Diversity of respondents

Status group:

Students comprised 65% of the total respondents. Around 16% described themselves as academic staff and another 13% as non-academic staff. The group of professorial staff were only marginally represented with just 3%.

Age:

Younger students and employees were predominantly represented in the survey. It is worth noting that 65% of the respondents stated that they belonged to the student group. Almost half of the respondents (49%) stated that they were between 15 and 25 years of age. A further 27% were between 26 and 36 years, around 12% between 37 and 47 years, 7% between 48 and 58 years, and around 4% between 59 and 67 years of age. Less than 1% of respondents were older than 67.

Gender identity (optional question):

When asked about gender identity, slightly less than 30% of respondents chose not to provide any information. Among those who did disclose their gender identity, women comprised a slightly higher proportion with 57% of respondents identifying as female. A further 40% identified as male and 3% as non-binary. For the majority of respondents (97%), their chosen gender corresponded with the gender they had been assigned at birth. Three percent of respondents stated that their assigned gender at birth did not correspond with their current gender identity.

Sexual orientation (optional question):

Like the question on gender identity, 35% of respondents did not answer the question on sexual orientation. Of those who did, 78% stated that they were “heterosexual”. A further 14% described their sexual orientation as “bi- or pansexual” and 6% stated that they were “homosexual”. A small proportion, 2% of respondents, described themselves as “a- or demisexual”. This means that the proportion of people at the University of Münster who describe themselves as bisexual or homosexual is above the national average. In Germany, around 96.9% of the men and 96.2% of the women surveyed identified as heterosexual. Of those surveyed, 1.8% identified as bisexual and 4% as homosexual.

Impairment:

A total of 22% of respondents stated that they had an impairment. Of this group, 9% of respondents disclosed that they possessed a mental impairment, 7.5% a chronic illness and 3% a physical impairment. With regard to visibility in everyday academic and working life, respondents stated that their impairment was mostly invisible, but (with the exception of mental impairment) known by colleagues in their working environment.

Nationality:

A total of 88% of respondents stated that they only had German citizenship. Another 7% had at least one non-German nationality in addition to German. Six percent of all respondents stated that they possessed at least one or more non-German citizenship(s). A full 81% of respondents stated that they had no international background.

Migration history:

The standard definition of “migration history” used by the Federal Statistical Office was also used in the survey, namely: a person has a migration history if they themselves or at least one of their parents were not born with German citizenship. Of those surveyed, 6% stated that they themselves had migrated. 7% disclosed that one parent, and 5% that both parents, were not German citizens at birth.

Religion/ideology (optional question):

Less than a third of all respondents (32%) answered the question on religious affiliation. Of those who did answer the question, 93% of respondents selected Christianity and around 4% Islam as their religious denomination. Of these respondents, 12% stated that they regularly wear visible religious symbols. The small number of other faiths ticked was grouped under “Other” and accounted for one percent of all respondents.

Parenthood/caregiving responsibilities:

Of those with parental responsibility for children, 16% stated that they were responsible for at least one child of their own. In contrast, 2% were responsible for at least one child of another person, such as a partner. Only around 6% of respondents stated that they were responsible for the care of one or more of their own relatives (5%) or their partner’s relatives (1%).

Organisational climate

Most respondents gave the organisational and working climate at the University of Münster a generally positive rating. Well over half of respondents (84%) agreed with the statement that they study or work in a friendly working environment and that they get on well with their colleagues/ fellow students (78%). 59% of respondents fully agreed with the statement ‘I think I can be myself at the University of Münster’ and a further 58% said that they can express their ideas and opinions freely at the University of Münster.

In open questions, the respondents positively rated the friendly and collegial interaction at the University, collegial support and assistance, the open, tolerant and family-friendly study and work environment, as well as the University’s support services.

However, critical perspectives were also expressed. Of 116 respondents, n = 33 felt that the organisational climate was rather positive and n = 83 rather negative. The structural shortcomings impacting the non-professorial academic staff, the exclusionary structures affecting students and (early career) academics, hierarchical power relations, competitive atmosphere and high performance expectations were rated negatively. 20% of respondents stated that they tended to “withdraw” from university life. 18% felt ‘put under pressure at the University of Münster’ and another 15% stated that they ‘didn’t feel competent’. In addition, 12% agreed with the statement that they were ‘rarely’ able to distinguish themselves and another 11% complained of a ‘lack of autonomy’.

Organisational climate by status group

Students:

The status group-specific analyses also reflect a positive picture overall. Of the students surveyed, 83% stated that their fellow students behaved in a friendly manner towards them. 7% agreed with the statement that they get on well with their fellow students and around 60% stated that they could fully ‘be themselves’ at the University of Münster. 57% said that they could ‘express their ideas and opinions freely’. While 42% experienced caring from fellow students, 38% reported receiving positive feedback and having the feeling of having ‘achieved something at the University of Münster [most days]’ (28%). In contrast, around 24% tended to withdraw and 21% felt under pressure. 19% agreed with the statement that they didn’t feel ‘really competent’. 13% of students complained of a ‘lack of autonomy’ and 11% felt that they were ‘rarely’ able to make their mark.

Academic staff:

This group also expressed a thoroughly positive assessment of the organisational climate. Around 79% of professors, 89% of academic staff and 81% of freelance lecturers stated that they worked in a friendly working environment, and a similar number of professors (78%), 84% of academic staff and 83% of freelance lecturers agreed with the statement that they get on well with their colleagues. 68% of professors and 61% of both academic staff and freelance lecturers agreed with the statement that they were able to express their opinions freely. Almost as many (67% professors, 65% freelance lecturers and 60% academic staff) said that they could ‘be themselves’ at the University. A further 61% of professors, 56% of academic staff and 47% of freelance lecturers agreed with the statement that they receive positive, collegial feedback. The belief that respondents ‘achieved something most days’ was confirmed by 52% of professors and 64% of freelance lecturers. However, only 36% of academic staff agreed with this statement. Professors (37%), academic staff (52%) and freelance lecturers (33%) agreed at differing degrees with the statement that they receive support from colleagues. 14% of professors, 12% of freelance lecturers and even 18% of academic staff felt under pressure and tended to withdraw from the University. In each case, less than 10% of academic staff agreed with the statements that they were rarely able to perform, had no room for autonomy and did not feel ‘really competent’.

Non-academic staff and trainees:

A similar picture emerged with respect to non-academic staff and trainees: 84% of employees and 96% of trainees stated that they worked in a friendly working environment and got on well with their colleagues. 59% of employees and 57% of trainees reported a positive feedback culture in their working environment and felt able to express their opinions freely (58% of employees; 83% of trainees). 56% of employees and 63% of trainees agreed with the statement ‘I can be myself at the University’. Employees (52%) and trainees (68%) also experienced good collegial care, and 35% of employees and 42% of trainees reported the feeling of having ‘achieved something most days’. However, 19% of employees also agreed that they were rarely able to make their mark. Both 13% of employees and 21% of trainees tended to withdraw from the University. Employees (11%) and trainees (4%) also reported a lack of autonomy. Similarly, 10% of employees and 4% of trainees felt under pressure and less than 10% each (6% of employees; 9% of trainees) didn’t feel ‘really competent’ at the University of Münster.

Diversity climate

The purpose of the "diversity climate" question was to assess diversity management at the University of Münster both from the perspective of employees and students within the departments and at the University of Münster as a whole. One of the questions asked was how important respondents rated the topic of diversity on a scale from ‘very important’ to ‘not important (at all)’. Of those who answered this question, 63% were of the opinion that the topic of diversity is (very) important. A further 15% considered the topic not important (at all), and 22% stated that the topic was neither (very) important nor important (at all). It’s interesting to note the significant difference in how women and men rated the importance of diversity. While 69% of the women surveyed considered the topic of diversity to be very important or important, only 27% of men rated the topic as very important or important.

Assessment of the overall organisational diversity climate: More than two thirds of respondents described the diversity climate as ‘tolerant’ (65%) and ‘respectful’ (63%). Furthermore, a small majority (51%) characterised the climate as ‘appreciative’. For 49% and 47% of respondents, the terms ‘cooperative’ and ‘supportive’ accurately described the climate respectively, and a further 43% perceived the climate as ‘rather favourable’. 42% described the climate as ‘competitive’, while a third of respondents (33%) even described it as ‘elitist’. Less than 5% of respondents perceived the climate to be ‘sexist’, ‘ageist’, ‘racist’, ‘homophobic/anti-queer’ or ‘hostile’.

Occurrence of discrimination:

When students and employees were asked whether they had already come in contact with discrimination or discriminatory behaviour in the university context, 16% stated that they had personally experienced discrimination. 22% of all respondents had observed discrimination and 29% had reported discriminatory behaviour. In contrast, 43% claimed not to have had any contact with discrimination in the context of the University of Münster so far.

Characteristics of discrimination:

Discrimination on account of gender identity is the most frequently perceived form of discrimination. 6% of those who stated that they had personally experienced or observed discrimination, or to whom it had been reported, stated that they had experienced discrimination on account of gender identity. Discrimination based on physical appearance (e.g. height, weight, appearance, clothing), ethnic/national/cultural origin or political views were each mentioned by 3%. Age, social background, parenthood, migration history, mental impairment, nationality or sexual orientation were each cited by 2% of respondents as further grounds for discrimination. Discrimination on the basis of language skills, physical impairment, religious affiliation or regional origin was only experienced or perceived by a small number of respondents (approx. 1%). Around 2% of respondents mentioned other forms of discrimination under the open response option. Of those who provided an open response, 39% attributed their experience of discrimination to their (university) status, 18% had experienced discrimination in connection with the coronavirus pandemic and 12% on the basis of (their own) gender identity.

Types of discrimination:

The most common type of discrimination that people regularly experience in the university context is that ‘people like me’ were met with prejudice (45%). Other forms of regular discrimination manifest themselves for 32% of respondents in the experience of being marginalised and in the fact that procedures/rules/access are discriminatory. Furthermore, 30% of respondents stated that they were regularly belittled. In addition, 26% of survey participants were regularly confronted with inappropriate questions about their private life. In contrast, 21% stated that their performance was unfairly undervalued, or their rights were denied them on a regular basis. Up to 19% of respondents were the target of derogatory jokes or experienced bullying (15%). Regular discrimination in the form of verbal and/or physical abuse (including sexualised forms) affected 4% of those who had experienced discrimination. The vast majority of respondents stated that they have never experienced physical threats (94%) or sexualised assaults (93%) in the context of the University of Münster.

Contexts of discrimination:

Respondents were allowed to provide multiple answers to the question regarding the contexts where they personally experienced and/or observed discrimination. The most frequently mentioned by 6% of respondents was ‘informal conversation (lunch breaks or between courses)’. Another 5% stated that discrimination took place in the context of the course. A further 4% of survey participants selected ‘discussion/meeting’, ‘organisation/administration’ and ‘procedures/regulations’. In each case, 2% of the respondents stated that they had experienced discrimination in the context of email communication, in examination situations or in the infrastructure (buildings, routes, access, resources, etc.). Contexts like office hours, tutorials/exercises, leisure/sports activities at the university, allocation of SHK/SHB/WHK positions/internships/scholarships, online meetings, (laboratory) internships at the University of Münster, fulfilment of SHK/SHB/WHK positions/internships, material conditions/technical equipment (e.g. in laboratories, etc.), etc. in laboratories etc.), teaching materials, information material/brochures/guides/advertising material or e-learning platforms (e.g. Learnweb) were only identified as contexts of discrimination by 1% of respondents in each case.

Discriminating groups of people:

When asked who instigated discrimination, 9% of those who had experienced discrimination stated (fellow) students or instructors. A further 6% stated that they had experienced discriminatory behaviour from supervisors and 5% from colleagues. Administrative staff were identified as a discriminatory group by 3% of respondents, and only 1% stated that they had experienced discrimination from advice centres at the University of Münster.

Correlation between experiences of discrimination and diversity awareness

The study also tested the correlation between diversity awareness and experienced discrimination. The data confirmed that diversity is more likely to be regarded as an important topic by people who have experienced discrimination in the context of the University of Münster. For example, 73% of people who have personally experienced discrimination consider the topic to be (very) important, while 14% rate it as neither ‘important nor unimportant’ and 13% rate it as ‘not important (at all)’. Interestingly, people who have been told about discrimination rate the topic of diversity as (very) important with an even higher percentage of 79%, whereas 15% of this group are ambivalent about the topic and only 6% rate it as not important (at all). Similarly, 78% of those who have observed discrimination consider diversity to be (very) important and 8% not important (at all). However, 74% of those who have never encountered discrimination in the context of the University of Münster also find diversity (very) important; for 17% it is neither important nor unimportant, and 9% classify it as not important (at all). Furthermore, people who have not observed discrimination show a similar tendency, with 59% considering the topic of diversity to be (very) important, while 24% consider diversity to be neither important nor unimportant, and 17% consider it to be not important (at all). Finally, 56% of those to whom no discriminatory behaviour was reported rate the topic as ‘(very) important’, while a total of 44% consider the topic to be ‘neither/nor’ to ‘not important (at all)’.

Dealing with discrimination

In addition to the questions about the characteristics of discrimination and contexts of discriminatory behaviour, people who had experienced or observed discrimination themselves were asked about their coping strategies. The ranking revealed that the predominant coping strategy was personal dialogue about the experience (10%). It is striking that behaviour was cited more frequently in cases of discrimination that were presumably not adequately resolved: 7% of respondents tried to avoid the situation or person in future and 5% ignored the incident. In each case, 4% of respondents even trivialised the incident or considered giving up their studies/job at the University of Münster. However, other respondents also stated that they tried to clarify the situation (4%). Finally, 2% stated that they had reacted with anger or provocation. With regard to the use of existing staff representatives/advice offices, the figures in this context indicate that very few respondents reported the incidents within the University (1%) or sought help/counselling within the University (2%). The same proportion sought help from external service centres (2%).

Potentials for development

The respondents’ top five wishes:

1. no new counselling and support services, but rather a central overview of existing counselling and support services and their responsibilities
2. expansion of social services that support respondents in reconciling study/work or other life situations
3. strengthening interest groups that offer respondents more support in representing their personal interests in the work or academic context
4. expanded services at the workplace, with support for reducing (professional) tensions in the workplace and guidance for employees in dealing with the topic of diversity
5. possibilities to seek advice/assistance anonymously for those confronted with discrimination/harassment