valuing richness and complexity), system openness to flows of energy and matter (networks) and dynamic balance
(recognizing that flexibility does not result from maximizing a single variable but from allowing many significant variables
to fluctuate around their optimal values).1
In the remainder of the paper, I also draw attention to two different uses of gender: gender as a biological variable and
gender as a concept. Frequently, discussions about diversity (one of our sustainability principles) define gender as a
biological variable. Here, gender is employed as an on/off variable – woman/not woman; or as stated by Scott (1986, 1056):
‘‘In its simplest. . . usage, ‘gender’ is a synonym for ‘women’. . .. . .’’ Gender as a variable implicitly defines diversity as a
diversity of sexes and, places attention upon the presence or absence of female bodies in accounting practice, in upper
management positions, in the academy, etc.
Although the inclusion of women in accounting practice and academia is an important objective, thinking of gender
primarily as a physical variable ignores how conceptual understandings of gender (i.e., masculine/feminine rather than
male/female) can address a wider set of issues. Gender as a concept draws attention away from man/woman (i.e., biology)
and toward how associations with masculine/feminine imbue our cultural understandings of as well as relative values
accorded to objects, disciplines, behaviors, etc. (Khalifa and Kirkham, 2008; Nelson, 2010). Defined in relation to each other,
the qualities associated with the feminine and the masculine may vary over time as well as across groups. These notions
operate at multiple levels being translated (and possibly altered) through interaction within families, communities of
activity, institutional arrangements, etc. (Walker, 2008). Indeed, ‘‘. . .gendered patterns of thought have influenced the
development of scientific endeavor’’ by valorizing qualities frequently associated with the masculine (at least in the West) –
rigor, hardness, detachment – and devaluing those associated with the feminine such as intuition, relationship, caring
(Hines, 1992; Nelson, 2010).
Regarding gender as a concept rather than biological variable discourages us from assuming that a quality associated with
the feminine/masculine is found in all (most, many) women/men. Accordingly, gender as a concept redirects our attention
from focusing mainly on achieving a diversity of bodies and toward exploring how existing notions of the feminine and
masculine may have limited flows of energy and matter into and out of the academy. In other words, these concepts can help
us to identify and examine obstructions to, as well as facilitate openings for, intellectual heterogeneity – a multiplicity of
ideas, research programs and methodologies, values and practices that are considered appropriate and important within a
particular domain of activity. In assessing the openness and dynamic balance of the accounting academy, gender as a concept
can assist us in questioning the assumptions (often unstated) that may hamper the academy’s intellectual, methodological
and topical heterogeneity. Gender as a concept can also aid in identifying values that are currently ignored or belittled as well
as to provide reasons for incorporating at least some of these omitted values into the set regarded as relevant for maintaining
a dynamic balance.2
The remainder of the essay is organized as follows. In the next section, I explore how gender as a variable usefully draws
our attention to the inclusion of more women in the academy (an issue of diversity) but encourages us to define diversity in
narrow terms as well as to ignore other sustainability principles. The succeeding section explores how gender as a concept
offers the potential for understanding the existing barriers to openness and for suggesting additional variables (or values) to
incorporate within the academy to promote a more dynamic balance. These discussions are followed by some concluding
comments and a postscript.