Title of the To Be Honest Conference Session:
Facts & Tools

Glass Ceilings in Academia: Strategies for Overcoming Systemic Barriers

Explore methods to challenge hidden obstacles in academic careers - how community-building, mentorship, and inclusive policies can open up glass ceilings for researchers.

Academia often promises merit-based advancement. Yet hidden obstacles—popularly called “glass ceilings”—continue to hold back many scholars. These barriers are often rooted in gender, origin, immigration status, language proficiency, systemic knowledge, and socio-economic background. Unlike overt discrimination, glass ceilings are subtle within the structural framework of  institutions, making them harder to identify and dismantle.

Recognizing how these barriers form and why they persist is essential for anyone committed to fairer, more inclusive institutions. In this session, Birte Seffert (GSO) spoke with three experts who bring varied experiences to the table:

Saumya Pant
Project Manager @ the University of Bremen
Taiwo Fagbemigun
Senior Project Manager & Team Lead of Horizon Resource Network
Verena Claudia Haage
Neuroimmunologist & Co-Founder of SciLead
Dr. Birte Seffert
Senior-Projektmanagerin Förderprogramme & Beratung

Intersectional Challenges in Academia

German academia, or academia in general did not historically anticipate a diverse pool of researchers. People who do not fit established norms (e.g., being a German man, fluent in German, and on a linear research track) may find career progression painfully slow if not outright blocked. A single-minded focus on publication counts and grants leaves little room for alternative qualifications or lived experiences. Rigid department structures rarely accommodate such diversity, underscoring the need for policies that address these realities rather than adopting one-size-fits-all solutions.

In addition to that, repeatedly juggling short-term contracts and lacking mentors with similar backgrounds lead people to leave academia. Many departments have no roadmap for how to integrate or support scholars from migrant or Global South communities, making advancement erratic at best.

In addition to that, problems like opaque hiring processes and precarious residency status amplify stress for researchers, especially when combined with minimal leadership training or inconsistent mentoring.

Key point: These barriers are not personal failings. Rather, they’re baked into an institutional design that historically excluded broad groups from academic life.

Building Community and Mentorship

Support networks can counteract isolation and doubt. Small groups, online forums, alumni networks, or conference gatherings offer emotional support and shared resources. Certain platforms—whether related to open science, leadership training, or grassroots initiatives—can further improve communication skills and raise one’s professional profile over time.

Having more than one mentor prevents reliance on a single viewpoint or advisor, and can add opportunities for different collaborations. Even if mentorship can be more effective when integrated into structured programs, informal peer networks can fill critical gaps and change the feeling of being alone, especially for internationals.

Reframing Your Individual Experience

International backgrounds or nontraditional research paths often appear “unusual” in academic settings. But, seeing them as credentials such as multilingual proficiency, cross-cultural adaptability, or independent thinking can help with your own visibility. Framing these traits as assets rather than deficits helps when seeking funding, submitting applications, or exploring new collaborations. Be proactive when self-advocating, because standard evaluation criteria do not always highlight these qualities.

Practical Take Away: In your cover letter or interview, highlight why your background and skill set add value. Ask the hiring committee direct questions about support for newcomers, including language assistance or resources that address cultural integration.

Transparency and Institutional Responsibility

Yes, individuals can adopt strategies for self-empowerment. Yet institutions owe a duty to dismantle exclusionary practices, as ad hoc solutions at institutions rarely serve; the progress requires deep reflection about who sets the rules in hiring, grant funding, authorship, and departmental culture:

  • Hiring committees should publish clear criteria.
  • Departments should articulate what “excellence” means beyond archaic publication metrics.
  • Leadership must reflect on the ways implicit bias shapes decisions—from who gets invited to speak at colloquia, to who secures lab funding, to who is encouraged to pursue professorship.

Red flags include departments writing about inclusivity in job ads but failing to show any real track record of diverse hires or robust anti-discrimination policies. If you suspect tokenism—where you alone represent an entire demographic—ask pointed questions about existing mentorship, workload distribution, and cultural support.

Mental Health & Neurodiversity: Further Reading

A frequent question is how or whether to disclose mental health challenges or neurodivergent traits in applications, interviews, or at the work place. The answer is deeply personal: in a genuinely supportive setting, disclosure can improve acceptance. However in less inclusive environments, disclosing might trigger more barriers. Be aware that you are not obligated to share anything that a workplace cannot respectfully handle.

For anyone in academia struggling with mental health or neurodivergent conditions, these online platforms and communities offer firsthand accounts, mentorship, and support:

Final Thoughts on Glass Ceilings in Academia

Academia’s glass ceilings are far from shattered. But open dialogue, collective action, and conscientious policies can gradually reshape the ivory tower into a space where diverse voices thrive. “We’re not alone,” reminds Birte Seffert, encouraging participants to keep sharing experiences and pressing for institutional accountability. The more researchers challenge implicit bias, share personal narratives, and demand structural fixes, the closer we get to equal academic structures.


Our Partners

The *Tbh-Conference was supported by  AlumNode – your network by Klaus Tschira Stiftung, and made possible by funding from the foundation Klaus Tschira Stiftung. Thank you to TwentyOne Skills for the support!