Introduction: continuum of outsiders S ince the 1970s, the women’s movement has been active in most Western countries. The fight for women’s rights has resulted in measures where expressions of overt gender prejudice have been made legally inappro- priate. In some instances this has even led to the creation of equality units, equal opportunity officers and equal opportunity committees. However, there has been no fundamental change. In spite of the inflow of women into the world of science, curriculum changes have been slow (Evans 1995; Schuster and Van Dyne 1985), the gender imbalance in scholar- ship has remained (Winnifred and Hamilton 1988) as well as the marked sex inequality at the higher levels of academic hierarchies (see for example, Acker 1994; Foster 1994; Martin 1994; Orser 1992; Robbins and Kahn 1985; Stolte-Heiskanen 1991). We feel that to be able to offer insights into why this is so, instead of studying open gender discrimination we must now turn to the more discrete modes of discrimination taking place in our work communities. It is a staggering phenomenon that the experiences of academic women across dis- ciplines, age groups, class origins and marital status appear to be so similar. And yet, most contemporary Western academic organiza- tions claim to be gender-neutral. The stories of academic women reveal themes of pro- fessional marginalization and exclusion from the centres of professional authority. The stories show a ‘continuum of outsiderness’ (Aisenberg and Harrington 1988, p. xii). Furthermore, female academics tend to de- scribe themselves modestly. They often attrib- ute their academic success to fate or luck, unlike academic men who usually see their success as the direct result of their achieve- ments (Davis and Astin 1990 cited in Wager 1994, p. 83; Hawkins and Schultz 1990; Stolte- Heiskanen 1991). Another common feature found in the stories of female academics is that they have a tendency to keep a ‘low pro- file’ even in cases of apparent discrimination. In their search for a new identity through professionalization women in academia are reluctant to place these experiences within a larger cultural or institutional context of sexism, or to admit that discrimination has affected them (Hawkins and Schultz 1990 cited in Wager 1994, p. 83; Simeone 1987; Stiver Lie and O’Leary 1990). Feeling that their professional identity is still precarious, they avoid using their intellectual skills politically because that could constitute a © Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1999, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA. Volume 6 Number 3 July 1999 DOING GENDER IN A MALE-DOMINATED SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY 163 Address for correspondence: * Saija Katila, Helsinki School of Economics and Business Administration, Runeberginkatu 22–24, 00100 Helsinki, FINLAND, e-mail katila@hkkk.fi A Serious Researcher or Just Another Nice Girl?: Doing Gender in a Male- Dominated Scientific Community Saija Katila* and Susan Meriläinen This paper explores how we as female researchers are constructing our professional identities in a male-dominated scientific world. In particular, we focus on the extent to which patri- archal articulations of professional identities influence female academics’ self-concept and consciousness of their own abilities. We believe that the business school in which we work reproduces certain inequalities systematically, if unintentionally. We are especially interested in the way in which we, as part of the scientific community, are ourselves discursively produ- cing and reproducing the gender division based on differences of sex. In other words, how we ‘do gender’ in a particular organizational setting and when assuming a particular organiza- tional role. The argument of this paper rests on the belief that the social construction of gender identities is not taking place only in the interaction of persons but also in the discourses within which those interactions occur. Identity and the meaning it implies are located here especially in language use. Discourses not only constitute meanings for terms and practices, but they also engender personal identities. Identity is not seen as fixed but rather as actively negotiated and transformed in discourse.