Gender,doctorate holders,career path,and work–life balance within and outside of academia

Abstract

Research on satisfaction with work–life balance among doctorate holders is scarce when considering those working outside academia. In this article, we present research on work–life balance among female and male doctorate holders working within and outside academia, and examine how satisfied are they with their work–life balance, and the role of gender and career path in that satisfaction. We study the role of time and flexibility, and whether differences are found in career path among doctorate holders working within and outside academia. The findings, based on open-ended interviews with 32 doctorate holders in Iceland, indicate that the doctorate holders find it difficult to balance their work and family life and feel they are always in a rush. Nevertheless, the academics expressed more complex feelings about their daily lives than those outside academia, especially the women, as their flexible working arrangements allowed them to be always working meant they were always working.

Research about work–life balance among doctorate holders is scarce, and almost non-existent when considering doctorate holders working outside academia (Mortier et al., 2020). Making a distinction between working within and outside academia is nevertheless important, as work–life balance and other working conditions are different between these two sectors. For example, the academic sector is known for being characterised by a flexible work arrangement (e.g. place- and time-independent work), which could benefit the work–life balance (Mortier et al., 2020; Rafnsdóttir & Heijstra, 2013), while the labour market outside academia tends to be more structured with regard to when and where to work. In this article, we analyse how work–life balance is experienced by doctorate holders and whether working within and outside academia is meaningful in that context. The overall aim is to gain knowledge of how they combine work, family life, and recreation. Even though doctorate holders account for a relatively small proportion of the labour market, this group of employees is vital for knowledge development and innovation, because of their investments in higher education (Bloch et al., 2015) and the type of work they perform. In a modern labour market, an acceptable work–life balance is a prerequisite for employee well-being (Gröpel & Kuhl, 2009; Lunau et al., 2014) and gender equality (Ridgeway, 2011). In addition, links have been found between the drivers of employee well-being, gender equality, and economic growth, and how they support and reinforce one another (OECD, 2019).

Linked to this, Moratti (2021) shows a gender-specific hiring pattern among doctorate holders applying for academic jobs in Norway, where women have a better chance of getting the job if they are internal rather than external applicants. The further away the women came from, the less likely they were offered the job. This was not the case for the male applicants. Moratti (2021) concludes that there is more disbelief around women being mobile, as women are seen as more tied to their local areas, for instance due to their families.

In this article, we present research on the work–life balance among female and male doctorate holders, working within and outside academia. We examine how satisfied doctorate holders are with their work–life balance, and the role of gender and career path within and outside academia in that satisfaction. In this way, we aim to improve both current theoretical knowledge on the issue as well as practical knowledge, with the hope of enhancing a gender-neutral and family-friendly working culture among highly educated employees.

Iceland is an important setting as the country follows the Nordic welfare model (Eydal & Gíslason, 2015), and is known for relatively high gender equality (World Economic Forum, 2021). In this article, we add to the knowledge about how women and men with the highest level of education manage work–life balance, and how this plays out for those who work within and outside academia.

Doctorate holders

In the global knowledge economy, many countries have increased emphasis on higher education, and a more educated workforce is considered to be key to more economic growth (Cyranoski et al., 2011; Petersen et al., 2014; Santos et al., 2016). University graduates have been on the increase over the last few decades, with the number of doctorate holders growing fast (Auriol, 2016). For a long time, academia was the usual workplace for PhD holders, but doctoral graduates are increasingly employed in institutions and businesses outside academia (Passaretta et al., 2019; Steinþórsdóttir et al., 2019; Suomi et al., 2020).

Traditionally, more men have completed a doctoral degree than women, though the gender gap has been decreasing in recent decades (Carter et al., 2013; Maher et al., 2004). Women finish their PhDs generally at an older age than men, especially those who had children before they graduated (Kulp, 2020; Mastekaasa, 2005). This implies that men and women face different challenges as PhD students and their position in managing their scientific careers remains different (Fusulier et al., 2017). Abundant research is accessible on gender differences among PhD holders employed within academia, concerning ranks, salaries, career development, and job security (Baker, 2012; Fusulier et al., 2017; Heijstra et al., 2017; Steinþórsdóttir et al., 2021; Webber & Canché, 2015). Hence, less is known about possible differences in combining work, family life, and leisure activities of doctorate holders working within and outside academia and how this may affect their career. In this article, we aim to add to that knowledge.

The Icelandic context

Iceland is particularly interesting due to its reputation for success when it comes to gender equality, as it has been ranked number one on the Global Gender Gap Index since 2009 (World Economic Forum, 2021). Also, the Economist glass-ceiling index ranks Iceland as number one in terms of gender equality (Economist, 2020). A reformed legal framework, higher educational attainment of women, and significant legislation around parental (in particular paternal) leave have been important steps toward gender equality (Arnalds et al., 2013; Bjarnason & Edvardsson, 2017). Since the late 1980's, women have been in the majority with respect to university graduates, accounting for almost 70% of PhD graduates in 2019 (Reykjavík University, 2019; University of Iceland, 2019).

Icelandic female labour force participation is among the highest among the OECD countries (OECD, 2021), nevertheless fertility rates in Iceland have been rather high compared to other European countries (Jónsson, 2018; OECD, 2022). Despite the country’s good reputation for gender equality concerning economic status, political position, education, and health, the gender wage gap remains quite constant and is unbridged (Ólafsdóttir, 2020), and it even exists among doctorate holders (Staub & Heijstra, 2021). The labour market is very gender segregated, both vertically and horizontally, with women less likely to occupy managerial positions (Júlíusdóttir et al., 2018) and more likely to dominate ‘typical’ female occupations, such as in education and health care (Snævarr, 2015).

Conceptual framework

The conceptual framework reflects time and flexibility as a source of capability in managing daily life tasks around work and family life. Time has become an important concern in people's daily lives in recent decades. Increasingly available time is found to be limited, more people experience time pressures, and they describe a lack of time as being a great challenge to getting all the necessary tasks accomplished in their everyday lives (Bryson, 2007; Craig & Brown, 2017; Fyhri & Hjorthol, 2009; Sullivan & Gershuny, 2018). Everyday lives have been changing with higher educational levels, increased labour force participation of women, and changes in ideas on upbringing and the time spent with children (Craig & Brown, 2017; Craig & Mullan, 2010; Gíslason & Símonardóttir, 2018). Therefore, finding a balance between family and work life has become more complicated.

Time and family life

As Valerie Bryson (2016, p. 110) has pointed out, “our relationship with time in contemporary societies is neither ‘natural’ nor just. On the contrary, time is used, valued and understood in ways that reflect and sustain economic, social, and political inequalities.” The commodified clock (Bryson, 2016) now runs our lives. Time is gendered and it is important to understand differences in time use and how time is experienced among men and women and that ‘“time cultures” are bound up with power and control’ (Bryson & Deery, 2010, p. 91). Further, how time is valued is based on patriarchal ideas of what constitutes ‘real work’. Domestic and caring work is still linked to women, where these roles are quite invisible and not considered to be of real value. Therefore the contribution of such work has been overlooked in a global economic value system that focuses on productivity, measurability, and results (Bryson, 2016). This dominant understanding and the failure to recognise that other rhythms of time might be possible ‘reflects – and sustains – deep-seated gender inequalities’, especially those related to care responsibilities (Bryson, 2007, p. 100), but gender has been the most significant predictor for how people allocate their time (Craig & Mullan, 2010, p. 1345). Part of this relates to Acker's (1990) concept of the ‘ideal worker’, who is totally committed to the job, disembodied, and free from domestic and other duties (Sang et al., 2015).

In recent years, people have increasingly felt rushed and time pressure has increasingly become part of daily lives (Craig & Brown, 2017; Fyhri & Hjorthol, 2009; Hjálmsdóttir & Bjarnadóttir, 2021). This especially applies to parents. Influencing such time pressure in contemporary families is when and how much work is done, as well as higher expectations of parenting than were previously accepted (Craig & Brown, 2017). However, research has indicated that women feel more rushed and have less control over their time outside of the workplace than men do. Mothers’ recreational time is more often shared with children than fathers’ time, and they are more likely to be multi-tasking (Craig & Brown, 2017; Friedman, 2015; Rafnsdóttir & Heijstra, 2013; Sullivan & Gershuny, 2018).

Studies suggest that mothers are more likely to spend more time on caregiving and domestic work, and this applies to academics as well as employees in other businesses (Acker, 2014; Acker & Armenti, 2004; Hunter & Leahey, 2010; Júlíusdóttir et al., 2018; Rafnsdóttir & Heijstra, 2013). The home is important since it is not only home to individuals but also to cultural beliefs on gender which influence gender roles and the organisation of the family (Ridgeway, 2011). Studies have shown that having children has a gendered effect on parents’ careers, and the interference of family roles tends to have more effect on women's careers, by slowing them down, while, on the other hand, having a family might enhance men's success, such as in relation to salary and positions. This applies in Iceland as it does elsewhere (Arnalds et al., 2013; Fuller & Cooke, 2018; Morrison et al., 2011; Petersen et al., 2014). Recent research from Flanders (Dutch-speaking Belgium) suggests that education also matters, as highly educated employees are less satisfied with their work–life balance than those with less education (Mortier et al., 2020).

Flexibility and work–life balance

The term work–life balance refers to the ability of individuals to coordinate duties of paid work, the construction and services of the family household, and recreation (Lewis, 2003; Ransome, 2007; Wheatley, 2012). Research has indicated that an improved balance between work and family life results in better mental and physical health (Haar et al., 2014). More flexibility at work is often seen as a key to a more successful balance between work and family (Gatrell et al., 2013; Haar et al., 2014; Sullivan, 2015).

Fuller and Hirsh (2019, p. 6) have underlined the importance of moving away from individual-level explanations to the context of organisational options and constraints to help unravel how work lives are negotiated. An individualised approach risks overlooking gendered experiences and organisational cultures, the collective and individual actions that shape shared values, beliefs, and attitudes communicated and taught within organisations (Skakni et al., 2022). The boundaries between paid work and the remaining aspects of life have become more blurred in the contemporary global marketplace, especially among high skilled professional workers. These changes have further shaped workplace cultures (Lewis, 2003).

Intensification of work in response to global competition and the goal of efficiency and reducing budgets negatively affected workers around the world (Lewis, 2003). Ideas and practices of neoliberal managerialism – with an emphasis on performance indicators, measurable outputs, competition, and performativity – have become more widespread in academia (Connell, 2019; Göktürk & Tülübaş, 2021; Le Feuvre et al., 2018; Steinþórsdóttir et al., 2019). This has resulted in increased competition within and between universities (Bozzon et al., 2018) and a culture of long working hours has become the norm (Cannizzo et al., 2019; Heijstra & Rafnsdóttir, 2010; Sang et al., 2015). While workplaces outside academia usually have quite structured work organisation, schedules, and time management, academia has an organisational culture that is characterised by an informal structure and high autonomy of the employees (Skakni et al., 2022, p. 1273). Sang et al. (2015), point out that ‘the ideal academic’ – like the ‘the ideal worker’ – prioritises work rather than family, and that his/her main interests are in pursuing time-consuming research and publications (Sang et al., 2015).

Flexible work arrangements have often been thought to facilitate labour participation and civic participation, and – not least – to improve work–life balance, especially for mothers (Fuller & Hirsh, 2019; Gatrell et al., 2014; Sullivan, 2015). As Cannizzo et al. (2019) have outlined, work–life balance policies can reflect the conflict between different interests and enable different kinds of flexibility, either being ‘employee-friendly’ allowing workers with more access to non-work time or ‘business-friendly’ where the organisation has access to employees outside regular working hours (Cannizzo et al., 2019, p. 253). With men being more likely to occupy higher positions they tend to have more flexibility than women, and therefore more power over their time, although they, unlike women, are not necessarily using that flexibility and power to create a better work–life balance (Staub & Rafnsdóttir, 2020; Williams et al., 2013). Women often carry a greater share of family commitments and feel less free to ‘choose’ to work longer hours, although choice, both for men and women, can be an illusion when increased workload and longer hours are the outcomes of changes in work and organisations’ environments (Lewis, 2003; Ransome, 2007).

This article takes this discussion further by examining how work–life balance and flexibility play out when examining the highest educated women and men working within and outside Icelandic academia. As the work organisation is, in general, different in academia compared to other organisations, especially regarding the regulation of working hours, flexibility, and where and when the work is conducted, it is of interest to compare these fields of employment. We focus on the role of time and flexibility, and establish whether we find differences in the career path of women and men, and of doctorate holders working within and outside academia.

The research process and method

The data presented here is part of a larger ongoing Nordic research project called NORDICORE, which investigates the career and family trajectories of those who have completed doctoral degrees and work within or outside academia, mainly in Sweden, Norway, and Iceland. The results presented here are based on interviews with 32 doctorate holders living in Iceland. The interviews took place in the Reykjavík capital area during the spring and the summer of 2018, and were facilitated in the interviewee's workplaces apart from three; one at an interviewee's home and two in an office provided by the interviewers at the University of Iceland. The interviews were conducted by two female doctoral candidates affiliated with the project, and the guidelines of the open-ended questions were based on questions around career trajectories, family circumstances, and the interconnectedness of private and public life.

For decades, the National and University Library of Iceland has archived information about all Icelandic citizens who complete their PhD degrees from anywhere around the world. This information is open to the public and we utilised this list for a purposeful sampling (Creswell & Poth, 2018) of doctorate holders to find participants in our study. Men and women in equal numbers who finished their PhDs within STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) and SSH (Social Sciences and Humanities) five to fifteen years ago at the time of the interviews, and who were working within academia and in other businesses, participated in the research. Four women and four men from STEM working within academia, four women and men from STEM working in other businesses, four women and men from SSH working within the academia, and four women and four men from SSH working in other businesses were interviewed. The participants working in other businesses all held managerial positions within their workplaces, working in the private sector and public institutions. They claimed they had the autonomy with regard to their working hours although they were expected to spend more hours at their workplaces than the academics, and most often within a certain timeframe.

The participants’ ages ranged from 38 years old to 61 years old when the interviews were conducted. They were all working full-time jobs and all of them were in heterosexual relationships, except five who were single or divorced at the time. Considering the small population of Iceland, their sexual orientation is not revealed to protect their anonymity. On average, the interviewees had two children, but four of them did not have any children while the other participants had one or more children. The data introduced here is based on interviews with the parents. The male interviewees had on average 2.3 children, while the females had 1.7 children on average, with the female academics – notably – having the fewest children on average. The interviews lasted around an hour and were recorded with the participants’ permission and were afterward transcribed word for word.

Using the standard method of interviewing but engaging in feminist knowledge production, we intend to operate reflexivity and relationally (DeVault & Gross, 2006) and employ standpoint theory as a ‘prescription for our research practices’ (Harding, 2004). The participants were provided a detailed introduction to the study before they gave informed acceptance for participation. They were promised confidentiality and that measures would be taken to prevent identification. The research was reported to the office of the Icelandic Data Protection Authority (under the number S8589).

The transcriptions of the interviews were analysed by drawing on Braun and Clarke’s (2013) six-phase process of thematic analysis. We took notes while reading through the interviews several times to gain familiarisation before we started coding the data into candidate themes using a theoretical thematic approach. This means that the analysis of the data was guided by theoretical concepts, of time and flexibility as a source of capability in managing daily life tasks around work and family life, and our feminist lens. By engaging in the active process of creating patterns of meaning, we shifted from codes to themes (Braun & Clarke, 2013), carefully based on the experiences and lived realities shared by our participants during the interviews. The themes drawn from the data and introduced here are work and time as lifestyle, work–life balance, and flexibility.

Findings

Despite all our participants claiming that it is challenging to balance work and family, and while they appear to be ‘on the run’ in their daily lives, there was a notable difference between the discourses of women and men on the one hand, and on the academics and those working outside academia on the other. Power of time, or the lack of it, and flexibility are surrounding themes.

The lifestyle of work

Most of the participants talked about the puzzling task of retaining balance in everyday life. However, we found gender patterns in difficulties described by the interviewees concerning negotiating work and family life. This mother of three in a job outside academia explained – in a way that was more common among women – the struggle with work–life balance: ‘It is just difficult, I don't do anything else than just attend to my work and my children.’ On the other hand, this married father of two, also in a job outside academia, explained his experience differently and more in line with other male interviewees:

Well, I wouldn't necessarily say that the work in the private life is a stumbling block it is more about the level of everything combined. It doesn't matter if you are a manager or on the floor, we are all just somehow on the wheel, you know.

He describes the combination of work and family as a time-consuming project, but not necessarily a difficult one. Despite these gender patterns, which were obvious both within and outside academia, there seemed to be more tension between work and family life among the academics. It turned out to be both among women and men, and despite the well-known flexibility regarding where and when to work within the academia. The tension caused by undefined working hours, and what seems to be a tradition of looking at work within academia not simply as work but perhaps as a hobby or lifestyle, seemed to be an extra burden. Also, the tension between teaching, researching, and administrative obligations appears to add greatly to the pressure experienced by the interviewees. Despite being in high positions within their workplaces, participants outside academia claimed that they had good control over their work time, something that few academics mentioned. Hence, their flexibility was somehow differently structured and limited by their managerial obligations, as this married mother and middle manager in a large public institution described: ‘Yes, yes, I have the flexibility and can decide to block time here and there […] but I have 40 workers in my department and it's of course best to be in the workplace while they are working.’

The academics talked frequently about the flexibility that their job has and how important they found that flexibility. But, unfortunately, this flexibility was like a ‘double-edged sword’, as this very same flexibility seemed to entail the pressure of being at work all the time. As this academic father said: ‘Thus, it can be a blessing, the flexible working hours, but at that same time it can be a curse,’ referring to the fact that it permits you to work at all times. The public Icelandic higher education system rewards research activities above teaching, as is common around the globe (Steinþórsdóttir et al., 2019), hence, as Berg et al. (2016) have pointed out, it explicitly assesses individual productivity, with monthly salaries of academics mainly being based on their research activity, as well getting early bonus payments based on the previous year's research activity (Berg et al., 2016). This seems to cause a lot of ‘internal tension’ in their working life, which seems to transmit into every aspect of the daily lives of the academics since they described much more tension in their daily lives than those working in other businesses. As this married academic father explains:

When you are already used to flexibility, even though you work a lot, if you would start to count the working hours I think it would be a lot. Somehow when you are in charge it doesn't feel like as much work, I’m not sure if a boss would tell me to work as much as I do, maybe to meet a deadline, that I would accept it.

Accordingly, the sense that you are working for your own benefit makes the long hours more acceptable and the flat structure of academia seems to be experienced as there is no boss. Even though one might argue that the structure of the system is ‘the boss’.

Time is a valuable resource in the modern world and academics talked a lot about the constant tension between teaching and researching. As this academic married mother of two explicated:

This is some kind of ‘art of balance’, you know. Often, I just have a knuckle in my stomach because I have the constant feeling that I’m not doing enough [research], but I start to feel better when I get some research done. This is particularly when I’m teaching a lot, then nothing seems to be happening.

Some of the participants discussed how the teaching ‘takes away’ time from research and how the structure of the system also puts strain on them, as this married academic mother of two explained: ‘I constantly feel guilty because I’m not working fast enough and all that, there is extensive, or you know, you put a pressure on yourself and the system puts a pressure on you’. Despite both men and women discussing the pressure they felt, the women were more likely to voice their feeling of guilt, both concerning work and the home, and they appeared to struggle even more with getting time to focus on their research than men.

Interestingly, academics often justify the heavy workload they experience and the struggle to balance work and family life by expressing that their work was part of their lifestyle. As this married academic father of two explained:

I think in this job it is incredibly difficult to leave your work behind at the end of the day and not take it home with you. I think it is impossible! And research is also just my hobby and what makes life entertaining, you see.

On the same note this married academic mother of two claimed: ‘Really, I have always seen my job as a lifestyle rather than a job.’ None of the interviewees working outside academia talked about their work being as much a lifestyle as their work, in fact, they talked more about drawing a line between work and family life. The academics more typically talked in this manner while discussing their workload and how they were trying to manage the tension between research, teaching, and administration, as well as a balance between the work and household and caring responsibilities.

Time and work–life balance

Most of the participants talked about difficulties in compromising between family and working life, and piecing together everyday obligations. Those who had older children talked about how much easier life had become once the kids got older and participants with younger children voiced more stress in their everyday lives. Even though everyday life was stressful for both genders, the women, both inside and outside academia, were more likely to talk at length about being on the run every day to get as much done as possible. Many of them described having the feeling that you never get enough done. Plans were being made but one can never be sure that things go according to plan, as this mother of two working outside the academia, described:

You know there is always so much going on, you come home from work, and thought you were going to do this and that during the day, and then something came up and at the end of the day you just ask yourself – what happened?

Despite clear gender patterns in the data, most of the participants claimed that the gendered division of household chores in their homes was more or less equal. Women tended to talk in more detail about issues concerning the home and the children, while the men were more likely to be brief about issues concerning their private sphere. Most of the participants said that, with time, some sort of division of household chores became a norm in their relationships. They further explained how work and working obligations outside the family had influenced the division of labour at home. However, some of the participants, more often women than men, expressed dissatisfaction with how the division of labour had developed within the relationship, and some of the women said they often ‘talked and pushed’ for a more equal division of labour.

Although most of the men described their home as quite gender equal in relation to the division of household tasks, some of them, though with some hesitation, admitted that their wives took on a greater share of the household labour and caring responsibilities. As this married academic father of two explained:

We share the cooking, and we clean together, uhm, [but] I must admit that she is under more strain when it comes to the household chores, it doesn't sound good though.

It seems to be an exception if the woman did not take care of the laundry as the married academic father of two said [laughing] when describing the couple's division of labour: ‘She is always doing some laundry even though I have no idea what she is washing all the time.’ A married father of three working outside academia described a similar situation as he explained: ‘She has taken over a greater share of the household, yes she has, [hesitation] still she has always been working a lot, it has been a puzzle the whole time, always.’ None of the female participants shared with us that their male partner would do a larger share of the household chores.

The women were more likely to express that they found daily life stressful and conflicting, especially the work and family life balance, and the female academics even more. The women also seemed to find it more difficult to draw a clear line between work and family, as this married academic mother of one explained: ‘I think that the pressure is also because your head is drawn into it, the things you are dealing with, the duties of daily life at home are pulled into your working life, you never have the peace you need.’

At the same time the men, within and outside academia, talked more frequently about the importance of good planning for a better balance, like this married father of three working outside the academia said: ‘It calls for very good planning,’ to get things done, and he further explained: ‘Often it is just a matter of planning. You just block time and, and work around that. […] We are probably quite organised.’ And this father of two working outside academia explained: ‘To keep the weekends work-free is just a matter of conscious decision – I just cut them out.’ Thus, the men were more likely than the women to describe how they master time, by taking ‘control over time’. The women were more likely to talk about time poverty and time squeeze. Sadly, the women were more likely to express that the stress and conflict they experience were somehow their own fault, like this married academic mother of two who said: ‘I don't know, I don't know if it is just me who is not organised enough or something, but I just don't get everything done.’ This is an indication that gender is a defining factor in this context, and that the men experience that they have more control over their time and tasks than the women do.

Concluding discussion

In this article, we present research on the work–life balance among doctorate holders working both within and outside academia. We studied how satisfied they are with their work–life balance and the role of gender and career path within and outside academia in that satisfaction. As previous research indicates (Baker, 2016; Heijstra et al., 2015; Júlíusdóttir et al., 2018; Moratti, 2021; Steinþórsdóttir et al., 2019), gender plays a great part in the participants’ satisfaction when it comes to work–life balance. What this research adds to that knowledge is that it shows the difference between doctorate holders within and outside academia. All our interviewees hold reputable positions, but what is of interest is the link between flexibility and work–life balance, as flexibility is more woven into academic work than the work of others (Skakni et al., 2022). Even though flexibility, in general, is seen as family-friendly (Fuller & Hirsh, 2019; Sullivan, 2015), it seems to prolong the workdays and make the work–life balance challenging, especially for women. Thus, although a good work–life balance seems a long stretch for all interviewees, the women describe more strain in their everyday lives than their male counterparts, and struggle more regarding balancing work and family.

That is not new knowledge (Baker, 2016; Moratti, 2021). However, what is new and of concern is that work–life balance seems to be more difficult for participants within than outside academia, especially for women. This shows the paradox of flexibility. Even though all participants experienced work strain and ‘constant’ lack of time, academic mothers were those who most often explained how family obligations were ‘pulled into their working life’ and vice versa, because of the flexibility they had at work. Even though they appreciated the flexibility, they often found these blurred boundaries between work and family stressful. Thus, academic mothers experienced the greatest difficulties in symbolising the ‘ideal worker/ideal academic’ criteria (Acker, 1990; Sang et al., 2015) due to gender norms around caring responsibilities in combination with work flexibility. The men, within and outside academia, talked in less detail about their private life, although admitting that their female partners might take on a heavier burden of the household chores, as well as the organising of the family's daily lives.

In line with Bryson (2016) on how time is neither neutral nor just but a reflection of social and political inequalities, men and women described their power over time differently. While the women explained how difficult it was to have control over their time, experiencing constant claims upon their time from children, their spouses, and work, the men explained the importance of planning time carefully and working around that. Thus, the men, both working within and outside academia, expressed more control over their time than the women, as if dealing with time constraints was only a matter of planning for our own and others' time. This also shows men's experiences – that it is possible to control the time of others – which women were less likely to mention. Women were more likely to point out that they had constantly to respond to others’ needs – that their time also belonged to others. The men felt busy, but a lot less because of family obligations constantly being pulled into their working life.

The group studied here had invested greatly in their education and all the participants were in a respectable position in the labour market, either as academics or in managerial positions in other businesses. The academic sector especially has been characterised by its flexible work arrangements (Mortier et al., 2020; Skakni et al., 2022) and flexibility has often been portrayed as a key to a more successful balance of family and working life (Haar et al., 2014). However, our finding suggests that flexibility, as offered in academia (Skakni et al., 2022), with unregulated working hours and a large part of the work conducted outside traditional working hours, can become a double-edged sword. The interviewed academics talked in detail about how they valued their flexible working hours, even though it seemed to add to the difficulties of drawing a line between work, family, and recreation, and demanded them to be at work ‘always and everywhere’. Although work outside academia seems less flexible, those participants expressed that they had more structured work, but also more autonomy over their working time than the academics, as it was easier for them to limit their working hours and draw a line between work and family. Thus they were more likely than the academics to experience ‘employee-friendly’ flexibility (Cannizzo et al., 2019).

The competition within the academy for positions, tenure track, promotions, and grants, and the heavy focus on research and publication, make the work stressful and this, in combination with the flexible working culture, prolongs the working day for academics (Berg et al., 2016; Steinþórsdóttir et al., 2019). This further seems to influence self-monitoring among them (Cannizzo et al., 2019) and encourage total work commitment (Rafnsdóttir & Heijstra, 2013).

Other differences between the academics and others were that the academics tended to describe their work as a lifestyle and their main hobby, which none of the interviewees working in other businesses did. This sounded as if the academics were using the discourse of work as their hobby as a coping mechanism to justify the very long working hours or even to bolster their self-discipline (Cannizzo et al., 2019). This raises interesting and important issues for further research on the lived realities for doctorate holders who have taken different career paths.

This article aimed to improve the knowledge of work and family life conditions of doctorate holders working within and outside academia. Doctorate holders working outside academia are growing in numbers. As shown in the article, the life experiences of those working within and outside academia are in some ways different, and it problematises the connection between flexibility and gender equality, as women seemed to be more likely than men to use the flexibility to take care of the family. That is the situation, even among doctorate holders in Iceland, which is seen as a frontrunner in gender equality (World Economic Forum, 2021). Although higher education empowers women, it empowers men even further (Staub & Heijstra, 2021) and does not eliminate the gender power relation between men and women doctorate holders.