Introducing gender, management and transition researchThe majority of studies on economic and political reform in central and eastern Europe(CEE) have failed to consider how men and women are differently affected bytransition from command to market economies (Grapard, 1997; Degtiar, 2000). Thisfailure is likely to have serious consequences for the economic and social well being ofwomen who seem to have borne greater costs of the restructuring. This special issuecontributes to this under explored debate. This special issue complements the previousissue of Women in Management Review (Vol. 20 No. 5, 2005), which examined casestudy analyses, and labour market data of women managers in CEE including EastGermany, Czechoslovakia and Hungary. The studies provided unique insights into theorganisational climates prevailing in transitional contexts and how managerial andorganisation practices and gender and equality discourses were being constructed. Theaim in this issue is to take a more critical stance on the nature of gender andmanagement research by examining how broader political economy and developmentprocesses have shaped gender dialogues. In short, the papers consider the genderedeffects of transition processes on managerial identities and subjectivities and unveilhow theorising of gender and work relations is an emerging research subject. Thisspecial issue incorporates case analyses of the Russian Federation, Belarus and Estoniaas well as a general theoretical paper charting gender and equal opportunities inpost-communist states.In order to position the debates it is first useful to consider how gender research hasevolved in post-communist states. Commentators have highlighted the absence of feminist agendas in social change research and stressed that even within the political,economic and philosophical academic community there is resistance to

feminism andwhat it represents (Grapard, 1997; Roman, 2001; Zdravomyslova and Temkina, 2003;Voronina, 2004). Indeed, it is argued that political and business culture is on the wholeanti-feminist, preferring instead to contextualise change within individual andneo-liberal political discourses (McDowell, 2004). Four periods of gender studiesresearch can be identified within CEE, although a great deal has been influenced byRussian gender discourse:(1) 1980s-1992: the so-called enlightenment period between the late 1980s andearly 1900s introduced for the first time gender as a research paradigm intopublic and social policy debates.(2) 1992-1995: this was characterised as a period of institutionalising of research,which included the growth in gender and feminist research centres inuniversities and the official registration of gender research scholars.(3) 1996-1998: a period of consolidation of scholars and teachers of Russian andEast European gender studies.(4) 1999 until present: a period of accelerated legitimisation and spreading ofgender education and research within university departments as well as greateracknowledgement of equality issues in public administration departments(summarised from Zdravomyslova and Temkina, 2003; See also Domsch et al.,2003).The relative late development of gender-inspired research, when compared to the Westhas created a multi-layered research climate that has likely contributed to the limitedresearch on gender, management and organisation. Undoubtedly, the new marketdevelopments and investment strategies in Eastern economies and the accession plansto the EU of some post-communist states have stimulated concerns about tradedevelopment organisation and managerial planning in these regions (Walby, 1999;Riley, 2001). It is hoped that the papers in this special issue will contribute to thelimited knowledge of gender and

management in transition states and will provide aplatform from which to assist the development of equality and diversity managementpolicies.The first paper, by Beverly Metcalfe and Marianne Afanassieva, reviews genderwork and equal opportunities in CEE countries. The authors explore the significance ofthe worker-mother contract and how ideologically and structurally this role wascentral to communist work systems. Drawing on United Nations international datasetsthe authors show that female employment in CEE has traditionally been higher than inwestern economies on account of the state-supported childcare programmes andflexible HR systems, which permitted women to combine work and familyresponsibilities. The dissolution of communist political systems has seen thewithdrawing of these services and seen a general deterioration in the working lives ofwomen. The authors highlight that the substantive literature on economic transitionhas adopted a gender-neutral stance. It is argued that the worker-mother contract hasbeen transformed from a largely political and national identity to one that is shaped bymarket and organisation imperatives. Metcalfe and Afanassieva argue that gender aspects of transition be described as remasculinisation which reinforces a new form ofgendered inequalities, one based on neo-liberalism that underplays notions of equalityand justice (McDowell, 2004). The remasculinisation is further reinforced byinadequate institutional frameworks to support gender development policies. Theysuggest that gender-mainstreaming initiatives can assist policy developmentprocesses. They argue a key focus for equality policy development will be inencouraging business partnerships between employer organisations, publicadministration and international agencies such as the UN and ILO as well asinstitutionalising equality audits within public

administration.The second paper examines case data on women managers in post-Soviet Belarus.After setting the scene of Belarusian unstable economic environment the paper byChristopher Rees and Galina Miazhevich explores the learning strategies andexperiences of a group of women managers employed in SMEs based on empiricalin-depth interviews. Traditionalist gender culture present in post-Soviet Belarus actsas a constraint to women's progression and is at the root of the discrimination thatshapes women managers' experience. Three factors of women's choice of beingemployed in SMEs were identified: financial necessity/stability; self-realisation; andindependence. There remains, however, a tension between their roles of the "modern"businesswomen on the one hand, and the traditional Belarusian notion of a woman as a"wife and mother", on the other, leading to a double burden of responsibilities at workand at home. Women's learning experiences were made difficult by the absence of amentor-type figure and widespread gender stereotyping affecting their self-esteem andconfidence. The factors hindering learning were noted as: the unstable economicenvironment; an absence of resources and information about employment; lack offormal and informal networks for women; negative reactions about women inmanagement, especially from men; and in the case of younger women - age. Theresearch also reveals the extreme nature of gendered organisation in Belarus, withmanagerial and organisation practices reflecting masculinist characteristics. Thesituation in Belarus is not unique. A common feature of women's professionaladvancement is assistance and support via women's organisations and NGOs. Thefacilitation of women's learning and empowerment is connected to the development ofwomen's networks for professional development enabling the support of mentors androle models. The

context of these developments can still be a significant deterrent,however. The persistence of the traditionalist gender order will act as a barrier to theachievement of equality between men and women in the workplace in CEE countries aswell as in the West.Metcalfe and Afanassieva's second paper examines the work experiences ofprofessional women managing transition in the Russian Federation. They examine the"women question" in Soviet political discourse and trace its developments from agender identity that was premised on masculine behaviours, to the current day, whichpromotes a feminine work identity. They question the view that the "woman question"had been resolved under communist rule. Based on empirical interviews with 30 femalemanagers and professionals in St Petersburg, they reported that managerial skills andcompetencies are constructed by women themselves along stereotypical masculinecharacteristics. This resulted in the "differentiation" between men and women's work,and masculine and feminine attributes, and the devaluing of a feminine contribution to the organisation sphere (see Fraser, 1992). They argue that gender, work and socialrelations are shaped by an essentialist gender order. As Kay argues:It is clear that the gender climate in post-Soviet Russia advocated a strict dichotomy of maleand female roles and personality traits and gave overt support to the gender order byencouraging and expressing explicit approval of a traditionalist hierarchy of power both interms of public and private relations, leadership and decision-making. These positions werestrengthened by the implication that they represented a reversal of the gender imbalanceallegedly brought about by Soviet policies of equality, the damaging 'over-emancipation' ofwomen and the oppressive crushing of masculinity by the overbearing and overtly intrusivestate (Kay, 2000, pp.

33).In.