Organizational Leadership Gender Differences in Medical Schools and Affiliated Universities

Objective: To compare gender compositions in the leadership of the top 25 medical schools in North America with the leadership of their affiliated university senior leadership and other faculties. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional observational study used publicly available gender data from 2018 to 2019 of universities drawn from the U.S. News Best Global Universities for Clinical Medicine Ranking report. Gender compositions in eight leadership tiers from senior leadership to medical school department directors were analyzed. Data analysis included gender compositions by leadership tier and faculty. Results: Male representation is greater at higher leadership tiers, with the largest imbalance being at the level of medical school department heads. The faculty of medicine has more men in leadership positions than the average of the other faculties (p = 0.02), though similar to schools of engineering, business, dentistry, and pharmacy. Across the eight leadership tiers, a significant trend exists between tier and proportions, indicating that male representation was greater at higher tiers (p < 0.001). No correlation was found between a university's leadership gender composition and its ranking. Conclusion: The under-representation of women is greater in medical school leadership than the leadership of their affiliated universities. The faculty of medicine has greater male over-representation than the average of the other faculties.

Rank and Tenure Amongst Faculty at Academic Medical Centers: A Study of More Than 50 Years of Gender Disparities

PURPOSE

To investigate progress toward gender equality in academic medicine through a longitudinal analysis of gender parity among faculty at medical schools.

METHOD

The authors conducted a retrospective analysis of Association of American Medical Colleges Faculty Roster data on gender, tenure status, and academic rank of faculty in basic science (BSc) and clinical science (CSc) departments from 1966 to 2019. They expressed data as whole numbers and percent female. A trend analysis projected time to gender parity across rank and tenure categories, and cross-tabulation analysis revealed the relative odds of females being in a rank and tenure position relative to males.

RESULTS

A 12-fold increase in the number of faculty occurred from 1966 to 2019, driven largely by increases in non-tenure track faculty. Female tenured and tenure track numbers increased at consistent rates (121 and 174 per year; P < .001). Female non-tenure track rates mirrored those for males, both changing in 2000. Odds ratios in 2019 for BSc and CSc females to be in tenure track versus non-tenure track positions compared with males were 0.83/0.98 and to be tenured were 0.63/0.44. Odds ratios in 2019 for BSc and CSc females to be full professors versus assistant or associate professors compared with males were 0.55/0.42. BSc assistant and associate professor percent female rates increased linearly from 1966 to 2019, while full professor rates increased in 1986. Transition points between periods of linear change were seen later in CSc departments (1977, 1980, 1985, 1994). Best fit line models indicated gender parity will be reached for BSc/CSc faculty in 2034/2023, 2047/2033, and 2065/2053 for assistant, associate, and full professors, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest large historical changes in medical school expansion, medical education, and economics have shifted gender curves at all academic ranks. To achieve gender parity, additional national changes are needed.

Stemming the ‘Leaky Pipeline’: an investigation of the relationship between work–family conflict and women’s career progression in academic medicine

Background

Even though women outnumber men enrolled in medical school, making up 59% of entrants in the UK, they are significantly under-represented in academic medicine and senior positions. In the UK, 28.6% of academics overall are women. In the USA, while 51% of instructors are women, only 20% make it through the ‘leaky pipeline’ to become professors. One attributable factor is work–family conflict. The purpose of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of the relationship between work–family conflict and women’s career progression in academic medicine, and to provide a model to inform and change perceptions and practice in order to improve the ‘leaky pipeline’.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed to identify qualitative studies which investigated this relationship. Studies were critically appraised, and data were analysed using thematic analysis. Themes identified in the data were used to develop a model to build on the understanding of this issue.

Findings

The findings of this research highlighted two main themes, one related to perceptions of gender (intrinsic or extrinsic), the way it impacts on work–family conflict and its relationship to women’s career progression. The second theme relates to structures which hinder or support women’s ability to have work–life balance. A model was developed that represents the inter-relationship between these factors.

Interpretation

Changes in both organisational culture and individuals’ perception in regard to gender roles, especially of those in leadership, are necessary to create an environment where the best talent in academic medicine is selected regardless of gender.

Leadership gender disparity in the fifty highest ranking North American universities: Thematic analysis under a theoretical lens

BACKGROUND

Despite changes in the discourse around gender distributions within academic leadership, women continue to be under-represented in academia. Our study aims to identify the extent of gender disparity in the academic leadership in the top 50 North American universities and to critically analyse the contributing factors through a comprehensive theoretical framework.

METHODS

We adopted the theoretical framework of leadership continuum model. A retrospective analysis of the gender of the leadership ranks was conducted between December 2018 and March 2019 for the top 50 universities in North America (2019 Quacquarelli Symonds World University Ranking system). The leadership hierarchy was classified into six tiers.

RESULTS

A total of 5806 faculty members from 45 US and five Canadian universities were included. Women were overall less likely to be in a senior leadership role than men (48.7% vs 51.3%; p value=0.05). Women accounted for fewer positions than men for resident/chancellor (23.8% vs 76.2%; p value<0.001), vice-president/vice-chancellor (36.3% vs 63.7%; p value<0.001), vice provost (42.7% vs 57.3%; p value=0.06), dean (38.5% vs 61.5%; p value<0.001) and associate dean (48.2% vs 51.8%; p-value=0.05). Women however were in a greater proportion in the assistant dean positions (63.8% vs 36.2%; p value<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Leadership gender imbalance is trans-organisational and transnational within the top 50 universities of North America and progressively widens towards the top leadership pyramid. This correlates with the lack of women leadership progress and sustainability in later cycles of the leadership continuum model (beyond assistant dean).

Impact of the Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling Special Issue on Women in Computational Chemistry

In this Viewpoint, we provide a commentary on the impact of the Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling Special Issue on Women in Computational Chemistry published in May 2019 and the feedback we received.

Who Is Writing About Women in STEM in Higher Education in the United States? A Citation Analysis of Gendered Authorship

The purpose of this study was to identify trends in the representation of female authorship regarding the topic of the status of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) in higher education in the United States from 2007 to 2018 in prominent interdisciplinary journals. We conducted a comprehensive search for articles and collected the genders of the first and senior authors from 647 citations. We assessed the number of male versus female authors, the percentages of female first authors and senior authors, and the percentage of female corresponding authors for each year. Additionally, we also analyzed the citations to determine the journals and publishers who produced the most literature in this area. Women constituted 59% overall authorship and 34% first authorship. The top publishers in this area include Sage Publications, Springer/Nature, and Elsevier. Women constituted 60% of the first authors in STEM literature on the status of women and 38% of senior authors. Although there was growth over time in first authorship in STEM literature written by women, they continue to remain a minority in senior authorship. We suggest it is women that are leading this discussion, highlighting the additional lift that women in STEM in higher education must make; researching and publishing on their own experiences as part of their self-advocacy.

Leadership Gender Disparity Within Research-Intensive Medical Schools: A Transcontinental Thematic Analysis

BACKGROUND

The underrepresentation of women in senior leadership positions of academic medicine continues to prevail despite the ongoing efforts to advance gender parity. Our aim was to compare the extent of gender imbalance in the leadership of the top 100 medical schools and to critically analyze the contributing factors through a comprehensive theoretical framework.

METHODS

We adopted the theoretical framework of the Systems and Career Influences Model. The leadership was classified into four tiers of leadership hierarchy. Variables of interest included gender, h-index, number of documents published, total number of citations, and number of years in active research. A total of 2448 (77.59%) men and 707 (22.41%) women met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Male majority was found in all regions with a significant difference in all levels of leadership (chi square = 91.66; P value = .001). Women had a lower mean h-index across all positions in all regions, and when we adjusted for number of years invested, M Index for women was still significantly lower than men (T test = 6.52; P value = .02).

DISCUSSION

Organizational and individual influences are transcontinental within the top 100 medical school leadership hierarchy. Those factors were critically assessed through in-depth analysis of the Systems and Career Influences Model. Evidence-driven actionable recommendations to remedy those influences were outlined.

The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future

Review, promotion, and tenure (RPT) processes significantly affect how faculty direct their own career and scholarly progression. Although RPT practices vary between and within institutions, and affect various disciplines, ranks, institution types, genders, and ethnicity in different ways, some consistent themes emerge when investigating what faculty would like to change about RPT. For instance, over the last few decades, RPT processes have generally increased the value placed on research, at the expense of teaching and service, which often results in an incongruity between how faculty actually spend their time vs. what is considered in their evaluation. Another issue relates to publication practices: most agree RPT requirements should encourage peer-reviewed works of high quality, but in practice, the value of publications is often assessed using shortcuts such as the prestige of the publication venue, rather than on the quality and rigor of peer review of each individual item. Open access and online publishing have made these issues even murkier due to misconceptions about peer review practices and concerns about predatory online publishers, which leaves traditional publishing formats the most desired despite their restricted circulation. And, efforts to replace journal-level measures such as the impact factor with more precise article-level metrics (e.g., citation counts and altmetrics) have been slow to integrate with the RPT process. Questions remain as to whether, or how, RPT practices should be changed to better reflect faculty work patterns and reduce pressure to publish in only the most prestigious traditional formats. To determine the most useful way to change RPT, we need to assess further the needs and perceptions of faculty and administrators, and gain a better understanding of the level of influence of written RPT guidelines and policy in an often vague process that is meant to allow for flexibility in assessing individuals.