for Profit. Why Democracy Needs the Hu-
manities. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 
Tomlinson, B., 2018. Category anxiety and the invisible white wom-
an: Managing intersectionality at the scene of the argument. Feminist 
Theory, 19(2): 145-164.
36
3.18 Carolyn Kehn 
Carolyn Kehn is an affiliated researcher at Hanken’s GODESS Institute 
and was an active member of the Gender Research Group from June 
2019-September 2020. She is now studying for her Master of Social 
Work degree in San Antonio, Texas. 
We were not our titles, but rather our individual selves
During the period where I worked as a research coordinator for the 
GODESS Institute, I also actively participated in the Gender Research 
Group every month. The research and publications we discussed were 
innovative, historically grounded, and theoretically rich. However, the 
trait that distinguished this group from other academic groups for me 
was the open, welcoming atmosphere. As a student in a masters program, 
it is easy to embody the precarious nature of academia. Uncertain over 
my own desire or ability to pursue advanced degrees, I often dismiss 
myself from opportunities before being rejected by others. Without many 
publications or research fellowships, I also wonder if my contributions 
have worth in their own right. The comparisons that diminish not only 
self-image, but also the pursuit of knowledge, are as alive in the academic 
sphere as anywhere else.
Yet, the spirit and community of the Gender Research Group allowed for 
questions and comments from all participants. We were not our titles, 
but rather our individual selves –  composed of experiences that could 
not be quantified or ranked. Furthermore, there was a commitment 
to ongoing education, learning and unlearning going hand in hand as 
different contributors mentored the next generation. I often remember 
more clearly how topics were discussed, rather than what their core 
components were. The Gender Research Group embodied a spirit of 
togetherness as we explored and deconstructed problems that we all 
37
face. Whether or not I decide to remain in academia, this group provided 
both intellectual inspiration and a structural model that preserved the 
accessibility of scholastic inquiry. As I continue forward in work that 
seeks to alleviate the social burdens and barriers that people encounter, 
my fond memories of the Gender Research Group help me maintain a 
commitment to the possibility of more egalitarian communities – even 
in the least likely places. 
*****
3.19 Mira Karjalainen
Mira Karjalainen worked at Hanken as a post-doctoral researcher from 
2012 to 2016, and was an active member of the GRG. Now she works 
as a senior researcher in Gender Studies at the University of Helsinki.
Amongst academic tribes – reflections on the Gender Group 
at Hanken
Welcome to the Jungle! I said to myself when I first stepped inside the 
doors of Hanken nearly ten years ago. This was a happy notion for a 
scholar with an anthropological mind, and I was excited to find myself 
in an academic environment vastly different from my alma mater, the 
faculty of humanities at the University of Helsinki. The language was 
different, people dressed differently, they discussed doing research in 
a different manner, the research interests and thus talking points were 
quite unalike, and it was simultaneously smaller and more international 
research site than my previous workplace. And I did not know a single 
person there.
I had completed my PhD in humanities few years back in a very different 
field – study of religion – and starting work as a postdoc in business 
38
school was certainly not an obvious choice. The reason I made this choice 
was Jeff Hearn. I had familiarized myself with his work for my PhD 
dissertation on men working on oil tankers and this made it possible 
even consider working at Hanken, which from the humanities point of 
view seemed very, very far away. 
The Gender Group provided me an instant home in the department of 
Management and Organization. Group members welcomed me warmly 
and wanted to get to know me. One of the surprising notions was that, 
at that time, the department seemed to be divided and I soon learned 
how to recognize those belonging to the Gender Group – they would 
greet me cheerfully and invite me for lunch. Thus, the group provided 
me a safety net from the very first day at Hanken. The other side of the 
coin was that I was treated as “one of the Gender Group” before I really 
had a chance to know what the group was about or whether I wanted 
to join it or not. This was rather perplexing: although no one knew me 
in the department, I was already labelled and put in a strict category. 
Where had I come?
The Gender Group turned out to be an inspiring academic environment 
and I was happy to be a member once I had become familiar with it. 
Eventually, and with some rather determined effort in the form of invi-
tations for lunch or coffee, I got to know researchers outside the Gender 
Group and was accepted in the general crowd. Despite that, the Gender 
Group remained my home at Hanken.
****
39
3.20 Marjut Jyrkinen 
Marjut Jyrkinen worked at Hanken over 10 years during 2000-2011. 
She completed her PhD in 2005 and was co-convenor of the Gender 
Research Group for approximately two years. She is now Professor in 
Working Life Equality and Gender Studies at the University of Helsinki. 
Some reflections on membership of the Gender Research 
Group
My first encounter with Hanken colleagues was through attending a se-
minar at the Management and Organisation Department where without 
much warning and any preparation I was asked to present my Doctoral 
research plan. This was a bit exciting encounter as my background was 
not in business studies. This first jump into the new environment to do 
my PhD was followed by an invitation to the Gender Research group, 
which opened up to be a supportive collective of researchers at different 
career stages. For a Doctoral student, it was important to be able to meet 
regularly other researchers with similar kind of topics and interests, 
but also to reflect together the hurdles and successes common in many 
researchers’ careers. Obviously, many hurdles arise also from sensitive 
research topics that relate to gender, management and organisations 
and different kinds of power relations that are embedded in academic 
life with high competition. Gender Group meetings and seminars were 
excellent platforms to share experiences and knowledge in a friendly 
atmosphere.   
As Hanken Honorary Professor Joan Acker (1990) has stated, organ-
isations are gendered in many ways. This is the case also in academic 
organisations, although there is often a strong belief in meritocracy. A 
concrete example is the ‘gender scissors’ of careers and the differenc-
es in permanent positions held by men and by women in a study on 
40
business schools (Hearn et al. 2011). It is obvious that many overt and 
covert inequalities in everyday work in teaching, such as the number 
and level of courses, supervision possibilities, and longer fixed-term or 
more permanent positions in early career phases are relevant in devel-
oping one’s academic career. Thereby the discussions and research by 
members of the Gender Group have been of outmost importance to show 
how gendered processes are present in our own organisations, although 
these are often difficult to see and admit. Discriminations, exclusions 
and marginalizations need to be revealed in the academia in order to 
deconstruct them and to rebuild equal working opportunities and career 
possibilities for all genders. 
Members of the Gender Group have done remarkable research, both in 
forms of Doctoral theses and through collaborative projects and writing. 
It has been a great platform to test new ideas, develop them in support-
ive environment, and to gain knowledge on fresh research and ongoing 
funding possibilities and international colleagues’ projects. Teamwork 
by many members has also been a springboard for new research funding 
applications. In particular, the international emphasis of the Gender 
Group has been important and many current collaborations have the 
origin in that.   
Facilitating the Gender Group has enabled many researchers to partic-
ipate in development work and concrete leadership tasks, often with a 
senior colleague(s). The Group members have also shared their ped-
agogical experiences and enabled good setting for teaching develop-
ment. Obviously, the most inspiring part has been the actual focus on 
gender-based research in different areas. Some of the initiatives and 
activities have led to new research projects and new career development 
possibilities for many. One aspect that has been important in the Gender 
41
Group work is the organising of national gender research conferences 
together with colleagues from other business schools.    
My warmest congratulations for the 20+ years anniversary of the Gender 
Research Group, and thanks for all the support and collaboration with 
former and current group members! 
References
Acker, J., 1990. Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organi-
zations, Gender and Society, 4(2), 139-158.
Jeff Hearn, J., Husu, L., Hiillos, M., Lämsä, A-M., Vanhala, S., Holm, J., 
Laukkanen, M-E. and Peltola, K. 2011. Teaching on gender and business 
within three Finnish business schools. In L. Husu, J. Hearn, A-M. Lämsä 
and S. Vanhala (eds.) Women, management and leadership - Naiset ja 
johtajuus. Hanken Research Reports 72, 14-24. Helsinki: Hanken School 
of Economics. 
*****
3.21 Marjana Johansson
Marjana was at Hanken during three separate periods between 1998 
and 2006, initially as a project coordinator affiliated with a research 
institute and later as a lecturer and PhD student. She was an occasional 
GRG-participant (and designer of promotional materials) and is now 
a Senior Lecturer at the University of Glasgow in the UK. 
I didn’t know it at the time …
My introduction to and occasional participation in Gender Research 
Group activities happened gradually and during different periods at 
42
Hanken. I started working at Hanken in 1998 as a project coordinator, 
located in FLO (the Department of Management and Organisation) in a 
management training/consultancy capacity rather than as a researcher, 
although the research institute I was with worked closely with some 
academics and PhD students in the department. Having at that point 
worked for a few years after completing my first degree, I found that I 
liked being back in an academic setting. The GRG was formed around 
the same time, which turned out to be a fortuitous coincidence. I just 
didn’t know it at the time. 
I left Hanken in 2001, but the thought of doing a PhD had taken hold. 
As a result of it I returned in 2002 to do some teaching and to start my 
PhD project. I eventually had the opportunity to do it at the Stockholm 
School of Economics instead which led me to leave Hanken again in 
2003. However, continuing the pattern, I returned a couple of years 
later to spend some time in the department as a visiting PhD student. 
Overall, this meant that my time at Hanken and my participation in 
the group was sporadic, and I especially view the 2005-2006 visit as 
the time when my contact with the group produced a shift in how I was 
approaching and conducting my own research.  
Much of it happened informally, and I didn’t realise how much it would 
shape my later work. What I did know was that I was interested in what 
members of the group were working on and talking about. Thinking back, 
I often see before my inner eye the kitchen/coffee room at the end of the 
corridor of offices at FLO, next to what was later the ‘open space’ office 
for PhD students. At times people would have a break and a chat in the 
kitchen, which I would sometimes join. Partly through those conversa-
tions, and through occasional participation in GRG activities, including 
listening to presentations at a conference organised by the group in 2003 
if memory serves me right, I started reading more about gender, work 
43
and organisation. After finishing my PhD I have increasingly incorpo-
rated these perspectives into my thinking and writing. 
In all, I did not realise at the time what a shift coming into contact with 
the group would produce, and how much participating in a small manner 
would mean. I have continued being on the mailing list through which I 
follow what the group is doing, and I have met members at conferences 
now and then over the years. Taking up a job at Hanken twenty-three 
years ago turned out to have a long-lasting, important effect.  
*****
3.22 Liisa Husu
Liisa Husu is Senior Professor of Gender Studies at Örebro University, 
Sweden, and affiliated researcher in Hanken, Department of Manage-
ment and Organisation, member of the Gender Group since 2008, cur-
rently working in two EU projects: UniSAFE on gender-based violence 
in universities, and GRANTeD on gender bias in research funding, as 
well as advising several national and international gender equality 
projects and actions. 
Warning: serious research development going on
For a social scientist and gender scholar focusing on gender and ine-
qualities in academia, science and knowledge production, interrogating 
how academic organisations, management and leadership are gendered 
has been a long-term key interest and concern. This kind of organisatio-
nal approach contrasts to those approaches that are individualised, or 
which represent ‘women-as-the-problem’, both of which have been very 
common in this research area. Exchange and debates with other scholars 
combining organisational and gender approaches in their research have 
44
been vital to move my own research and thinking forward. In Finland, 
Hanken and especially the Department of Management and Organisa-
tion has been a rare concentration of such research, be it on business, 
military, cultural, public sector or NGO fields, with several high-profile 
research projects and a continuous flow of high-quality PhDs with gender 
focus. I have felt privileged to take part in numerous lively discussions 
and topical seminars of the Gender Group over the years since 2008, 
having first succeeded Minna Hiillos as a Project Manager of NASTA – 
Women’s Leadership, Research and Education Development, and later 
involved in European Social Fund Project on women’s careers NAISUrat, 
and lately, the GODESS institute. Thinking of the Gender Group from a 
networking and academic research development perspective, to maintain 
this kind of academic forum successfully for such a long period is a rare 
accomplishment to be applauded. Skål! 
*****
3.23 Minna Hiillos
Minna Hiillos worked at Hanken 1996-2008.  She completed her PhD 
at Hanken in 2004.  She was an active member and co-convenor of 
the GRG.  She works now as Vice President of Teaching and Learning 
at Haaga-Helia University of Applied Sciences.  
‘Application agents’ 
The joy of working with like-minded colleagues. The energy trigged by 
an inspirational atmosphere. These are the first thoughts that pop into 
my mind when thinking about my active time in the Gender Research 
Group. A group with a strong shared mindset constantly discovering new 
research ideas, organising conferences, presenting and publishing – it 
was a very active and happy time.  We were so active in searching for new 
45
funding opportunities and producing applications that we even produced 
black T-shirts for our group - with a white text ‘Application Agents’!
During my time in the group, I finished my PhD with a focus on emotions 
in organisations.  The empiric data consisted of interviews with personnel 
managers.  Many of them were women.  The concepts of emotion and 
women’s leadership began to interest me more and more.  Just after my 
PhD, a chance to apply for funding from the Ministry of Education for a 
project on Women’s Leadership was a fantastic opportunity.  Together 
with Gender Research Group colleagues and colleagues from Jyväskylä 
University and Helsinki School of Economics (now Aalto) we managed to 
receive long-term funding for NASTA - Women’s Leadership – a research 
and education development project. I was employed by this project as a 
project manager for three and a half years. This was the most productive 
period of my career as a researcher.  
The role as a researcher and a project manager in this very inspiring 
project was a kind of a turning point in my career.  I became very aware 
of the way how work life functions from a gender perspective.  Also, I 
realised that I really enjoyed organising and managing the activities of 
the NASTA and the Gender Research Group.  I started to think about 
applying for managerial jobs within academia. The Gender Research 
Group empowered and inspired my own choices in life to a great extent. 
I am grateful for that.
*****
3.24 Jeff Hearn
Jeff Hearn is Professor Emeritus in Management and Organisation, 
and Research Director, GODESS Institute, Hanken School of Economics, 
and one of the founding co-convenors of the Gender Research Group.
46
It is not so easy to know what to write … 
It is not so easy to know what to write. Certain meetings stay in my mind, 
some have been momentous, some quite fleeting and have vanished, or 
almost vanished, from memory. For me, being there from the beginning 
has brought a certain sense of responsibility – for what has gone well, and 
what hasn’t been so good, for what has worked, for what has not worked 
out. Co-convening initially with Guje Sevón, Anne Kovalainen, and then 
with Minna Hiillos, Marjut Jyrkinen, Lotta Niemistö and Annamari 
Tuori has been a great and diverse privilege. Also, Denise Salin agreed 
to co-convene, but then gained some years’ research funding elsewhere 
and so never took up the baton; and more recently it has been so good 
to now have Jonna Louvrier, Anna Maaranen and Inkeri Tanhua taking 
over as co-convenors. 
There have always been “regulars”, and these are the people that keep 
the group going, in all sorts of practical and intellectual ways. Small 
things, small gestures, can make a huge difference. And then, there are 
those who “drop in”, sometimes for just the occasional session. These 
are equally important, but in a different way. Sometimes, in some of 
these “drop ins”, it seems to be a time when “the penny drops” – ahah, 
so now I see how gender is really, really important; and that helps to 
explain x, y or z, and why I haven’t been able to put a, b or c into words. 
I have sometimes found that especially moving. 
In practice, what has happened within the Gender Research Group, or 
GRG for short, has varied a lot, often moving between detailed discus-
sions of gender research to discussions of gendered lives of researchers, 
and sometimes the gendered life of Hanken. Often, the actual sessions 
have been very lively, exhilarating; sometimes people are just tired, 
whether through too much work or a kind of gender-fatigue: some things, 
some problems, don’t go away, they just return again two, five or ten 
47
years later. FLO/Management and Organisation has been the home, 
but over the years quite a lot of others from other parts of Hanken have 
joined, as well as interested researchers and practitioners from outside 
Hanken. Then there are visitors from various part of the world, also 
equally important, in giving energy and saying we are not alone in all of 
this struggle. Also, important have been the lunches after meetings, the 
multiple contacts between meetings, and very occasional social gather-
ings and outside events. For some of those who work and live outside 
the Group, it must have been or still be all very confusing, not least in 
mixing up what is the GRG and what is institutionally the quite different 
GODESS Research and Development Institute. 
Over the life of the Group, the GRG has been like a spine … essential but 
also hopefully fairly flexible. It’s always there in the background, even 
if you’re not always aware of it, that is, until you get backache – or until 
you get gender ache: a profound condition that can take several forms, 
from minor to major, from acute to chronic.
And so how about a specific memory? There are many, but some of those 
that particularly stay with me involve times when we have organised or 
co-organised workshops, events and conferences, like the two Suku-
puolentutkimuspäivät conferences which we co-organised with friends 
and colleagues in Kauppis/Aalto. These weren’t any vague meanderings, 
but focused and task-driven, often with great urgency, and sometimes 
some panic too. The way people worked together, truly collectively and 
collaboratively, was immensely powerful – the very antithesis of the 
individual researcher with no commitment to organisational citizenship 
that has been encouraged by some recent trends in academia. Preparing 
those events certainly involved being very organised, as when thanks to 
Marjut we were able to secure President Tarja Halonen to open one of 
the conferences, and the day before the opening Minna told me I just 
have to wear a suit and tie! 
48
I also particularly recall our hiring Laulumiehet restaurant just nearby 
to Hanken for the evening party of one of those annual Gender Studies 
conferences. Then, after some tense persuasion of the restaurant man-
ager, we managed to get permission to temporally cover the faces of the 
men in all the paintings of men around the main room (and not damage 
the paintings!) with printouts of many different kinds of faces of women, 
via an ingenious system of string and paper clips. Last minute, getting 
the venue ready, tidying the rooms and installing those new paper faces 
with Teemu Tallberg and Hertta Vuorenmaa (then Niemi) was certainly 
a small panic – even if when the party got going no-one seemed to no-
tice that the portraits of men had been covered by the various masks of 
various women, at least for those few hours. 
*****
3.25 Pernilla Gripenberg
Pernilla Gripenberg completed her master’s degree at Hanken in 1996 
and continued her doctoral studies there between 1997 and 2005. She 
then continued as a teacher and researcher in various positions until 
2011 when she moved on to Hanken & SSE Executive Education where 
she is now a member of the management team as Director of Design 
and Delivery.
Belonging, learning in a context or growing and learning in 
dialogue with your context
The Gender Research Group was an important group for me as a doctoral 
student (1997-2005) and a member of faculty at the Department of Man-
agement and Organisation (2005-2011), although my research was never 
directly related to the topic of gender or diversity. All founding members, 
Guje Sevón, Jeff Hearn and Anne Kovalainen played vital roles in how 
49
my thinking in organization theory and my doctoral research around the 
relationship between humans and technology developed over the years. 
Guje Sevón who founded the Department of Management and Organ-
isation (then called the Department of Business Administration) was 
the one introducing me to Weick’s Sensemaking in organizations and 
Translating organizational change (by Sevón and Czarniawska), Bru-
no Latour’s, Michael Callon’s and John Law’s work on Actor-Network 
Theory, Shozanna Zuboff’s In the age of the smart machine, and later I 
found Antony Gidden’s and Wanda Orlikowki’s work on Structuration 
theory and the duality of technology that all impacted my studies and 
thinking. I still find those ideas about the relationship between humans 
and technology fascinating, yet still very badly understood in society 
today. I remember a story Guje told about when she picked up Bruno 
Latour from the airport in her Saab. Bruno did not fasten his seatbelt 
and the car started beeping loudly, serving as an actor in the network 
forcing Bruno to act, i.e. to buckle up! Today I can witness how my own 
teenagers are totally enslaved by technology, and they feel forced to act 
to get their daily awards in different games and apps and not miss their 
streak in Snapchat etc.
Jeff Hearn was a rock and mentor to me during my doctoral studies and 
long after, when I worked at the department. I dwelled in his fantastic 
library that he kept in his office, borrowing books that further devel-
oped my thinking on the relationship between humans and information 
technology, for example, introducing me to the work of Manuel Castells 
(The rise of the network society etc.), Joshua Meyrowitz (No sense of 
place – highly relevant framework for analysing what has happened 
now when work has moved home and boundaries are even more blurred 
than before), and of course to the gender perspective (and the Gender 
Research Group), to which people’s blindness can still baffle me com-
50
pletely. Jeff supported me by taking the time to review my texts and guide 
me forward in my thinking and writings, he was a wonderful support to 
me and all my fellow doctoral students. I remember once saying to him 
that I wish I could be a “Reader” only spending time reading fascinat-
ing and interesting books, and he told me that in UK there are people 
at universities with that title! In my current job I very rarely have any 
time to read, and I sometimes miss that luxury of sinking into the fas-
cinating world of books were thinking, ideas, frameworks and theories 
are being developed.
Anne Kovalainen, I learned to know later, and she turned out to be my 
rescuer at a time when I was struggling and at a loss with my research, 
and out of a proper supervisor. She helped me structure my various 
research efforts and projects into a coherent article thesis in no time, 
and I am truly grateful for her support. I also learned to understand how 
important it is that you get support in your process and I have tried to 
advice others to make sure they have proper supervision or belong to 
an active research group if they are planning to embark on a doctoral 
journey. For me it was a lifechanging and exiting, although not at all 
easy, journey. 
My current colleagues often praise me for being so good at taking feed-
back; that I never get low, take it personally, or get offended, but just 
listen carefully, go back to the drawing board and come back with some 
kind of new improved solution and then happily move on. I tell them it 
is because of the good work we did at the department and with the Gen-
der Research Group on how to give constructive feedback to each other 
and how not to take it personally, but as constructive help to improve 
science. We actually arranged a workshop on that involving the whole 
department! That has remained with me and today I am teaching man-
agers and leaders of Finnish and international companies how (among 
other things) to create a positive feedback culture.
51
References
Castells, M., 1996. The rise of the network society. Malden, Mass: 
Blackwell Publishers.
Czarniawska-Joerges, B.; Sevón, G., 1996. Translating organizational 
change. Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Giddens, A., 1986. The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of 
structuration. Cambridge: Polity.
Meyrowitz, J., 1985. No sense of place: The impact of electronic media 
on social behavior. New York: Oxford University Press.
Weick, K. E., 1995. Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks: 
Sage Publications.
Zuboff, S., 1988. In the Age of the Smart Machine: The Future of Work 
and Power. New York: Basic Books
*****
3.26 Leila Gharavi 
Leila started her career in telecommunication engineering and wor-
ked for Nokia as a research engineer. Later, she transitioned from 
engineering to the social sciences, motivated by a switch to studying 
sport management. This got her to be fascinated and involved in gen-
der-related issues, which took her to GODESS Institute. She next leaned 
about the new field of computational social science (CSS) and in 2019, 
started a second master’s program in CSS. She’s now working on her 
PhD proposal in the same field.
52
In all honesty …
In all honesty, my observation of academic careers has not been a pos-
itive one (perhaps more so, the social science-related ones). And by 
‘academic careers’ I mean those that start with a Doctoral degree and 
may lead onto doing research, teaching, and professorship – in various 
combinations – in academic institutions. It seems to me that such careers 
are characterised by excessive tasks and obligations, and pressures of 
competing and delivering (e.g., carrying out the work and publishing 
scientific papers, books and book chapters; preparing for and attending 
conferences; combining research and publications with teaching respon-
sibilities; engaging in writing research proposals for funding – which is 
a constant in academia – either individually or collectively). If one does 
not fully engage in all those undertakings, one way or another they are 
left behind.
Contemporary technological advances such as fast and ubiquitous con-
nection, smart devices, digitalisation, and social media, which provide 
the potential and the possibility of staying always on and responsive, 
appear to have only exacerbated an already intense situation. Academic 
colleagues seem to be working full force during the working periods, 
fulfilling urgent responsibilities during that time, and then slowing down 
so-to-speak during a few days or weeks of holidays here and there but 
using those to try to catch up with all the rest of what may need further 
attention, plus, their own personal career aspirations and interests, say, 
readings, writings, and applications. Stress and burnout seem to be part 
and parcel of such academic careers. Within this landscape, gender-re-
lated issues are likely to make matters more pronounced for women, in 
general, and mothers, in particular.
Personally, I can divide my own career in research, either in or in close 
correspondence with academia into three parts:
53
1. I was a research engineer for nearly 10 years at Nokia Research 
Center, and I have worked with many others with masters 
and PhD degrees, including those in academia with whom we 
had common projects. One issue to note is that in the private 
sector, there did not seem to be a pressure for researchers to 
have or obtain a Doctoral degree in order to build careers as 
researchers. Furthermore, I have experienced engaging in top-
rated research, while enjoying perfect balance between work 
and non-work, with good pay, support, and benefits. 
2. More recently, I worked for three years at Hanken School of 
Economics, which is where I came to observe the academic 
careers up close and personal. This is where I also engaged 
more closely in the activities of the Gender Research Group 
(GRG), as well (although, I knew of GRG and had participated 
in its meetings a couple of year prior to my employment at 
Hanken). During this period, we talked with colleagues about 
careers in academia, and more so because I was usually at the 
receiving end of this question: Are you going to start a PhD? 
(I had already discontinued one PhD in telecommunication 
engineering) Meanwhile, two colleagues who were post-doc 
researchers left academia to pursue other aspirations. There 
were others, too, who pivoted and, for instance, started their 
own external careers and slowly shifted to that direction.
3. During the past two years, I have enrolled in a new, research-
oriented master’s degree at Linköping University in Sweden to 
study computational social science. As a student, I was now at 
the receiving end of educational services provided by a group of 
researchers and lecturers in academia. In this capacity, I could 
plead with the educational system to separate the research task 
54
and teaching task so that no one could possibly engage in both, 
because the end result can well be the suffering of master’s 
degree students and having their wellbeing jeopardised. 
When a researcher has too much on their plates to attend to 
(e.g., research, publications, funding applications, teaching 
responsibilities), it is no wonder that the education and welfare 
of students has to be a lower priority.
Finally, in a matter of weeks, I will be starting to work in a research proj-
ect at Aalto University, and it already seems so that the two researchers/
lecturers, with whom we will be working, hardly have time to respond 
to their Emails. :)
It goes without saying that personalities are different; capabilities, ap-
proaches to issues, coping mechanisms, preferences and interests are 
varied, while the degree of humanity and care for others are different, 
too. Nevertheless, the idea of academic careers invokes the feeling of 
unnecessary pressure in me. As a result of these anecdotal references, 
I have had my own knee-jerk reaction to the prospects of doing a PhD. 
I feel like I will only engage when I make sure that what I have is a 
burning question, for which I need to find answers. Otherwise, life is 
supposed to come with ease and flow, humans’ well-being is and should 
stay off-limits, stress and burnout are absolutely human-made and were 
not supposed to be part of life, and balance in life is of a prime value. 
In this environment, I feel that Gender Research Group (GRG), having 
already clocked over 20 years after its conception, has served as a com-
munity for professional and emotional support and care to its members. 
Formally, GRG was formed in 1999-2000 in order to advance scientific 
knowledge on gender-related issues, and to put gender at the centre of 
research and analysis on such subjects as national and transnational 
organisations, economy, identity and culture, information, technolo-
55
gy. The existence of such a long precedence in research on gender at a 
business school is quite remarkable but as I mentioned, my observation 
and attendance in the monthly meetings of the group have shown me 
that this group goes beyond its formal guidelines. It has been flexible 
and stood with open arms to topics that members might have wished to 
discuss, even outside of the circle of gender, and to talks from outsiders 
to the group. 
What has remained constant has been the will to keep the monthly 
physical meetings intact, sometimes with 4-5 people only, sometimes 
many more, and to make these meetings more than just an academic/
professional exchange. To my knowledge and experience, the meetings 
were held in the midday, after which the participants would go to have 
lunch together, as well. Yet another plus sign in the profile of the GRG. 
:) I have personally attended, presented in, and invited outside speak-
ers to the monthly meetings of the GRG and have enjoyed them all. We 
have spoken about all aspects of gender, theory, methodology, human 
psychology and wellbeing, academic careers, race, etc. etc. I have also 
witnessed the GRG position itself as a friendly and supportive space for 
researchers to received feedback on their work prior to presenting in a 
formal setting that might be of significance to their careers. I am confi-
dent that through the years, members of the GRG have drawn all kinds of 
personal and professional benefits from this group, and GRG has served 
as a community where the members have discussed their concerns and 
have found from other members that even though the going may get 
tough, they are not alone and that together, they can find a way. To me, 
this is how a gender-aware society would present itself and function.
Finally, a word about our current historical times, marked by the 
COVID-19 pandemic. I have noticed that many physical gatherings, 
seminars, conferences, festivals, etc. that had to go online during the 
56
pandemic have noticed that they can attract many more – as well as more 
diverse – audiences to their cause. Moreover, society as a collective has 
got more technologically sound and fluent in video conferencing, and 
everyone has become increasingly more used to initiating or being at 
the receiving end of online gatherings. It remains to be seen how nearly 
everything in life will turn out to be after the COVID-19 pandemic is 
over, including the monthly meetings of the GRG.
Happy 21st anniversary to the GRG! And here is to the next 20 strong 
years ahead … 
*****
3.27 Martin Fougère
Martin Fougère is an Associate Professor in Management and Politics 
at Hanken. He has been an occasional member of the GRG since 2007, 
when he became an Assistant Professor in Politics and Business within 
the Department of Management and Organisation.
The GRG and its constructively radical discussions
While I have been a member of the Gender Research Group (GRG) 
at Hanken since 2007, I would say I probably haven’t participated in 
more than 15 meetings over the years, which means approximately one 
per year on average. Even so, the GRG has meant a lot to me, not least 
because it has made me aware of possibilities for going about academic 
presentations and discussions differently. Before I became a member, I 
experienced research seminars primarily as the theatre of a confrontation 
of academic egos. As a junior postdoc scholar eager to contribute with 
my own perspective, I was excited by these types of seminars and did 
57
find them sometimes rewarding. But they were also intimidating, and 
in some cases, downright scary. 
Against this backdrop, attending my first GRG meeting in 2007 was a 
refreshing experience. It soon seemed to me that due to a very bene-
volent atmosphere, everyone in the group feels there is a low threshold 
for both presenting and discussing. While a constructive climate is va-
luable in itself, what is particularly remarkable is that this GRG climate 
seems to subsist almost effortlessly despite the issues discussed being 
anything but ‘easy’, frictionless themes. At the core of the GRG, there 
is a questioning of (economic, societal, but also academic) structures, 
and the members seemingly remain always open to discussing some of 
the most complex societal topics, often with a denaturalizing element 
and subversive implications. This combination of radical openness to 
critical discussions and inclusive constructive dialogue has been very 
inspirational for me – although exactly how it is achieved also remains 
something of a mystery to me. 
Many of the initiatives I’ve been associated with since 2007 have been 
influenced by the GRG – though certainly not always consciously. The 
CREME cross-disciplinary seminars at Hanken were meant to be in a 
similar spirit as the GRG, and so are the Responsible Organising (RO) 
‘What do you think?’ seminars. However, neither of these seminar series 
have been as successful as the GRG at (1) always delivering a benevolent 
atmosphere, and (2) getting a critical mass of people to always be there. 
There is definitely something unique about the GRG, and I have expe-
rienced this every single time I have attended GRG meetings since 2007.
*****
58
3.28 Katja Einola
Katja is an assistant professor at Stockholm School of Economics and 
her research focuses on teams, leadership, research methods, HRM and 
higher education. She has twenty years of professional experience in 
small and large multinational firms spanning three continents.
A community to lean on
To me, the Gender Research Group has meant the type academic commu-
nity I was expecting to find when I left my job of 15 years in IT/Telecom 
and decided to do a PhD in my early forties. To my disappointment I 
had slowly discovered, however, that many academic environments are 
not communities I had imagined. In my, well, fantasy, perhaps inspired 
by the thrilling discoveries by the many men and women of science I 
so admired, I had built unrealistic and naive expectations of the Acade-
mic Sect. With time I found out that collegiality was a value cherished 
by some, for sure, but not by many others. Around me, I saw rather 
hierarchical institutions with cultures resembling those of some big 
consulting firms or investment banks with people working in teams but 
relentlessly pursuing their own interest, being rewarded for that, and 
building structures that worryingly look like pyramids. 
I suppose, like so many others, I started playing the game while keeping 
a diary on my experiences, a lot of which was about gender, being an 
over-aged junior academic, organizational dysfunctions of all kinds (my 
job in IT was to sort out such dysfunctions so I keep on spotting them 
after all this time, still getting frustrated that I cannot do anything about 
... anything much anymore) and about the impossibility to make things 
like ‘work/life balance’ work for me.
59
I never really joined the Group but sort of gravitated towards it organical-
ly through a series of informal encounters first with Jeff, my then office 
neighbour, and then with Charlotta, Annamari, Leila, Inkeri, and so on. 
In the midst of trying to put bread on the table and to secure funding, 
a job, a consulting assignment ... and get those bloody four-star-publi-
cations that pave the way to a job (perhaps), I one day found myself in 
one of those Group’s Monday meetings. I just sat back and enjoyed the 
company and learned something new, completely different. I felt my 
feet on the ground and head in the clouds. Yes, in my numbness I felt 
something and that was ... interesting.
My role in the group has been peripheral and participation sporadic, 
but I have all along had a reassuring feeling that within this group, I 
could relax, let go and freely talk about my budding ideas, embryonic 
projects and also my saddest failures and hurts I have had to hide from 
the outside world. I think the most precious thing in this group is its 
(unacademic!?), open-minded humanity, openness to difference and 
tolerance of divergent opinions and worldviews, including mine that 
reflects a curious but sceptical attitude towards gender studies and fe-
minism in general. 
But with time, with every instant, we change, and the world changes. 
I’ve changed, too.
I do not know exactly what is the cause and what is the effect of all this 
changing, nor do I care. All things are interlinked and tangled in my 
mind. Hopelessly and fantastically messed up. In fact, I stopped caring 
about causality altogether at some point. I am writing about gender-to-
pics now, on the side of other topics like leadership, teams, ignorance 
and method ... It is like continuing with the diary, but raising my tone 
of voice. 
*****
60
3.29 Hanne Dumur-Laanila
Viimeiset kaksi vuotta Hanne Dumur-Laanila on toiminut tutkimus-
koordinaattorina Hankenilla Responsible Organising (RO) -vahvuus-
alueella. Päätyön ohella Hanne tekee selvitys- ja julkaisutoimintaa 
konsulttina, on aktiivinen järjestötoiminnassa ja on hurahtanut täysin 
viherkasveihin sekä pihaviljelyyn. 
Yksi ryhmä – monta näkökulmaa
Niin kuin monet muutkin työyhteisöt tässä ajassa, akatemiakin on melko 
kilpailuhenkinen ja hierarkkinen. Tällaisessa maailmassa tulee väistä-
mättä etsineeksi tilaa, jossa voi säännöllisin väliajoin sulkea oven kaikelta 
muulta ja kokea tulevansa hyväksytyksi yhteisön tasavertaisena jäsenenä 
titteleihin tai arvomerkkeihin katsomatta. 
Parhaimmillaan turvallinen tila antaa mahdollisuuden uuden innovoin-
tiin ja kehittämiseen. Se luo myös pohjaa kestävälle ja luottamukseen 
perustuvalle yhteistyölle. Se on kuin turvaverkko, jonka läpi ei putoa 
heti ensimmäisestä silmusta. Tai jos on putomassa, on aina joku, jonka 
käteen voi tarttua. Oman kokemukseni mukaan tiedeyhteisö kuten monet 
muutkin työyhteisöt tarvitsevat tällaista tiloja. Ei vain yhtä, vaan monta. 
Minulle ”Gender Research Group” edustaa juuri tällaista pitkäjänteisellä 
työllä rakennettua tilaa, jossa voi vapaasti esittää ajatuksia ja näkökul-
mia tutustuen samalla uusiin ihmisiin. Olen saanut mahdollisuuden 
olla kuuntelemassa viimeisimpiä tutkimustuloksia ja saanut käsiini 
uunituoreita tutkimusartikkeleita. On hienoa kun saa ratsastaa ajan 
hermolla, eikö vain?
Silti, ennen kaikkea olen saanut etuoikeutetusti kuunnella kertomuksia 
myös onnistumisen tai epävarmuuden tunteista. Näistä tunteista har-
61
vemmin puhutaan työtovereiden kesken. Olen tästä nöyrästi kiitollinen. 
Nämä tarinat tulevat kuulluiksi, koska siihen on annettu mahdollisuus. 
Jos voisin jotain konkreettista ottaa mukaan tästä ryhmästä, on se voi-
maantumisen tunne. Haluan kuljettaa sen tunteen ryhmästä ja työyh-
teisöstä toiseen myös tulevaisuudessa. Mielestäni jokainen työyhteisö 
tarvitsee oman gender-ryhmän!
Näillä sanoilla toivotan pitkää ikää kaksikymppiselle ryhmälle!
*****
3.30 Stephanie Clark
Stephanie Clark completed her MA at University College London in 
2019, has been an active member of the GRG since January 2021, and 
was accepted for doctoral studies at the University of Helsinki in Au-
gust 2021 (thanks in no small part to the GRG’s wonderful support!) 
Reflections from a zygote
As I write this reflection, I am conscious that my voice may be slightly 
different from my fellow contributors to this volume. As someone who 
is both new to the group and also very new to academia as a whole 
(practically zygotic compared with the wealth of knowledge on display!), 
I am painfully aware that I have fewer experiences to give than others 
and a distinct sense that I have less licence to give those experiences. 
However, it is my hope that this different perspective can provide our 
readers with an idea of what it is to be a newcomer to the group, and 
hopefully even persuade some others to get involved!
Joining the GRG has been extremely timely for me – coinciding with 
my plans to move from the patriarchal world of consulting in London to 
62
the distinctly more feminised world of academia in Finland, while also 
coming at a time of great discord in the wider world. Of course, all these 
things are connected. A global pandemic has been the perfect time to 
re-evaluate and reprioritise, leading me to get in touch with Jeff Hearn 
for advice about doctoral studies, which in turn led me to this group upon 
Jeff’s kind invitation. I joined the group in January with some trepidation 
- I had heard a lot of stereotypes about the antisocial nature of Nordic 
people in general and Finns in particular (one fantastic joke to come out 
of the pandemic is how Finns look forward to the end of the two metre 
social distancing rule … so they can go back to their usual six meters). 
 These stereotypes have been proven spectacularly false by the group. 
Everyone has been so friendly and welcoming, and made me very quickly 
feel as though I had been a part of it for years.
The group has been somewhat of an oasis for me over the past few 
months, hearing engaging discussions about topics like aging and an-
thropocentrism, and receiving so much generous advice on my own 
work. It has absolutely convinced me that I am doing the right thing 
in planning on continuing my studies in Finland. The presence of wel-
coming spaces which encourage the active participation of women is 
something I’ve found to be surprisingly (and depressingly) rare in my 
career so far. I am also particularly conscious that, at the time of writing, 
as a Londoner, the murder of Sarah Everard by a London police officer 
is still very fresh in my mind and in the minds of many British people. 
It is these acts of violence which remind us of the preciousness of spaces 
in which women can feel safe and welcome – where public spaces feel 
unsafe it is these private spaces into which we retreat. It has been a real 
pleasure for me to have been invited into one such of these spaces and 
I hope it will continue long into the future – perhaps I will soon qualify 
for embryo status! Peukut pystyyn!
63
3.31 Valentina Carnali 
Valentina Carnali is an undergraduate student of Contemporary His-
tory at the University of Bologna, and a trainee at GODESS Institute 
(September-November 2021). As a part of GODESS, she has attending 
the Gender Research Group meetings during her traineeship.
Previously she spent her second year of studies at Univerzita Karlova 
in Prague, focusing on contemporary history and gender history. Her 
main interest is the historical development of gender equality policies, 
mainly tackled from a cross-national perspective. 
Reflection of a newcomer and early leaver
As the end of my already brief internship at GODESS is getting closer, 
it is not easy to process both the position of being a newcomer and an 
early leaver, and my voice may seems quite different compared with 
previous ones. When I was asked by Jeff to write a short contribution, 
my first reaction was “What am I even going to write?” “Shall I do that?” 
“Are you sure Jeff?”. 
Nevertheless, now I feel that is a great and needed way to express the 
grateful feeling I have for the Gender Research Group. Despite having an 
incredibly microscopic career in academia, I’ve been warmly welcome by 
the GRG, invited to their sessions and join their interesting discussions. 
I felt so inspired listening to the experiences of all the researchers, PhD 
students, Professors I had around, as much as having a safe space where 
I could express my own thoughts without the fear of being “considerated 
less”. 
On top of this, the possibility to help in the last steps for the realization 
of this publication, has definitely make me acknowledge even more what 
a wonderful space of confront this Group is. Reading and going throught 
64
all the contributions made be somehow establish a connections with the 
past times of the GRG, that - funny enough- has almost my age. 
I want to deeply thanks all: who let me be part of this, and also who I’ve 
never met but has been an active member of the process that has brought 
the GRG until this moment. 
My gratitude is endless, and I hope I will have the occasion to contribute 
more in the future. 
*****
3.32 Ingrid Biese
Ingrid Biese is a Postdoctoral Researcher at the Swedish School of Social 
Science at the University of Helsinki in Finland with a PhD in sociology 
from the University of South Australia. She is also an entrepreneur and 
the founder of The Art Place Finland, a space and platform for bringing 
research findings back into the organizational world, and where she 
works with individuals and organizations around issues of sustai-
nable working cultures, practices, and solutions. Biese was an active 
member of the Gender Research Group while she was a PhD candidate 
and during subsequent years when she was employed by the Hanken 
School of Economics. Biese’s main area of research is the phenomenon 
known as opting out and includes both men and women who opt out 
of successful careers to adopt new lifestyles where they can live and 
work on their own terms. Her areas of interest are sustainable work, 
gender, masculinities, identity globalization and individualization. 
Biese regularly engages in public debates on sustainable careers and 
lifestyles, for example, through her blog theoptingoutblog.com.
65
My home away from home 
When I started working on my doctorate, I decided to do the uncon-
ventional thing of enrolling in a PhD program at a university that was 
literally on the other side of the globe from where I lived. With my de-
partment, supervisor and colleagues so far away, I needed to build my 
own network and find colleagues that I could actually meet in person 
and collaborate with. I found this in the Gender Research Group, which 
soon became ‘my home away from home’. Jeff Hearn and the other mem-
bers of the Gender Research Group welcomed me with open arms and 
the warmth and collegiality I found meant a lot to me. The discussions 
were always friendly, open and constructive and the group became a 
safe place for me to share my ideas, to raise questions and insecurities, 
and to present my research as it evolved. I remember the first time I 
presented my research in front of the group, I over-zealously went on for 
almost two hours. However, no one got restless or seemed bored even for 
a second! On the contrary, everyone listened attentively and engaged in 
helpful discussions. The group was, at the time, a much-needed source 
of support and inspiration for me. 
Being a part of the Gender Research Group opened up other possibil-
ities as well. It has been the springboard for collaborations with other 
members and through the support of especially Jeff it provided teaching 
opportunities as well as work in projects. One example is the two-year 
ESF-funded research and development project NaisUrat (2013-2015) 
that I had the opportunity to manage. 
For me, the Gender Research Group has always stood for collaboration 
over competition. It was a wonderful environment in which to grow as 
a researcher when I came back to academia after years in the business 
world, and for that I am thankful!
66
4. APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Completed PhDs include
Denise Salin The Antecedents of Workplace Bullying, 2003.
Minna Hiillos Personnel Managers and Crisis Situations. Emotion-hand-
ling Strategies, 2004.
Marjut Jyrkinen Sexualised Violence, Global Linkages and Policy 
Instruments, 2005.
Mia Örndahl Survival Stories: Knowledge Intensive Organisations and 
the 1990s Recession, 2005.
Solja Paganus Finnish Business Repatriates’ Coping Strategies, 2006.
Teemu Tallberg The Gendered Social Organisation of Defence: Two 
Ethnographic Case Studies in the Finnish Defence Forces, 2009.
Hertta Niemi (now Vuorenmaa) Managing in “the Golden Cage”: An 
Ethnographic Study of Work, Management and Gender in Parliamentary 
Administration, 2010.
Beata Segercrantz ‘… the walls fell down but the blokes just coded …’: 
Varieties of Stability in Software Product Development during Orga-
nizational Restructurings, 2011.
Charlotta Niemistö Work/family Reconciliation: Corporate management, 
Family Policies, and Gender Equality in the Finnish Context, 2011.
Violetta Khoreva Gender Inequality, Gender Pay Gap and Pay Inequity: 
Perceptions and Reactions in Finnish Society and Workplaces, 2012. 
67
Marion Pajumets Post-socialist Masculinities, Identity Work, and Social 
Change: An Analysis of Discursive (Re)constructions of Gender Identity 
in Novel Social Situations, 2012 (Tallinn University).
Jonna Louvrier Diversity, Difference and Diversity Management: A Con-
textual and Interview Study of Managers and Ethnic Minority Employees 
in Finland and France, 2013.
Annamari Tuori Doing Intersectional Identity Work: Social Categories, 
Inequalities and Silences, 2014.
Sanne Bor A Theory of Meta-organisation: An Analysis of Steering 
Processes in European Commission-funded R&D ‘Network of Excel-
lence’ Consortia, 2014. 
Ingrid Biese-Stjernberg Opting Out: A Critical Study of Women 
Leaving their Careers to Adopt New Lifestyles, 2014 (University of 
South Australia).
Ling Eleanor Zhang On Becoming Bicultural: Language Competence, 
Acculturation and Cross-cultural Adjustment of Expatriates in China, 
2015. 
Paula Koskinen-Sandberg The Politics of Gender Pay Equity: Policy 
Mechanisms, Institutionalized Undervaluation, and Non-decision Ma-
king, 2016. 
Tricia Cleland Silva Packaging Nurses: Mapping the Social Worlds of 
Transnational Human Resource Management, 2016.
68
Appendix 2: Ongoing PhD projects
Susanna Bairoh: The Gender(ed) Gap(s) in STEM – Exploring and 
Explaining the Underrepresentation of Women                                                                                       
Cecilia Blomster: Essays on Work and Family Economics
Stephanie Clark: Alterity and the Construction and Deconstruction of 
Masculinities in Anglo-Western Migrant Men in Finland (University 
of Helsinki)
Neema Komba: Entrepreneurship in Practice – Strategies for Start-up 
Survival and Growth in a Corrupt Environment
Susanna Kallio: Exploring Gender Dynamics in Intellectual Property
Anna Maaranen: Impacts of Social Media on Work and Organization
Hanna Sjögren: A Critical Approach to Maintaining and Promoting 
Human Sustainability in Elderly Care (University of Helsinki)
Micaela Stierncreutz: Resistance in Nordic Gender Equality Work
Inkeri Tanhua: Explaining Occupational Gender Segregation – 
Students’ Experiences of Two Technical Study Programmes in 
Vocational Education
69
Appendix 3: Gender Research Group brochure (2003)
70
Appendix 4: Genusforskning med internationell prägel
Den tvärvetenskapliga konferensen ”Kön och makt: Organisationer i fö-
rändring” samlade genusforskare från Hanken, Helsingfors handelshö-
gskola och övriga högskolor. Professor Jeff Hearn i mitten. Foto: HKKK:s 
bildarkiv
Genusforskning med internationell prägel Genusforskningen är en 
gemensam nämnare för ett flertal forskare vid Hanken.Våren 2003 
ordnades en konferens som besöktes av forskare från hela världen, tio 
bokprojekt fick sin början och kurser om genus fortsätter att locka gläd-
jande många studerande. 
Den tvärvetenskapliga konferensen ”Kön och makt: Organisationer i 
förändring” ordnades av Hankens forskningsgrupp – Gender Relations 
in Organisation, Management and Society – tillsammans med en mots-
varande grupp kring genusforskning vid Helsingfors handelshögskola. 
Enligt professor Jeff Hearn hade tanken om ett möte grott länge. 
71
Överraskande stort intresse 
– Vi hade inte väntat oss ett så stort intresse som det blev, berättar pro-
fessor Jeff Hearn vid institutionen för företagsledning och organisation 
(FLO). Trots anspråkslös marknadsföring svällde det lilla seminariet 
raskt till en konferens med hundra deltagare från både universitetsvär-
lden och andra organisationer. Det här var den första nationella konfe-
rensen i sitt slag om genus, organisation och ledarskap. Man visste att 
forskarfältet var splittrat men inte att det var så här stort. Hearn kons-
taterar att många som forskar kring genus kan vara ganska ensamma 
på sin arbetsplats.En del undervisar kanske i ett helt annat ämne,till 
exempel marknadsföring, och forskar vid sidan om det. Det finns inga 
tjänster som uttryckligen är vikta för forskning i genus, organisation och 
ledarskap. En effekt av konferensen 2003 var således att likasinnade fick 
träffas och utbyta idéer. En annan var att deltagarna enades om att ordna 
en uppföljande konferens på ett annat universitet i Finland. Sedan var 
steget att ge ut en bok med bidragen från konferensen kort. – Det var 
ett bra sätt att presentera ett tvärsnitt av den nuvarande forskningen i 
Finland, säger Hearn. Han och doktoranderna Minna Hiillos, Marjut Jyr-
kinen och Hertta Niemi har tillsammans med kolleger från Helsingfors 
handelshögskola redigerat texter till boken ”Sukupuoli & Organisaatiot 
liikkeessä – Gender & Organisations in Flux” som utkommer hösten 
2004. I boken behandas bland annat organisationer och kvinnliga ledare, 
företagande och kön samt teknologi, kön och organisationer. Jeff Hearn 
har bedrivit forskning om genus,organisation och ledarskap sedan slutet 
av 1970-talet i England. Han kom till Finland på 1990-talet och träffade 
då professor Anne Kovalainen och dåvarande Hankenprofessorn Guje 
Sevón. Sevón ledde ett genusperspektiv, säger Jeff Hearn. Han har varit 
ledare för ett forskarnätverk där man studerat män i Europa ur olika 
synvinklar. Fokus har legat på män hemma och på jobb, män och social 
72
exklusion, män och våld samt mäns hälsa. Projektet fick EU-finansie-
ring för tre år fram till år 2003. Forskarna i nätverket har tillsammans 
skrivit fyra böcker, bland annat ”Men and Masculinities in Europe” och 
ett flertal artiklar till internationella tidskrifter. Institutionen för företa-
gsledning och organisation har en internationell prägel. I början av år 
2003 utsågs ämnet företagsledning och organisation till en av Finlands 
spetsenheter inom grundutbildningen för åren 2004–2006 av Rådet 
för utvärdering av högskolorna. Intressanta forskningsrön och inno-
vativa undervisningsmetoder attraherar utländska forskare på längre 
eller kortare besök. Hit hör bl.a. professor Linda McKie från Glasgow 
Caledonian University som har varit gästande professor och undervisat 
doktorander samt portugisiskan dr Cristina Reis som har tillbringat ett 
år av sina postdoktorala studier vid institutionen för företagsledning 
och organisation. Jeff Hearn är emellertid den första engelskspråkiga 
professorn som fått fast anställning på Hanken. Han har funnit sig väl till 
rätta på institutionen. – Det här är ett av de vänligaste ställen jag jobbat 
på, säger han. Toleransen är hög och attityden till språk avslappnad. 
Hans svenska är ”inte så bra” men han klarar av att följa med institu-
tionens möten.Arbetet med de studerande går utmärkt. – Så gott som 
alla doktorander skriver på engelska.Om du vill göra akademisk karriär 
och bli publicerad internationellt ligger det i ditt eget intresse att skriva 
på engelska, eller på något annat världsspråk. 
Genus lockar studerande 
Genus diskuteras inte bara på doktorandnivå. Det finns en valfri kurs, 
”Gender, Management and forskningsprojekt om lågkonjunkturen, 
kvinnor och företagsamhet. I slutet av 90-talet fick Hanken som enda 
handelshögskola en av de åtta tidsbundna professurerna i kvinnoveten-
skap som undervisningsministeriet inrättat. Anne Kovalainen valdes till 
professor och Hearn samarbetade med henne i ett forskningsprojekt 
73
som handlade om kön och ledarskap. De gjorde bland annat en under-
sökning om jämställdhet i finska företag. Som bäst görs en uppföljande 
studie med sju av dessa företag. Den högsta ledningen redogör för sin 
syn på jämställdhet i teori och praktik. Rebecca Piekkari har utfört in-
tervjuerna som en del av sin postdoktorala forskning. Hearn utnämndes 
till forskare vid Finlands Akademi år 2000. Han har skrivit böcker som 
getts ut av internationella toppförlag, till exempel Sage. Dessutom har 
han anlitats som expert av Europarådet, Europeiska kommissionen och 
Sveriges regering. Genusforskning har alltså bedrivits under en längre tid 
på Hanken.I dag finns det ett tiotal doktorander vilkas ämne på ett eller 
annat sätt tangerar frågan om genus, organisation och ledarskap. Hearn 
nämner bland andra Minna Hiillos som intresserar sig för personalchefer 
och kriser, Denise Salin som nyligen har doktorerat på ekonomer och 
mobbning, Marjut Jyrkinen som fördjupat sig i globalisering, sexhandel 
och IT, Hertta Niemi som skriver om kön och parlamentariska organi-
sationer samt Teemu Tallberg som granskar manliga nätverk. 
Ledarskap och män 
Genusforskningen på Hanken har fyra tyngdpunktsområden: Kön och 
ledarskap,olika former av våld inom organisationer, så som mobbning, 
kränkningar och attityder till sexhandel, informationssamhället och 
forskning om män. – Det kan verka självklart att fokusera på män, men 
faktum är att man sällan granskar mannen ur ett 15 Organisation”, som 
grundstuderande kan ta. Doktoranden Minna Hiillos har lett den i två 
år. – Jag vet att handelshögskolor överlag har svårt att locka studerande 
till valfria kurser som behandlar genus. Läsåret 2003 var det 30 perso-
ner som deltog och till min stora förvåning anmälde sig ännu flera till 
våren 2004,berättar hon.Det här anser Hiillos är väldigt positivt och 
hon ser att det finns ett intresse bland högskolestuderandena för kurser 
i genus. – Det är inte alls självklart. Vissa studerande är ganska kritiska 
74
till den här typen av kurser. Även om vi diskuterar genus så fokuserar 
kurslitteraturen mest på kvinnans ställning på arbetsmarknaden. Minna 
Hiillos är mån om att ha ett genusperspektiv men det är ett ofrånkomligt 
faktum att kvinnor är en minoritet på ledande poster. Ju högre upp i 
hierarkin man kommer, desto färre kvinnliga chefer finns det. Kvinnorna 
utgör 2–3 procent av ledarna i toppställningar. I studenternas kritik kan 
Hiillos skönja tankesättet att kvinnor inte vill stressa och ta de risker 
som till exempel en vd-post medför. Man menar att kvinnor av naturen 
är mera familjeorienterade och mindre karriärsugna. – Jag måste ge de 
manliga deltagarna en eloge.De kan ofta hantera den här frågan på ett 
moget sätt, säger hon.Det händer att de kvinnliga studerande vänder 
sig direkt till dem och frågar om män tycker kvinnor är ett hot på arbet-
smarknaden. Till det har de manliga studerandena försiktigt svarat att 
de tycker konkurrensen överlag är hård. Kursen hålls på engelska vilket 
medför att en del utbyteselever väljer den. Härmed får kursen en extra 
krydda i form av olika kulturella perspektiv på genus. 
– Fransmännen säger att vi skandinaver är längre hunna i de här frågor-
na.Vi talar om barn och hur familjelivet kan kombineras med arbetslivet. 
Sådant diskuteras väldigt lite hos dem, säger Hiillos. Hon bemödar sig 
om att utvidga begreppet genus och drar bland annat paralleller till andra 
minoriteter på arbetsmarknaden. Många av studenterna kommer att 
arbeta i en global miljö där det finns etniska och religiösa minoriteter. 
Eftersom normen i arbetslivet är den vita,västerländske mannen är det 
av intresse att diskutera hur andra minoriteter upplever sin ställning där. 
Efterdyningar av lågkonjunkturen 
Hiillos kom till Hanken år 1996 och har undervisat här sedan dess.Pa-
rallellt med undervisningen har hon deltagit i olika forskningsprojekt 
och skrivit på sin doktorsavhandling. Hon vill inte säga så mycket om 
75
avhandlingen eftersom den ännu inte är klar. I korthet handlar den dock 
om personalchefer och hur de hanterar kriser. I slutet av 1980-talet job-
bade Minna Hiillos med chefsutveckling på ett stort finländskt företag. 
Hon såg det ekonomiska uppsvinget och djupdykningen som följde. Hän-
delserna under lågkonjunkturen väckte många frågor hos henne. – Det 
var en tuff period för alla personalchefer. Alla trevliga utvecklingsprojekt 
lades på is, konstaterar hon. Det här är bakgrunden till att hon valde 
att koncentrera sig på personalchefer och hur de handskats med svåra 
situationer i arbetslivet. Genusfrågan är aktuell här eftersom cirka 60 
procent av personalcheferna i Finland är kvinnor. Hiillos har varit med 
om att skriva en bok om kvinnligt ledarskap, ”Näköaloja naisjohtajuu-
teen”, och där diskuterar hon bland annat frågan om moderskap. Det 
har nämligen visat sig att en kvinna betraktas som en potentiell mor på 
arbetsmarknaden - även om hon inte har barn. Det här påverkar hennes 
ställning i en rekryteringssituation. Om en kvinna är ogift utgår man från 
att hon snart kommer att gifta sig.Sen när hon är gift får hon antagligen 
barn och så måste hon ofta stanna hemma med sjuka småbarn. 
– En kvinna är följaktligen andra klassens arbetskraft under en period 
på cirka tio år, säger Minna Hiillos. För en man är det däremot ingen 
belastning att vara i fertil ålder och gift. Då uppfattas han som någon 
som stabiliserat sig.
Kvinnliga chefer har dock en fördel. De kan utnyttja sin moderlighet i 
arbetet och göra det till en del av sin karisma.
Hiillos konstaterar att de merkantila ämnena av tradition uppfattas som 
könsblinda. Hon önskar att man oftare beaktade genus i forskningen.
Genus är en aspekt som borde beaktas oftare till exempel när man un-
dervisar i ledarskap, gruppdynamik och kommunikation. 
76
Genus och kön
Många har stött på ordet genus i samband med skolgrammatiken då man 
lärde sig hur substantiv skulle böjas. Inom genus- och kvinnoforskningen 
används ordet genus i en annan betydelse. Professor Jeff Hearn ger en 
kort, förenklad förklaring: 
Kön är biologiskt betingat. När vi föds kategoriseras vi som pojkar eller 
flickor. 
Genus är kulturella, sociala, politiska och ekonomiska versioner av vad 
ett kön är. Den här kategoriseringen är inte biologiskt betingad och den 
varierar från samhälle till samhälle.
Source
SVENSKA HANDELSHOGSKOLAN 
ÅRSBERÄTTELSE 2003 
SWEDISH SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS 
AND BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
place an 
ean code here
JEFF H
EA
RN
, C
H
A
RLO
TTA
 N
IEM
ISTÖ
 A
N
D
 M
A
RG
A
U
X V
IA
LLO
N
 - M
EM
O
RIES A
N
D
 REFLEC
TIO
N
S FRO
M
 TH
E G
EN
D
ER RESEA
RC
H
 G
RO
U
P
Memories and Reflections from 
the Gender Research Group
21 Years of Collaborative Action
EKONOMI OCH SAMHÄLLE
ECONOMICS AND SOCIETY
7
9
In most organisations, ideas of collaboration and 
collaborative action are often lauded, but often in 
practice more challenging to carry into effect. The 
Hanken School of Economics Research Group on 
Gender Relations in Organisations, Management 
and Society, usually known as the Gender Research 
Group, or just GRG, was launched publicly in 
2000. This collection celebrates those 21 years of 
existence. It brings together memories and reflections 
from members and former members. It is collective 
effort from the corridors of Hanken, from elsewhere 
in Finland, and from beyond. The continuing message 
is that gender matters, that researching gender and 
gender relations come in many shapes and sizes, 
and that these in turn impact in multiple ways on 
working, organisational and personal lives, and on 
the changing form of academia and science. In this 
long-term process, the importance of mutual support 
and mutual learning cannot be over-stated. 
 
“[This publication] … tells me about a supportive 
community and, (citing from the texts): a relaxed, 
inspirational and creative atmosphere, eye-opening 
occasions, honesty, companionship, laughter, 
friendship, equality, and humour, also when the topics 
are heavy or personal. At the same time, the meta 
story conveys the authors’ feeling of being involved in 
important and meaningful academic work conducted 
in an international network.” (Professor Emeritus Karl-
Erik Sveiby, Hanken School of Economics) 
 
“This publication is important because the 
experiences and accounts of the influences of the 
Group members to their studies, professional identities, 
careers and life in general are made visible. The 
publication shows that any research group, such as 
the Gender Research Group can have an extensive 
influence on many spheres of an individual’s life, not 
solely to the advancement academic contentbased 
knowledge of a topic in question.” (Professor Anna-
Maija Lämsä, Jyväskylä University) 
 
”This delightful volume attests that the most 
generative moments in research can be found in 
the meeting of great minds. The personal stories are 
contagious, highlighting the emotional, serendipitous 
and transformative sides of research collaboration 
that too rarely get discussed in published work. 
Congratulations on this wonderful book!” (Rebecca 
Piekkari, Marcus Wallenberg Professor of International 
Business, Aalto University) 
 
For anyone interested in getting inspiration on the 
potential that collaboration can bring, please read on! 
Jeff Hearn, Charlotta Niemistö and Margaux Viallon 
HANKEN SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS
HELSINKI
ARKADIANKATU 22, P.O. BOX 479,
00101 HELSINKI, FINLAND
PHONE: +358 (0)29 431 331
VAASA
KIRJASTONKATU 16, P.O. BOX 287,
65101 VAASA, FINLAND
PHONE: +358 (0)6 3533 700
BIBLIOTEKET@HANKEN.FI
HANKEN.FI/DHANKEN
Memories and Reflections from the Gender Research Group
EDITORS
JEFF HEARN, CHARLOTTA NIEMISTÖ 
AND MARGAUX VIALLON 
ISBN 978-952-232-457-3 (PRINTED)
ISBN 978-952-232-458-0 (PDF)
ISSN-L 0357-5764
ISSN 0357-5764 (PRINTED)
ISSN 2242-7007 (PDF)
HANSAPRINT OY, TURENKI
 
  f ll ti  ti
  
  
7
9
  
 
 
 
  
ff r , rl tt  i ist   r  i ll  
E  S L F E I S
EL I I
R I T  , P. . B X ,
 ELSI I, FI L
P E: +  ( )   
IRJ ST T  , P. . B X ,
 V S , FI L
P E: +  ( )   
BIBLI TE ET E .FI
E .FI E
i   fl ti  f  t    
I
    
   
I  - - - -  (PRI TE )
I  - - - -  (P F)
I -L -
I  -  (PRI TE )
I  -  (P F)
I T , T E I9 789522 324573
In most organisations, ideas of collaboration and 
collaborative action are often lauded, but often in 
practice more challenging to carry into effect.
The Hanken School of Economics Research 
Group on Gender Relations in Organisations, Ma-
nagement and Society, usually k own as th  Gen-
der Res arch Group, or ju t GRG, was founded 
late 1999 and launched publicly early 2000. This 
collection celebrates those 21 years of existence.  It 
brings together memories and reflections from mem-
bers and former members. It is collective effort from 
the corridors of Hanken, from elsewhere in Finland, 
and from beyond. The continuing message is that 
gender matters, that researching gender and gen-
der relations come in many shapes and sizes, and 
that these in turn impact in multiple ways on working, 
organisational and personal lives, and on the chan-
gin  for  of academia and science. In this ong-te m 
process, the importance of mutual support and mutu-
al learning cannot be over-stated.
“[This publication] … tells me about a supportive 
community and, (citing from the texts): a relaxed, in-
spirational and creative atmosphere, eye-opening 
occasions, honesty, companionship, laughter, friend-
ship, equality, and humour, also when the topics are 
heavy or person l. At the s me time, the meta story 
conveys the authors’ feeling of being involved in im-
portant and meaningful academic work conducted 
in an international network.” (Professor Emeritus 
Karl-Erik Sveiby, Hanken School of Economics)
“This publication is important because the expe-
riences and accounts of the influences of the Group 
members to their studies, professional identities, 
careers and life in general are made visible. The 
publication shows that any research group, such as 
the Gender Research Group c n have an extensive 
influ c  on many spheres of an individual’s life, not 
sol ly to the dvanc ment of academic conte tba-
sed knowledge of a topic in question.” (Professor 
Anna-Maija Lämsä, Jyväskylä University)
”This delightful volume attests that the most gene-
rative moments in research can be found in the me-
eting of great minds. The personal stories are conta-
gious, highlighting the emotional, serendipitous and 
transformative sides of research collaboration that 
too rarely get discussed in published work. Congra-
tulations on this wonderful book!” Rebecca Pi kk ri, 
Marcus Wallenberg Profess r of International Busi-
ness, Aalto University 
For anyone interested in getting inspiration on the 
potential that collaboration can bring, please read 
on!