Women as Principal Investigators
How good are women at running research grants as principal investigators? On July 25, 2009, the New York Times ran an interview with Carol Smith, senior editor at the Elle group, called, "No Doubts: Women Are Better Managers." Perhaps not, though, if the over 320 comments they received reflect public opinion accurately. Some even suggested women bosses were harder on women than men bosses.
Edyta Zielinska of The Scientist: Magazine of the Life Sciences, brought up this issue vis-a-vis women as PIs on grants in the June 1, 2010 issue. Her article, "Are Women Better PIs?," referred to the Carol Smith interview and turned to studies of effectiveness of women PIs to respond to two main questions:
Q1: Do women treat female subordinates worse than men?
A: maybe, but probably not.She cites a survey by the Workplace Bullying Institute showing verbal abuse, threats, intimidation were reported more from men bosses than from women bosses. But of women who reported being bullied, two thirds reported it from women. Zielinska notes that Sue Rosser thinks it could be done to make up for past bad treatment of the PI, but it's also possible that expectations for women are different and so behavior that does not seem like bullying from a man does seem that way from a woman. A study by Leanne Atwater found harsh words are less acceptable from women than from men. But women can also help other women; Zielinska also cites a study by Alice Eagly showing that women rise through the ranks easier if there are more women already in the higher ranks.
Q2: Are women better managers?
A. In the lab setting, possibly. She cites evidence that women are percieved as more effective when they use neutral expressions and tones than are men, and that women may excel in less hierarchical leadership that enhances creativity. Some studies showed women more likely to consider/support individual development and offer encouragement and rewards for achievement. One study showed women were more charismatic, i.e. they were more able to capitalize on all employees' strengths and weaknesses to make an effective whole.
What do you think?
A. In my experience, there's no consistent gender difference in PIs.
B. I think men I've actually seen are more effective as PIs than women.
C. I think women I've actually seen are generally more effective as PIs than men.
I do feel very lucky! And yes, of the female VPs in our company 4/5 have children. All grown up of course, but they were successful in having a family and a career. And with lots of help of course. They all pointed out in the company newsletter that either a grandparent or nanny/housekeeper was critical in keeping things together so that they could focus on work while raising children. Having a nanny at home with my son I have to say makes life a lot easier!
Female role models with children? Among the VPs? Not everywhere, by any means. Consider yourself lucky, hmcbride! Sounds like you're in a very good company.
It would be nice, but then there are plenty of female VPs in other areas of the company, just not research. So it's not like you can't see yourself doing that...one day. It is really nice to be able to see successful women with children all around you.
Hi Helen,
I am surprised but not really shocked to hear about the male VP import system. I wish academia had more female VPs to export! But I love the idea of industry developing leadership among all its employees. Too bad it doesn't go all the way to the top.
cheers,
Laura
Hi Laura,
Industry isn't perfect either. In my company, the VPs are hired from academia, not promoted from within, so you end up with only male VPs of course. So the differential still bites us in the butt at some point! But up to the Exec. Director (ED) level women are well represented. Why? There are an even number of women at the principal scientist level (Where do you think the women who leave academe go?:) ), and women are just as good at being leaders, so they become directors and then EDs. You just need enough women around that their behavior or way of doing things is not perceived as being "odd" or different. At least that's my opinion.
Very interesting that academia and industry feel different, Helen. Sounds like you think it's mainly that there are about equal numbers of women and men in leadership positions in industry. I hope someday that will happen in academia, but it sure isn't a fast change from the old ways.
I wonder how industry got to the 1:1 ratio for leaders? I'll bet they had some good strategies that academia could use if they found out about them.
cheers,
Laura
In academe, I would have said B. Just by the numbers, men win.
But now that I'm in industry where it is 50/50 at the PI level, I would say A. There's really no difference in how successful their direct reports are. There are always exceptions in both genders, but the averages end up similar.
I really think A is right. I certainly hope my attitude doesn't require the b-word, but I am not a pushover for lazy graduate students and postdocs. I expect a lot, but i reward people who do good work, male or female. The part of this paper about how women and men in charge of groups can do the same thing but be perceived differently really is interesting. I haven't been conscious of trying to be softer than a man in how I phrase 'you need improvement' comments, but maybe I should. FBP
Hate to say it, but I have to pick b. The women PIs that I've seen close up and personal can be described best with a word beginning with b.
Hi Caltech observer and similar,
I would pick C, although I've seen some women who don't seem very good at being PIs. But when they are, the groups really fit together and work to help each other and all succeed big time. It does seem possible that these qualities are more about the younger women PIs. Maybe the stress of fighting their way in ruined some of the older ones, made them hostile and suspicious.
cheers,
Laura
I think some women, particularly the younger ones, are really collaborative, like the studies cited in The Scientist suggest. Maybe the first ones hired had to be tough to make it, they seem pretty hierarchical.
A. I don't see much difference overall, although individual women can be problems, but so can men. No good generalization from those lab chiefs I've seen.
