The paper explores the feasibility of organisational change in the search for gender equality in European universities in a climate of volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity. Despite numerous EU-funded projects on aspects of equality in universities, reductions in inequality resulting from such initiatives are hard to sustain (Deem 2018), irrespective of successful attempts worldwide to reduce the gendering of higher education (White and O'Connor 2017). New equality priorities overtake older ones, so whilst the majority of undergraduates in European countries are female, this does not translate into a reduced gender pay-gap and sexual harassment, gender violence and hate-crime continue to be a problem in HE (Universities UK 2017). Additionally, as right-wing parties and movements continue to grow in importance in Europe and elsewhere, key underpinning aspects of equality strategies such as gender studies are now under attack (viz the departure of the Central European University from Budapest to Vienna because its gender studies programme can no longer be validated in Hungary). Gender studies is also regarded as ideological rather than an important academic field, with those researching it driven to work ever harder (Pereira 2017). The search for greater equality does not sit well with other forms of change in HE systems such new managerialism with an emphasis on performance management and target setting (Deem, Hillyard et al. 2007) and ‘boardism’ in the form of external stakeholders increasingly exercising decision-making power (Veiga, Magalhaes et al. 2015). Human Resource practitioners are also increasingly taking over equality initiatives as box-ticking exercises. The paper uses a university case study of struggles to reduce inequality using varied means. This includes working on accreditation schemes like Athena Swan (gender) and a Race Equality Charter, as well as equality data in the English Teaching Excellence Framework. Accreditation schemes require analysis of complex data sets, as well as running surveys and focus groups and excluded groups are prominent in doing the work required, driven by their own commitment to equality. At the same time gaining accreditation can turn into ever-harder hurdles to jump. Senior managers may support for equality in theory but not always in practice because to do so might mean changing institutional priorities. Only threats of loss of access research funding or a deleterious effect on rankings are likely to challenge this way of thinking. The paper concludes by asking if we need to explore new kinds of approaches for tackling inequalities in HE.

Deem, R. (2018). ‘Living with gender in the 21st century university; how do we now effect lasting change?' Gender, Human Rights and Inequalities. Ed A. Torres. Lisboa ISCSP Universidade de Lisboa. Deem, R., et al. (2007). Knowledge, Higher Education and the New Managerialism: The Changing Management of UK Universities. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Pereira, M. d. M. (2017). Power, Knowledge and Feminist Scholarship: an Ethnography of Academia. London Routledge Universities UK (2017). Changing the Culture: Report of the Universities UK Taskforce examining violence against women, harassment and hate crime affecting university studentshttps://http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/policy-and-analysis/reports/Documents/2016/changing-the-culture.pdf. London Veiga, A., et al. (2015). From Collegial Governance to Boardism: Reconfiguring Governance in Higher Education. The Palgrave International Handbook of Higher Education Policy and Governance. J. Huisman, H. De Boer, D. Dill and M. Souto-Otero. London and New York, Palgrave: 398-416. White, K. and P. O'Connor, Eds. (2017). Gendered Success in Higher Education: Global perspectives London, Palgrave Macmillan