-
This Gender Equality Plan (GEP) was developed by the Counterintuitive Institute’s core team – Rosalina Todorova, Leda Kuneva, Gergana Tzvetkova, and Margarita Ancheva. The team members have background and proven experience in human rights, gender equality, inclusion, intersectionality, feminist methodology and methods, communications and campaign management. The work on the GEP was guided and supported by the Steering Council of the Counterintuitive Institute (CI).
-
Direct Discrimination
Discrimination where one person is treated less favourably on grounds such as sex and gender, age, nationality, race, ethnicity, religion or belief, health, disability, sexual orientation or gender identity, than another person is, has been or would be treated in a comparable situation.
Diversity
Differences in the values, attitudes, cultural perspective, beliefs, ethnic background, sexual orientation, gender identity, skills, knowledge and life experiences of each individual in any group of people.
Gender
Social attributes and opportunities associated with being female and male and to the relationships between women and men and girls and boys, as well as to the relations between women and those between men.
Gender audit
Assessment of the extent to which gender equality is effectively institutionalised in policies, programmes, organisational structures and proceedings (including decision-making processes), and in the corresponding budgets.
Gender balance
Human resources and equal participation of women and men in all areas of work, projects or programmes.
Gender bias
Prejudiced actions or thoughts based on the gender-based perception that women are not equal to men in rights and dignity.
Gender budgeting
Application of gender mainstreaming in the budgetary process. It entails a gender-based assessment of budgets, incorporating a gender perspective at all levels of the budgetary process, and restructuring revenues and expenditures in order to promote gender equality.
Gender equality
Equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities of women and men and girls and boys.
Gender mainstreaming
Systematic consideration of the differences between the conditions, situations and needs of women and men in all policies and actions.
Indirect discrimination
Discrimination occurring where an apparently neutral provision, criterion or practice would put persons of one sex at a particular disadvantage compared with persons of the other sex, unless that provision, criterion or practice is objectively justified by a legitimate aim, and the means for achieving that aim are appropriate and necessary.
Intersectional discrimination
Discrimination that takes place on the basis of several personal grounds or characteristics/identities, which operate and interact with each other at the same time in such a way as to be inseparable.
Non-sexist use of language
Avoidance of both an ambiguous generic masculine gender in the grammatical forms of nouns and discriminatory expressions which describe women and men in terms of their physical appearance or the qualities and gender roles attributed to their sex.
Organisational culture
Commonly accepted values and behaviours within an organisation, such as the hours that are worked, the jokes that are considered appropriate and the manner in which colleagues are addressed.
Sex- and gender-based discrimination
Discrimination occurring due to interaction between sex (as the biological characteristics of women and men) and their socially constructed identities, attributes and roles and society’s social and cultural meaning for biological differences between women and men.
Sexual harassment
Any form of unwanted verbal, non-verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature occurs, with the purpose or effect of violating the dignity of a person, in particular when creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.
Structural inequality
Embedding of gender inequalities in social structures, based on institutionalised conceptions of gender differences.
Work-life balance
Achieving balance between not only domestic tasks and caring for dependent relatives, but also extracurricular responsibilities or other important life priorities.
Introduction
Achieving gender equality and empowering all women and girls is among the 17 Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations, where gender equality is defined “not only a fundamental human right, but a necessary foundation for a peaceful, prosperous and sustainable world”. The EU Gender Equality Strategy has as a key objective “ending gender-based violence; challenging gender stereotypes; closing gender gaps in the labour market; achieving equal participation across different sectors of the economy; addressing the gender pay and pension gaps; closing the gender care gap and achieving gender balance in decision-making and in politics.”
With the launch of the Horizon Europe funding programme in 2021, a new eligibility criterion was introduced, namely that public bodies, such as research funding bodies, national ministries and other public authorities, including public for-profit organisations, public and private higher education institutions, and public and private research organisations applying for Horizon Europe funds are required to have a GEP in place. The CI’s GEP complies with all process-related and content-related requirements set in the Horizon Europe Work Programme 2021-2022:
Minimum process-related requirements:
publication: a formal document published on the institution’s website and signed by the top management;
dedicated resources: commitment of resources and expertise in gender equality to implement the plan;
data collection and monitoring: sex/gender disaggregated data on personnel (and students, for the establishments concerned) and annual reporting based on indicators;
training: awareness raising/training on gender equality and unconscious gender biases for staff and decision-makers.
Content-related recommendations centre on concrete measures and targets regarding:
work–life balance and organisational culture;
gender balance in leadership and decision-making;
gender equality in recruitment and career progression;
integration of the gender dimension into research and teaching content;
measures against gender-based violence, including sexual harassment.
With this GEP, the CI commits to attaining these objectives through continuous resolve and active effort. The GEP is a flexible instrument, a major internal policy and organisational document, which serves as a guide to action. Thus, as the GEP’s implementation is monitored and evaluated, the document will be reviewed, updated, and improved every three years.
Its implementation will be measured by means of relevant indicators and the periodic collection of gender/sex-disaggregated data. At the end of each year, the CI will include a section on gender equality and non-discrimination in its Annual Report, adopted by the CI Board and published on the organisational website.
The GEP was reviewed and approved by CI’s Steering Council and signed by the CI’s President.
-
The Counterintuitive Institute was founded entirely by women with the main purpose to counter all forms of inequality with a special focus on gender. A fairer world for women can only be built upon elaborate data-based knowledge about the factors which shape and perpetuate deliberating structural forces. The CI will follow its hopeful vision for healing societal maladies to enable and empower all women and girls to create their own future as bright as they can imagine it. The respect for human rights and the commitment to equality and gender justice have been at the heart of the CI’s work ever since the institute’s inception and founding. Thus, the GEP is inspired by and embodies our organisational values: people-centricity & inclusivity, courage & creativity, empathy & ethics, purpose & perseverance, and counterintuitive ideas. Its objectives and the measures embedded within deeply resonate with who we are, what we do, and what we strive for.
The Counterintuitive Institute is a fully female-led research organisation, dedicated to challenging the status quo and driving positive societal change in a world of constant turbulence and deepening uncertainty. We are driven and inspired by the wish to apply feminist organisational theory into practice by relying on co-leadership, co-creation, and consensus, and by trying to challenge oppressive inequality regimes and dominant patriarchal structures. We are dedicated to building and sustaining an organisation that is accountable, transparent, open, non-hierarchical, and empowering and values diversity, reflexivity, and constructive collaboration. This document is an essential step towards achieving our goals and an embodiment of our strong understanding that often, if not always, change starts from within.
Main Objectives and Planned Actions
Key Areas
Our main objectives and the measures to be undertaken to achieve them fall into the following focus areas:
TODO: Place visuals when ready
-
Citing the She Figures reports, the European Commission ascertained that women remain underrepresented in governing bodies of academic and research organisations. On the basis of an extensive literature review, Avolio, Pardo and Prados-Peña identify the following groups of factors that contribute to the underrepresentation of women academics: personal factors (impostor phenomenon, lack of esteem, etc.), labour-economic factors (pay gaps, long working hours, lack of models and mentorship, etc.), organisational factors (gender roles, stereotypes, power structures, etc.), social (peer-related) factors (male-dominant normative standards, boys’ club culture, etc.), educational factors (lack of support, institutional barriers, etc.), and family factors (work-life balance, care-taking responsibilities). Describing the underrepresentation of women in senior ranks and leadership positions at universities as a social justice issue, Aiston and Fo explore what they refer to as the silence/ing of women academics through a framework of micro-inequities and micro-politics. Among the behaviours and practices, resulting in the silencing of women, are the demonisation of confident women academics who speak out and their outright exclusion from important decision-making committees and panels.
The CI recognises that women's underrepresentation in research and academia, particularly acute in some fields, such as STEM and ICT, as well as the frequent undervaluation of their academic contributions and achievements is a complex and long-lasting problem. Thus, it requires multi-faceted solutions, as it is tightly linked to recruitment bias, lack of work-life balance, and the underestimated importance of integrating gender in research priorities, practices, and activities.
The CI has committed to three important steps towards ensuring gender balance and gender equality in leadership:
Our Board and core team are entirely composed of women, who bring diverse perspectives due to their different age, areas of expertise, and lived experience;
We have fully-embedded feminist values and principles into our strategising, decision-making, and day-to-day operations. We embrace allyship, intersectionality, inclusion, and diversity and seek to avoid and counter discrimination, marginalisation, and bias;
While the CI maintains formal roles such as President, Vice President, Steering Council members to meet legal requirements and ensure transparency, we are committed to non-hierarchical decision-making and power-sharing.
Strategic objectives
Maintain and strengthen the CI as a women-led organisation and seek and encourage applications for leadership positions from women in their diversity, regardless of biological characteristics. Constantly promote gender equality and gender awareness in all organisational processes, practices, and policies
Measures of success
Percentage of women and gender-diverse people in leadership positions (Value)
Organisational policies and decision-making processes and outcomes are reviewed on an annual basis to eliminate gender bias and discrimination (Yes/No and narrative reporting)
The CI’s Board members and staff are periodically offered gender equality training (Yes/No and narrative reporting)
-
Metaphors like sticky floor, glass ceiling, glass walls and leaking pipeline demonstrate how systemic bias and persisting structural barriers confine women to low-paying and low-mobility positions, prevent them from reaching leadership positions or force them to drop out along the career path. Citing a 2018 policy brief by the European Research Area and Innovation Committee (ERAC), the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) highlights some of the challenges and stereotypical perceptions that women face at work – for instance, that identical work is often valued more when it is attributed to a man rather than to a woman or that, driven by the impostor syndrome, women may experience self-doubt despite their skills and abilities and avoid career opportunities, especially those in male-dominated fields like research and science. According to the International Labor Organization, it is more difficult for women (in general and around the world) to find a job. When they do, they often land “low-quality jobs in vulnerable conditions, and there is little improvement forecast in the near future”. The situation is no different when it comes to research, academia, and science. A 2022 article on gender bias in academia contends that the problem is very much still present despite increased awareness and various mitigation initiatives – women are under-cited and under-assigned in university syllabi, they are “systematically underrepresented as first and last authors in peer-reviewed publications relative to the proportion of women scientists in the field”, while a common form of sexual harassment they encounter at the workplace is sexist hostility. There are also numerous studies and reports on the transfer of algorithmic bias in digital technologies and AI development and deployment to recruitment and retention processes, which has a profoundly negative impact on women, minorities, and vulnerable groups. For instance, it has been found that algorithmic bias, resulting from limited raw data and biased algorithm designers, leads to discriminatory hiring practices based on gender, race, colour, and personality traits.
The CI has been established to pursue its founders’ commitment to having more women-founded and women-led organisations in Bulgaria. However, it is also a research centre where most of our project work focuses on uncovering and addressing gender stereotypes and systemic bias towards vulnerable groups in recruitment and career progression. We believe in the need to address inequalities in recruitment, career progression, and retention and have an inclusive workplace based on equal pay for equal work, the adoption of gender-sensitive or gender-transformative hiring practices, and transparency with respect to evaluation, appraisal, and promotion.
Strategic objectives
Design, review, and constantly improve recruitment and retention processes, policies, and procedures to ensure they are equitable, transparent, and gender-sensitive or gender-transformative;
Explore and address explicit and implicit gender bias in hiring, promotion, and retention;
Cultivate an inclusive environment where everybody can thrive and progress, both personally and professionally.
Measures of success
A code of conduct for recruitment and promotion is in place (Yes/No)
Clear, transparent, inclusive, and gender-sensitive recruitment and promotion procedures are in place (including clear definitions of research and administrative ranks with salary scales, job descriptions, career progression paths, guidelines related to gender equality and avoiding gender bias for the hiring team, etc.) (Yes/No and narrative reporting)
Strategies are implemented to increase the number of women candidates and people from marginalised groups (proactively identifying women in under-represented fields, active scouting of women and gender-diverse people, assessing research quality rather than quantity, not relying on journal-based metrics, valuing non-traditional career paths, diverse job experiences, soft skills training and certifications, etc.) (Yes/No and narrative reporting)
Using standardised CVs and guaranteeing that CVs of applicants undergo a human review (Yes/No)
Procedures are in place to ensure that job ads are open, inclusive, and publicly advertised (Yes/No)
Procedures are in place to readvertise a role if there are no women candidates or candidates from marginalised groups (Yes/No and narrative reporting)
-
Work-life balance is nowadays a familiar concept as employees and employers alike recognise, to a different extent, how important it is to find harmony between work responsibilities and personal fulfilment and well-being. Many organisations and institutions highlight their commitment to work-life balance by means of flexible work arrangements, wellness programmes, increased vacation days, although the implementation of such policies varies. In 2019, the EU adopted the important Directive 2019/1158 on work-life balance for parents and carers, which seeks an equilibrium between family and professional commitments and aims to increase equality between men and women at work and at home. Тhe adoption of this much needed document has been deservedly and widely welcomed. However, additional steps could be taken to foster work-life balance. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, which forced many companies into teleworking, Kelliher, Richardson, and Boiarintseva suggested expanding the scope of work-life balance research, and subsequently policy, to include an understanding of “life” going beyond childcare responsibilities and the expectations and needs of those who do not fit the model of a traditional nuclear family (persons living alone, single parents, LGBTQ couples) or of traditional employment (self-employed, people in temporary employment, etc.). More recently, De Micheli and Smilari have outlined the following challenges to work-life balance policies in the EU: persisting understanding of childcare as the central aspect of personal life to be balanced with work; measures that predominantly address care responsibilities, thus disregarding people’s wish to pursue passions, interests, new skills and competences; and the absence of measures that actively support the role of fathers in childcare.
The CI is committed to building and sustaining a culture of work-life balance, because our team believes that creativity, productivity, and freedom flourish when people are valued and supported, and all their needs and interests are understood and adequately met. Thus, we fully embrace remote work and flexible working arrangements. We offer 25 non-working days per year (excluding Bulgarian public holidays) and a two-week break around the end of December/beginning of January so that our team members can recharge and spend time with loved ones. We prioritise physical and psychological well-being and wish to create a workplace where people can thrive personally and professionally. More specifically, at the CI:
Team members are encouraged to unplug outside working hours, avoiding work-related emails or calls;
A strict 9-to-5 schedule is not enforced; instead, team members enjoy the flexibility of working anytime and from anywhere, which allows them to manage their time in a way that best suits their productivity and personal commitments;
Team members are provided with time and resources (when possible) for professional growth;
Workload is realistic, deadlines are manageable, and priorities are clear;
Team members’ needs are heard and understood, while they are involved in discussions and decisions about policies and practices that impact their work and work-life balance.
Strategic objectives
Support the CI team members in progressing their careers while balancing personal responsibilities, such as caring for children, the elderly, and other dependents, and pursuing their interests and passions;
Prioritise and promote staff wellbeing through an ethical, caring, respectful, and inclusive organisational culture.
Measures of success
Clear and detailed policies for pursuing work-life balance that comply with the minimum legal standards are in place (flexible working arrangements, parental leave, caring responsibilities (childcare, individual care, partners’ care, elderly care), unpaid leave, etc.) (Yes/No)
Measures and steps to support the reintegration of team members returning from career breaks (such as personalised reintegration plans that include gradual transition to full workload, onboarding refresh, peer support, etc.) (Yes/No and narrative reporting)
Measures and steps to promote and support the continued professional development of team members (such as student-inclusive policies, part-time arrangements, encouraging team members to take certification courses relevant to their roles during work hours) (Yes/No and narrative reporting)
Channels and procedures through with team members can voice their concerns and offer solutions in place (Yes/No and narrative reporting)
-
EIGE correctly points out that “(l)ooking at potential sex and/or gender differences and at issues related to gender equality generates added value in terms of research excellence, rigour, reproducibility and creativity; brings in-depth understanding of all people’s needs, behaviours and attitudes; and enhances the societal relevance of research and innovation (R & I).” Still, very often, integrating a gender dimension in research is narrowly understood as having more women on the research teams (especially as senior researchers and principal investigators) and achieving gender balance. In 2024, the European Commission stated that while in the EU women make up 41% of scientists and engineers, the percentage of women self-employed professionals in science, engineering, and ICT is just around 25%. This clearly emphasises the persistent scarcity of women in science and highlight the precarity and structural dependency of their professional development. The benefits of intersectionality for research have also been widely discussed, such as the need to focus on experiences of “groups marginalized by multiple and interlocking forms of oppression” and the substitution of a “single-axis” (e.g., gender or race or class) with a multiple “matrix” (e.g., gender, race, sexual identity, and class) perspectives for understanding privilege and social inequality. All this is even more applicable in the era of advanced technologies and AI, where design, development, and deployment are marred by lack of diversity and inclusivity, and often – outright, entrenched bias towards women and underrepresented and vulnerable groups.
Integrating a gender dimension in research is fundamental to CI’s mission and activities. The Institute specialises in gender analysis and adopting an intersectional approach to studying discrimination and inequalities, which has equipped us with the knowledge and skills to accomplish this specific objective. Our team members have contributed to numerous research projects where a detailed description of the project’s gender dimension and interdisciplinarity was required. The CI’s focus on topics that predominantly affect women, girls, and vulnerable groups highlights our commitment to inclusive research and mainstreaming gender in all aspects of our work. The lived experience and the expertise of the members of our team, currently comprised entirely of women, ensures that we can identify and address underresearched, problematic, and sidelined gender-related issues.
Strategic objectives
Create and sustain an environment where researchers of all genders and backgrounds enjoy equal opportunities to thrive and pursue high-quality research;
Fully integrate gender and intersectional perspectives in research content, design, implementation, and findings
Measures of success
All research projects consider gender-specific needs, experiences, and impact (measures including, but not limited to, disaggregation of data by sex/gender/age/ethnicity where relevant, and adopting gender-inclusive language and images in all research-related materials and outputs) (Yes/No and narrative reporting);
Gender diverse and inclusive research teams are formed (Yes/No and narrative reporting);
There is diversity with respect to the designation of Project Leaders/Principal Investigators, publications authored by team members, participation of team members in dissemination and communication events, etc. (Yes/No and narrative reporting);
Increase understanding of team members and project partners about the need to integrate gender in research and project activities and the ways to accomplish this (through trainings, consultations, resources) (Yes/No and narrative reporting).
-
It is crucial to create and sustain a safe, inclusive, and respectful work environment by preventing all forms of harassment, bullying, and gender bias. A 2024 report by the International Labor Organization finds that: i) more than 77% of survey respondents experienced at least one form of workplace violence at least once during their careers; ii) around 60% experienced economic violence during their careers; iii) psychological violence is widespread, predominantly affecting women in managerial positions; iv) more women than men experience sexual violence, while more men than women are affected by physical violence at the workplace. Here, we wish to highlight the importance of countering psychological violence in the workplace – a serious form of abuse that often remains invisible. The ILO report defines it as “violence, through which an employee is left with perceptions and feelings of vulnerability and helplessness due to the prolonged negative actions of their supervisors or colleagues”, which may manifest as “underestimation of one’s work, assignment of work that cannot be completed in the allotted time period, looking out for mistakes in one’s work, changing one’s working conditions, hours, or shifts in an arbitrary manner, and behaviors aimed at damaging one’s reputation.” Another 2024 report, published by Eurofound, highlights that cyberbullying at work should be countered as well, because, despite being far less studied than offline bullying, it is equally damaging to one’s mental health.
The Bulgarian Protection against Discrimination Act (PDA, 2004) defines “harassment” in para 1. p.1 of its Supplementary Provisions as any behavior on the grounds of, inter alia, sex through physical, verbal or other means, which has the intention of or results in violating the dignity of the individual and creating a hostile, debasing, humiliating, insulting or threatening environment. The PDA creates legal responsibilities upon all employers to react to and investigate reported instances of harassment, including sexual harassment, in the workplace, and impose disciplinary measures should the harassment be perpetrated by an employee.
CI is committed to preventing and countering of all types of harassment and discrimination – including their cyber dimension – based on sex, gender, disability, ethnic origin, religious affiliation, age, disability, etc. To achieve this, the Institute has established mechanisms for reporting harassment and/or discrimination, as well as disciplinary measures against employees that have committed an act of harassment and/or discrimination, including such behavior that is based on unequal power relations and misuse of authority. We have embraced a culture of zero tolerance towards sexual harassment, intersectional and multiple discrimination, gender prejudice, and gender-based violence. Whenever possible, the CI is organising awareness-raising and capacity-building initiatives in this regard.
Strategic objectives
Prevent and counteract all types of violence, harassment, and bullying in the workplace, committed by and against team members and all other persons involved in the CI’s work (Board members, consultants, partners, etc.);
Foster a work culture based on non-discrimination, inclusivity, support, and the pursuit of gender equality and elimination of all types of bias.
Measures of success
Sound policies and mechanisms for reporting and investigating harassment, discrimination, and bullying in the workplace are established, implemented, and regularly reviewed (Yes/No and narrative reporting);
Disciplinary measures against employees that have committed harassment, discrimination, and bullying at work are adopted and implemented (Yes/No and narrative reporting);
Measures for supporting victims (such as counselling and providing information about their options following a report, both within the organisation and through external services) are in place (Yes/No and narrative reporting).
-
The GEP’s implementation will be monitored and periodically reviewed so that the CI co-leadership can assess if the set objectives are fulfilled or if there are serious challenges to their fulfillment and, consequently, identify possible solutions.
At the core of the continuous review process will be the collection and analysis of quantitative and qualitative data disaggregated by gender, sex, sexual orientation, age, level of education, etc. The data will be collected through one or more of the following techniques:
Continuous gathering of relevant data
At the end of each calendar year, the CI co-leadership will collect data as per the Measures of success identified above. Based on the collected data, a section on gender equality will be included in the organisation’s Annual report. The data will be collected and stored in compliance with relevant data protection standards and internal privacy policies.
Satisfaction Survey
At the end of the GEP’s three-year period (i.e. at the end of 2027), the CI’s team will be asked to participate in a survey on work-related stress, workload, work happiness, sustainable employability, diversity, inclusion, and social safety. The questions will be formulated based on existing state-of-the-art guidelines and best practices for the development of GEPs. The survey will be anonymous, and the results will be processed and summarised by an external evaluator. The results will be used to review, update, and improve the GEP for the period 2028-2030, as well as any relevant policies and procedures of the Counterintuitive Institute.
Interviews
If the team satisfaction survey were to demonstrate that there are serious challenges to the fulfilment of the GEP’s objectives (such as strong internal resistance to the GEP, multiple reports of harassment, lack of familiarity with gender-related concepts and ideas, poor work-life balance or feelings of exclusion), the Gender Equality Officer may propose and prepare protocols for interviews with the CI team. It is highly recommended that the interviews be conducted by an external expert.
Mandatory GEP Rquirements of the European Commission
The table below demonstrates how the GEP is meeting the European Commission’s specific requirements.
| Specific Requirement | Action |
|---|---|
| The GEP is a public document | The GEP is approved by the CI’s Board, signed by its President and published in English on the CI’s website. It has been communicated to and disseminated among the CI’s staff. |
| Dedicated resources | The GEP’s implementation and regular review is overseen by a dedicated Gender Equality Officer. |
| Data collection and monitoring | Sex/gender disaggregated data will be continuously collected and analysed to help monitor the GEP’s implementation. Various collection techniques will be employed (see the section on Monitoring above) to ensure reliable observations and robust analysis. |
| Training | Training in gender equality, eliminating gender bias and countering all types of harassment will be offered to the CI team members. They are encouraged to suggest new and more specific, gender-equality related topics for future trainings, seminars, and workshops. |