Framing equality, concealing inequality: gender discourse and women academics’ career barriers in Vietnamese university web publications Open Access

Gender equality has become a central concern in higher education policy and practice globally (Boni Le Goff et al., 2024). Across regions, universities are expected not only to improve the representation of women in academic leadership (United Nations, 2015) but also to demonstrate a broader commitment to inclusion, fairness, and institutional accountability (Times Higher Education, 2025). Promoting gender equality is not only an ethical imperative but also linked to improved institutional performance, innovation, and societal impact (Crimmins and Barnard, 2022). Yet, how universities represent their commitment to gender equality – particularly through public-facing narratives – remains underexplored, especially in non-Western contexts.

Vietnam presents a timely and underexamined context for exploring these issues. The country has achieved notable gains in gender parity in education, including high rates of female enrolment and graduation (UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2022). However, women academics remain significantly underrepresented in senior academic and leadership roles (Nguyen, 2021). Institutional discourses around gender equality are shaped by broader societal norms, including Confucian gender ideology, state-socialist governance, and nationalist rhetoric (Ngo, 2024). Within this environment, universities must navigate the dual pressures of aligning with state logics while striving to meet international expectations of academic excellence and equity. Despite these tensions, there is limited empirical research examining how Vietnamese universities report and portray their gender equality policies and initiatives to the public.

Promoting gender equality within higher education necessitates a critical examination of the concept of “academic excellence.” Far from being an impartial metric, academic excellence is a socially constructed framework that both reflects and perpetuates existing power dynamics and structural inequities (O’Connor and O’Hagan, 2016). Within non-Western contexts, such as Vietnam, there exists a notable gap in understanding how “excellence” is defined, operationalised, and experienced, revealing an urgent need for further inquiry into the ways this concept intersects with local cultural and institutional dynamics.

This research seeks to address existing gaps by examining how the concepts of gender equality and “academic excellence” are publicly represented through analysing 21 University Web Publications (UWPs) sourced from ten universities in Vietnam. Drawing on feminist critical discourse analysis and organisational impression management theory, the study examines how Vietnamese universities report and portray gender equality policies and initiatives on their websites.

This research provides significant contributions to both theoretical understanding and practical applications in the field of gender studies and higher education. From a theoretical perspective, the study elucidates the discursive mechanisms by which practices symbolising gender equality are constructed and legitimised within a non-Western cultural and institutional context. Specifically, it demonstrates how Vietnamese UWPs engage in Dual Impression Management—outwardly signalling commitment to gender equality through symbolic messaging while simultaneously concealing structural barriers that impede women academics’ career progression. On a practical level, the findings offer actionable insights for Vietnamese universities aiming to transcend superficial rhetorical commitments and engage substantively with global standards for equity and academic excellence. The paper proceeds with a review of relevant literature and theoretical framing, followed by methodology, findings, discussion, and conclusion.

Vietnam has made significant strides in promoting gender equality through a comprehensive legal framework, including the Law on Gender Equality (2006), the Law on Domestic Violence Prevention and Control (2007), the Marriage and Family Law (2014), and the Labour Code (2019). These legislative instruments emphasise women’s rights, access to employment, and maternal protections, reflecting the state’s commitment to advancing gender equity across social, economic, and legal domains. Despite this progress, gender disparities remain, particularly in political leadership. As of 2024, women constitute approximately 30.26% of the National Assembly, placing Vietnam among countries with relatively high female parliamentary representation (Nga, 2024). Women’s participation has also increased at the provincial and district levels, with representation in People’s Councils reaching around 29% (Nga, 2024). However, as Dang (2024) notes, the language in many key policies often adopts a “protective” discourse, emphasising women’s roles in childbirth, childcare, and family responsibilities, thereby reinforcing traditional gender norms.

Vietnam has achieved near gender parity in education, with female literacy rates exceeding 93% and women comprising nearly half of tertiary graduates (UNESCO Institute for Statistics, 2022). Women also represent 46.8% of the labour force, participate at a rate of 62.4%, and own 28.2% of enterprises (Nga, 2024). Nevertheless, a persistent gender wage gap remains, largely driven by occupational segregation that channels women into lower-paid sectors such as textiles and services, where they earn 20–30% less than men (Chowdhury et al., 2019).

In Vietnam, gendered language and discourse across various societal domains continue to reproduce and reinforce patriarchal norms and expectations. Studies have shown that Vietnamese language reflects patriarchal stereotypes, with women often portrayed as inferior (Phuong, 2024). Media discourses similarly present a blend of progressive and traditional ideals, often reinforcing women’s domestic roles (Nguyen, 2011). Educational texts tend to depict women as virtuous and submissive, reinforcing conventional gender stereotypes (Phuong and Vanderstraeten, 2024). Broader cultural narratives, influenced by Confucianism and revolutionary ideals, also shape gender expectations, frequently confining women to domestic spheres while granting recognition during times of national struggle (Ngo, 2024). These studies provide a foundational understanding of how gender is discursively constructed in Vietnam. Building on this work, this study examines how gender equality is framed and communicated in higher education, focussing on how institutional discourse reproduces or resists dominant gender ideologies.

As a lower-middle-income country with constrained resources and a large student population, Vietnam faces significant challenges in modernising its higher education system. The sector remains highly centralised, shaped by strong state regulation and the enduring legacy of socialist governance. Since the amended Law on Higher Education came into effect in 2019 (Quốc hội, 2018), universities have gained increased institutional autonomy in areas such as rector appointments, curriculum development, internal organisational structures, student enrolment quotas, and tuition setting. However, state control continues to prevail in key domains. The Communist Party retains authority over succession planning and the appointment of university presidents, resulting in a “moulded career path” (Baruch et al., 2025). The Ministry of Education and Training maintains oversight of national standards for academic promotions, including professorial appointments (Bộ Giáo dục và Đào tạo (MOET), 2021).

Despite women constituting approximately half of the academic workforce in Vietnamese higher education (Bộ Giáo dục và Đào tạo, 2025), they remain markedly underrepresented in senior academic and leadership roles. As of 2017, only 7 out of 235 public universities had female rectors. In 2021, women held rector or vice-rector positions in just 6% of universities overseen by MOET, and in only 8% of institutions under the Vietnam National University, Hanoi (Nguyen, 2021). Between 2014 and 2020, only 10% of professorships were awarded to women. This gender disparity persisted in 2024, with just 1.24% of female academics attaining full professor titles and 30.74% achieving associate professorship, compared to 6.36 and 61.66%, respectively, for their male counterparts (The State Council of Professorship, 2024). Furthermore, studies consistently show that women have lower research productivity than men (Vuong, 2019).

To improve the representation of women in senior academic and leadership positions, research-informed policy development is essential. However, the literature on Vietnamese universities’ support for women’s career progression is limited. Most existing studies have concentrated on generic barriers at personal, organisational, and societal levels (Maheshwari et al., 2021), or have focused on single institutional case studies (Nguyen, 2013). Notably absent is research that examines how gender equality is framed and enacted at the organisational level. Nonetheless, this research topic is important, as organisational practices and discourses significantly influence whether equality is genuinely pursued or merely symbolic (Eva and Susanne Maria, 2023). Analysing institutional discourse helps uncover the gap between stated intentions and actual practices.

For women academics to advance their careers, they must demonstrate academic excellence. However, the concept of “excellence” is far from neutral; it is a socially constructed ideal that reflects and reinforces existing power dynamics (O’Connor and O’Hagan, 2016). In Western contexts shaped by neoliberal ideologies and New Public Management reforms, academic excellence is frequently measured using market-oriented metrics such as research output, international rankings, and leadership prestige. While these measures appear objective, they are inherently gendered and tend to sustain male-dominated academic structures (Lagesen and Suboticki, 2024).

Research productivity metrics, for example, favour publication patterns and collaboration networks that are more accessible to men due to systemic advantages in mentorship, time availability, and resource allocation (O’Connor and O’Hagan, 2016). Similarly, teaching evaluations are subject to gendered biases in student perceptions, often penalising women for failing to conform to stereotypical expectations (Aragón et al., 2023). Grant funding mechanisms present another area of inequity, as women often face barriers in peer review processes that undervalue their leadership potential and research contributions (Morgan et al., 2018). These systemic conditions result in a form of “conditional inclusion”, where women and other marginalised groups are nominally incorporated into academic spaces but are expected to conform to masculinist standards of success (Lagesen and Suboticki, 2024).

In non-Western contexts such as Vietnam, there remains a significant knowledge gap regarding how the notion of “excellence” is conceptualised. This paper addresses this gap by offering new insights into how global discourses of excellence are locally interpreted, adapted, and reinforced within a non-Western higher education setting.

This study draws on Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis (FCDA) and Organisational Impression Management (OIM) theory to examine how Vietnamese universities construct and communicate gender equality via websites.

FCDA is an interdisciplinary approach that combines critical language and discourse studies with feminist studies. FCDA assumes that language is not neutral (MacLure, 2003) but is shaped by – and in turn reinforces – social structures and power relations that can create gender inequality (Lazar, 2007). Through analysing written texts and spoken communication, FCDA highlights how discourses often perpetuate patriarchal ideologies, shape and maintain gender roles and stereotypes. This approach reveals not only what is said about gender equality, but how and why, and with what impact.

Following Fairclough (1989), this study analyses gender equality discourse in university publications across three levels. At the textual level, it examines how UWPs are framed, revealing the underpinning gender equality values and assumptions. The discursive practice level explores who constructs and circulates these narratives, whose voices are included or excluded. At the social practice level, the analysis situates these discourses within broader societal contexts, showing how universities reinforce or challenge traditional gender norms.

Organisational Impression Management (OIM) refers to the deliberate or unconscious efforts by organisations to shape how they are perceived by others (Highhouse et al., 2009). Through selective presentation of information, organisations craft desired images to maintain legitimacy, align with stakeholder expectations, and enhance their marketability (Windscheid et al., 2018).

In higher education, universities often engage in impression management – such as conforming to prevailing norms – to meet the expectations of governments, accreditation bodies, international partners, and the public. When it comes to gender equality, they may publicly highlight equity initiatives, celebrate the achievements of women, or align with global inclusion standards. However, beneath this polished image, structural barriers that perpetuate gender inequality may remain unaddressed or deliberately obscured.

To examine both the strategic intent and ideological content of university discourse, this study integrates FCDA and OIM. Table 1 outlines the conceptual framework.

This qualitative study draws on UWPs that report gender equality-related events, such as announcements of support structures and policies, and celebrations of women’s achievements.

We selected 10 universities from 237 across Vietnam using the VNUR 2025 ranking, which is based on six criteria and 18 indicators (VNUR, 2025). To ensure regional and ranking diversity, we included at least one high- and one low-ranked university from each of VNUR’s six economic regions: Northern Midlands, Red River Delta, Central Coast, Central Highlands, Southeast, and Mekong Delta. The sample also included universities listed in the 2024 Times Higher Education Impact Rankings for SDG 5: Gender Equality (Times Higher Education, 2025) - resulting in 39 initial selections.

To generate an initial list of UWPs from these 39 universities, we conducted a Google search during December 2024. The search was not bounded by a fixed start date but included all gender-related publications that were publicly available at the time of collection, recognising that Vietnamese universities do not necessarily archive UWPs indefinitely. We used the below key Vietnamese phrases plus each of the 39 university abbreviations: “Bình đẳng giới tại … ” (Gender Equality at …); “Thúc đẩy phụ nữ tại … ” (Promoting Women at …); “Định kiến về giới tại … ” (Gender Stereotypes at …); “Ban Vì sự tiến bộ của phụ nữ/Ban Nữ công tại … ” (Committee for the Advancement of Women/Women’s Affairs Committee at …). We used Google Search for broader results, then applied the same keywords in each university’s internal search bar to maximise information retrieval. These two steps yielded a total of 134 UWPs.

Due to time and resource constraints, we narrowed the sample from 39 to 10 universities. We ranked the 39 based on their UWPs in four areas – Policy Support, Support Structures, Initiatives and Programs, and Visual Representation – rating them as Outstanding, Strong, Moderate, or Limited. Only those rated Outstanding or Strong were selected, resulting in 10 universities from four of Vietnam’s six economic regions. However, final analysis showed clearer differences across three main geographical regions (North, Central, South) (Do et al., 2023), so we grouped universities accordingly (Table 2).

The final sample of 10 universities vary regarding geographic region (North, Central, South), ownership (public vs. private), and commitment to gender equality – measured by inclusion in the THE Impact Rankings 2025 and whether they are ranked for SDG 5 (Gender Equality), pre-1975 (colonial/war-era), Socialist Consolidation (1975–1990), Đổi Mới expansion (1990s), and the post-2007 wave of private universities. Public universities are state-funded, larger, and research-oriented, whereas private universities are tuition-dependent, smaller, and more focused on applied training. The sample also included both urban and provincial institutions, with leadership still predominantly male, reflecting national patterns.

Our Google and internal web search identified 82 UWPs from the ten selected universities. We excluded third-party initiatives and those not focused on gender equality within the institution, as well as initiatives targeting students. After filtering, 61 links were deemed irrelevant, leaving 21 relevant UWPs, most published between 2020 and 2024, with one outlier from 2016, referred to as P1 through P21 in the findings.

Our analysis followed the Gioia methodology (Gioia et al., 2013) and proceeded in three steps aligned with its data structure: developing first-order concepts through open coding, deriving second-order themes by clustering related concepts, and building aggregate dimensions to capture the broader dynamics of gender discourse and career barriers. We applied an overarching analytical framework as shown in Table 1.

We began with inductive open coding (Strauss and Corbin, 1990), working with English translations of each UWP generated by Google Translate. The 21 translated texts were imported into NVivo 15 for systematic coding. Before this step, the lead researcher, a native Vietnamese speaker, read all 21 UWPs holistically in the original language to ensure accurate understanding of the discourse, guided by key analytical questions: Why is gender being reported? What is being reported? Who is being reported on? How is excellence framed? During coding, constant cross-checking against the Vietnamese originals was undertaken to preserve rhetorical tone, metaphors, and culturally specific expressions. This open coding step allowed for the emergence of codes directly from the text, without imposing predefined categories (Patton, 1980). Examples of initial codes included phrases such as “Good at school – Good at home” or “Good at public work – Good at housework”, which were later grouped under broader concepts like “Dual excellence”.

In the second stage, we clustered first-order codes into second-order themes, consistent with the Gioia methodology (Gioia et al., 2013). These themes reflected both gendered discursive patterns (e.g. Strong Espoused Gender Equality Values) and impression management strategies (e.g. Party-State Alignment). We applied a cross-case synthesis approach (Yin, 2009) to identify patterns across the ten UWPs, allowing for both within-case richness and between-case comparison.

In the third stage, we engaged in aggregate dimension building, interpreting the second-order themes through the combined lenses of OIM and FCDA. This step examined the strategic and ideological purposes behind the gender narratives -exploring why certain portrayals were constructed, whose voices were amplified or marginalised, and which institutional values were being projected. Drawing on FCDA, we attended to rhetorics that celebrate women through motherhood, family, or beauty while downplaying leadership and research excellence, revealing how institutional narratives symbolically celebrate women yet obscure their professional contributions. From this process, we identified three aggregate dimensions: State logics influence, Well-rounded excellence, and Rhetorical commitment.

Coding was primarily conducted by the first author and subsequently reviewed in collaboration with the fourth author to ensure analytical reliability. As qualitative researchers, we acknowledge our active role in shaping the interpretation of findings (Jamie and Rathbone, 2022). The first author, a Vietnamese Australian female academic with expertise in gender and higher education, approached the analysis with an insider-outsider perspective -drawing on cultural familiarity while maintaining critical distance. This positionality enabled sensitivity to local nuances while applying a feminist critical lens (Lazar, 2007). To enhance reflexivity and analytical rigour, coding was discussed with the fourth author, a research assistant trained in English and discourse analysis. Although not a subject-matter expert in gender and higher education, her fresh perspective and methodological grounding supported the credibility of the interpretations (Patton, 1980).

To make the analytic process transparent, we present the data structures that emerged from our coding. Tables 3–5 show how illustrative first-order concepts were clustered into second-order themes and distilled into the three aggregate dimensions of State Logics Influence, Rhetorical Commitment, and Well-Rounded Excellence.

Vietnamese UWPs demonstrate alignment with state logics, rhetorical commitments to gender equality, and the gendered burden of “well-rounded excellence” for women academics.

As summarised in Table 3, State Logics Influence emerged from first-order concepts highlighting the presence of Party and government leaders, legal compliance, and trade union activities, which clustered into themes of Party–State Presence and Party–State Alignment.

Almost all UWPs provided detailed descriptions of attending authorities. These included representatives from Trade Unions, Women’s Progress Committees at national, ministerial, or institutional levels. Only three UWPs (P8, P12, P14) explicitly reported attendance of rewarded women staff members and three (P8, P10, P18) mentioned general women staff.

Universities demonstrated alignment with party-state directives by highlighting their compliance with gender equality policies and showcasing the roles of Trade Unions and Committees for the Advancement of Women in their UWPs.

UWPs reported on having established Committees for the Advancement of Women or developed policies to enhance women’s professional and personal capabilities. For example, at Uni.2, the Committee for the Advancement of Women launched initiatives to “improve the professional capacity and spiritual life of female staff” (P8), while the Uni.6 Women’s Union provided a space for women to “share happy and sad stories in work as well as life” (P4). Uni.1 focused on helping staff “maximize their capacity” and “join hands to build Uni.1” into a top institution (P7).

UWPs also highlighted the activities and achievements of their universities’ Trade Union or Committee for the Advancement of Women, including establishing women’s unions to lead practical initiatives (P7), organising grassroots-focused activities to engage female staff (P8), and strengthening trade union capacity through professional development discussions (P11).

Two UWPs explicitly showed universities’ compliance with government policies. Uni.4 aligned their gender equality recruitment policy with the Labour Code and the Government Law on Gender Equality (P2). Uni.7 focused on enhancing trade union activities to improve staff support while adhering to state regulations (P11).

Regarding university types, public universities showed stronger alignment with state logics than private ones (100 vs. 83.3%). Regionally, institutions in Northern and Central reported full alignment (100%), while those in the South were slightly lower (88.9%). Universities listed in the 2025 THE Impact Rankings or reporting on SDG 5 also showed slightly lower alignment (93.75 and 90.91%) compared to those not listed (100%).

As shown in Table 4, Rhetorical Commitment was built from concepts expressing espoused gender equality values, symbolic appreciation of women, and rhetorical recognition of their contributions, which clustered into themes of Strong Espoused Values, Symbolic Recognition, and Neglect of Academic Excellence.

Universities spanning public and private institutions across the Central, Northern, and Southern regions of Vietnam consistently projected strong espoused values of gender equality. For instance, U4 (Public, Southern) prominently promotes “a diverse, fair and non-discriminatory environment,” recruiting and promoting staff “regardless of gender, age, skin color, marital status … or social status” (P2). Its Code of Conduct explicitly prohibits harassment and embeds non-discrimination principles. U3 (Public, Northern) “always advocates equality and no discrimination” (P13), including protections for LGBTQ + students and those with non-normative body types or skin colour. U10 (Private, Northern) emphasised the creation of “a favourable environment” for female scientists and leaders (P20).

However, aside from U4 - which aligns its institution-wide policies with global DEI frameworks and integrates gender equality across academic, cultural, and sporting domains -most universities relied on vague rhetoric. For example, U3 (Public, Northern) stated that “gender equality is an issue of special concern” (P13), while others merely expressed leadership sentiments, such as “hope” (P11, U7, Public, Northern) or a “request” for greater commitment (P14, U5, Public, Central), without referencing concrete strategies or programs. Where specific initiatives were mentioned, they often appeared ad hoc, such as U3’s inclusion of “Gender and Development” in its curriculum (P18) or were limited to symbolic activities like conferences where speakers “shared problems and wishes” rather than showcasing actionable practices or institutional accountability (P20). These patterns suggest that while gender equality was publicly valued, its operationalisation remained superficial or underdeveloped across many institutions.

Across the 21 UWPs, Vietnamese universities actively engaged in symbolic and celebratory practices to recognise women’s contributions, often through festive events and ceremonial expressions of appreciation. Many universities, such as U6 Private Southern, marked Women’s Day by “honouring outstanding female employees” and affirming their “silent but extremely important contributions” (P9), while U7 Public Northern offered leadership congratulations and gratitude to female staff for their work in “training, teaching, scientific research, and administration” (P11).

These acts, however, often centre on emotionally charged and traditional discourses of women’s devotion and sacrifice, rather than challenging structural barriers. Events such as Ao Dai festivals (P7), folk cake contests (P12), and volleyball matches (P10) are frequently used to foster solidarity and “joyful atmospheres,” reinforcing essentialist portrayals of femininity tied to aesthetics, harmony, and caregiving. Even when academic achievements are acknowledged – such as honouring female PhD graduates (P12) or young scientists (P19) - these are nested within ceremonial contexts rather than policy-led structural change. While the existence of Committees for the Advancement of Women (P1, P6) indicates institutional awareness, their activities predominantly remain within the realm of celebration and symbolic affirmation, rather than institutional transformation.

Despite occasional mentions of women’s academic achievements, Vietnamese UWPs demonstrate a limited and inconsistent commitment to promoting gender equality through academic excellence. Some institutions highlighted high proportions of female leaders and degree holders (e.g. 94% of trained female leaders at U4, Public, Southern, P3), while others acknowledged women’s contributions during symbolic events, such as U9, Public, Southern’s recognition of three female lecturers on Women’s Day (P12). However, these efforts were often superficial, lacking sustained narratives or structural support.

References to scientific accomplishments – such as increased ISI/Scopus publications by female researchers (P16, U1, Public, Northern) or national conferences honouring women scientists (P19, P21) - were sporadic and typically framed as inspirational exceptions rather than institutional priorities. Notably, these successes were frequently credited to the trade union movement (P16) rather than to women academics themselves.

The lack of academic dialogue around gender equity was further evident in the scarcity of seminars or policies addressing systemic barriers, particularly in STEM. While initiatives like “Building solutions to promote the participation of women and girls in STEM” (P21, U8, Private, Southern) acknowledged structural discrimination and internalised self-doubt, they were isolated and heavily dependent on external partners such as UN Women and the British Council.

As detailed in Table 5, Well-Rounded Excellence reflected the recurrent framing of women as excelling simultaneously in professional and domestic domains, endowed with multifaceted talents, and positioned as moral exemplars, captured in the themes of Dual Excellence, Multifaceted Talents, and Exemplary Role Models.

Across the analysed UWPs, the theme of Dual Excellence was pervasive, with women consistently depicted as excelling in both professional and domestic spheres. Phrases like “good at schoolwork, good at housework” (P5, P8, P9, P16) and recognition of women’s dual roles (P9, P16) illustrate how the ideal Vietnamese woman is constructed as both career-competent and devoted to family. Institutional campaigns and ceremonies reinforced these discourses by honouring women’s ability to maintain work–life harmony and serve as role models (P10, P16). Emulation movements, discussions, and awards further promoted both workplace excellence and traditional domestic responsibilities (P8, P9, P16).

UWPs portrayed women as embodying multifaceted talents, combining professional expertise, intelligence, health, creativity, and kindness (P5, P8, P15, P16). Female staff were celebrated not only for their contributions to the workplace and academic achievements but also for their ability to maintain family harmony, uphold traditional values, and inspire innovation in a changing era (P7, P9, P10). This discourse emphasised the ideal of the “modern woman” as someone who excels across multiple domains – work, home, and community – while also promoting ongoing self-improvement, resilience, and dedication to collective goals in education and society (P10, P15, P16).

UWPs depicted women as exemplary role models. Women were praised as models of morality, self-study, and creativity (P5), celebrated for fostering collaborative and supportive environments (P11), and encouraged to continuously improve qualifications and harmonise roles across family, school, and society (P12, P14). These ideals were reinforced through campaigns promoting both professional achievement and traditional responsibilities, such as “democracy, discipline, love, responsibility” and excelling at both work and home (P5, P16).

Public universities reported well-rounded excellence more often (60%; 9 out of 15 UWPs) compared to private universities (33%; 2 out of 6 UWPs). There was little difference between universities by regions or by their inclusion in THE rankings.

This study contributes theoretically to the discourse on gender equality in Vietnamese higher education. Drawing on OIM (Highhouse et al., 2009) and FCDA (Lazar, 2007) the study shows how universities engage in Dual Impression Management—the outward positive public signalling of gender equality and the inward concealment of hidden barriers to women academics’ career progression. On the surface, UWPs demonstrate alignment with State Party logics, projecting a strong rhetorical commitment to gender equality through symbolic messaging. However, deeper analysis uncovers institutional discourses that marginalise academic excellence and reinforce a form of conditional inclusion, where women are expected to demonstrate “well-rounded excellence” - beyond professional merit – to gain recognition and career advancement (see Figure 1).

The findings reveal that Vietnamese universities’ publications of gender equality policies and initiatives on their websites reflects positive public signalling of gender equality. Within a highly state-governed higher education system (Nguyen, 2020), universities frequently highlight the presence of Party-State representatives at gender-related events and align their policies with Party-State directives. In Vietnam’s exclusive Party leadership model, such alignment is critical, as universities must demonstrate compliance with state regulations while also signalling to the public their commitment to gender equality and the advancement of women.

However, the reported activities (e.g. Women’s Day celebrations) largely reflect symbolic, event-based portrayals rather than substantive commitments to structural transformation. These portrayals often lack specificity in goals, outcomes, or sustained action. In this way, gender equality is framed as a rhetorical or ceremonial commitment, serving to demonstrate legitimacy rather than to catalyse meaningful change (Cavaghan, 2017). Such symbolic alignment is indicative of what Edelman (1992) refers to as “symbolic compliance,” wherein organisations adopt the language and appearance of equity while reinforcing existing institutional hierarchies.

An FCDA of Vietnamese UWPs reveals hidden barriers to women academics’ career progression, including the gendered burden of “well-rounded excellence” - a standard misaligned with global norms of academic excellence – and the neglect of discourse on academic merit.

A key theme emerging from the analysis is the ideal of “well-rounded excellence,” which constructs women as simultaneously exceptional professionals and devoted family members. Within the Vietnamese socio-cultural context, where Confucian traditions and socialist gender narratives coexist (Ngo, 2024), women’s value is often tied to their capacity to maintain harmony at home while contributing productively at work. Originating as a wartime mobilisation strategy (Hoang, 2020), it combines socialist ideals of women’s participation in nation-building with traditional expectations of familial duty. This dual expectation reflects an implicit gender contract, where women’s professional legitimacy is conditional on fulfilling cultural expectations of femininity and domesticity – a barrier not faced by their male counterparts.

This “conditional inclusion” has been noted in broader literature as a persistent barrier to gender equality in leadership and academia (O’Connor and O’Hagan, 2016). This mirrors patterns in other Confucian-influenced countries such as China, where language often highlights tensions between modern professional expectations and traditional gender roles (Bao and Yuan, 2024). Rather than challenging gendered divisions of labour, these portrayals reinforce the notion that women must “do it all” to be deemed successful.

“Well-rounded excellence” stands in marked contrast to contemporary global academic standards, which typically focus on performance-based systems such as research productivity, teaching effectiveness, grant acquisition, and institutional leadership (Kramer and Bosman, 2024). By embedding domestic responsibilities within the performance criteria for women, Vietnamese universities construct a localised version of academic excellence that is not only gendered but also culturally contingent. Such constructions may limit women’s mobility and recognition in international academic circles, where success is narrowly defined by research output and leadership roles free of domestic constraints (O’Connor and O’Hagan, 2016). This reveals a tension between global and local standards, suggesting that gender equality initiatives in Vietnam are not merely underdeveloped, but are operating within a framework that fundamentally reconfigures what success means for women.

Our findings show that universities engage in what we term Dual Impression Management. Outwardly, they project compliance with Party-State directives and global equality norms to secure legitimacy. Inwardly, they preserve hierarchies by celebrating women symbolically—through motherhood, family, and beauty—while downplaying teaching, research, and leadership achievements. The managed image is thus one of progressive commitment, even as inequality persists.

This dual dynamic highlights the limits of OIM. Beyond reputation-building, impression management in Vietnamese higher education also serves ideological purposes, operating as symbolic compliance (Edelman, 1992) that sustains gendered power. By combining OIM with FCDA, we reveal how Dual Impression Management not only protects legitimacy but also reproduces conditional inclusion inviting a more critical application of OIM to contexts where legitimacy is deeply tied to ideology and culture.

Our research found that gender equality reporting in Vietnamese universities closely aligns with state logics, reflected in the presence of Party-state representatives at events and adherence to national directives. Rather than seeing this as a constraint, universities should leverage national leadership to advance gender equity at the organisational level. The Committee for the Advancement of Women should be empowered to conduct gender audits, design leadership programs for women academics, advise on gender-inclusive research and promotion criteria, and integrate gender equity into strategies for research and internationalisation. These actions would position the Committee as a key agent of structural change, supporting Vietnam’s goals to raise university rankings and become a hub for knowledge-driven development.

While Vietnamese universities publicly espouse gender equality values, their current approaches remain largely symbolic – centring on celebratory recognition of women’s contributions rather than providing substantive support for their academic advancement. This emphasis on visibility over capability risks undermining the long-term goal of establishing universities as centres of innovation, research excellence, and intellectual leadership.

To genuinely advance gender equality and institutional excellence, universities must move from rhetoric to action by investing in women academics’ development toward senior roles like professorships and presidencies. For example, research capacity-building and internationalisation programs – with targeted support for those with caregiving duties – can enhance women’s publication, collaboration, and mobility opportunities. Institutionalising such initiatives would help Vietnamese universities foster truly equitable environments where women can thrive and lead.

Our research reveals that Vietnamese university websites promote a “well-rounded excellence” ideal for women academics—expecting Dual excellence, Multifaceted talents, and Exemplary role models. Rather than challenging structural barriers, these unrealistic expectations reinforce them. Universities must reject the “superwoman” myth and adopt transparent, gender-neutral evaluation criteria that hold all academics to the same standards (Hoang, 2020). Only by confronting and dismantling these entrenched expectations can Vietnamese universities create genuinely equitable environments where women can thrive and lead.

This study has several limitations that suggest directions for future research. Firstly, it relies exclusively on UWPs, which may not fully capture the range of gender equality policies and initiatives, as these documents often reflect institutional priorities and may omit informal practices or challenges. Because Vietnamese universities do not consistently archive UWPs, our dataset reflects only materials publicly available during December 2024, capturing recent curated portrayals but possibly underrepresenting earlier initiatives. The analysis focuses solely on analysis of reportage via websites, without engaging directly with faculty or leaders to validate or contextualise the initiatives, leaving out the lived experiences of women academics. Future research could address these limitations by incorporating stakeholder perspectives through interviews or surveys with women academics and university leaders, offering a more nuanced understanding of gender equality practices. Secondly, while the study’s focus on Vietnamese universities provides valuable contextual insight, it limits the generalisability of findings to other non-Western contexts, where historical, cultural, and political factors may differ. Expanding the scope to include regional comparisons across non-Western higher education contexts could reveal broader patterns and unique variations.

This study contributes to the literature on equality, diversity and inclusion by offering a critical Southern perspective that challenges the presumed universality of gender equality discourse. In many Western contexts, symbolic inclusion is increasingly critiqued for its failure to drive institutional change, yet few studies have explored how these dynamics unfold in non-Western settings where cultural and political histories shape the contours of equality differently. By analysing how Vietnamese universities communicated gender equality events via websites, this paper demonstrates how symbolic inclusion practices in a non-Western context – while outwardly progressive – can entrench gendered expectations and reinforce conditional inclusion. In doing so, it adds to the growing call for more context-sensitive, critical, and decolonial approaches to gender equality in higher education.

The authors thank the two anonymous reviewers and the Special Issue editorial team, particularly Associate Professor Viviana Meschitti, for their constructive feedback and careful handling of the manuscript throughout the review process. Their guidance significantly strengthened the paper, and the authors are grateful for their time and professionalism.