Women Overdo Service, Or Do They?
In a recent post on Inside Higher Education by Scott Jaschik (see it here) he pointed out that women in academia often do more service than men and at least sometimes may have less research achievement. Thus they get promoted to full professor slower and sometimes not at all. This service gap has been noted in several studies including a recent AAUP study by authors Joya Misra, Jennifer Hickes Lundquist, Elissa Holmes, and Stephanie Agiomavritis, which can be viewed here. Jaschik and the AAUP study suggest that promotion from Associate Professor to full Professor for women in R1 research universities is stalled by this service gap, creating a glass ceiling originating from women's files with more service. Men are perceived as more research-oriented even when both men and women appear equally effective in research.
The solution suggested by both Jaschlik and the AAUP group is to rebalance the service loads so that they are distributed more fairly over the facutly members without regard to gender. The AAUP report says, "While men are not necessarily more productive than women, they are more protective of their research time. Tenured women, on the other hand, devote more time to teaching, mentoring, and service, and particularly to activities that may be seen as building bridges around the university. Yet, these pursuits hold less value in promotion cases in many institutions, especially at research-intensive universities."
But I say, it's time to try another possible approach. Why not make an effort, perhaps reinforced by NSF and NIH, AAUP, AAUW, and other interested organizations, to revalue the contributions women make? They want to mentor, build bridges, optimize functions, generate good working environments, increase cooperation, increase student orientation? Well, why not reward these activities? They are arguably MORE important to the academic success of the university than navel-contemplating research. (Note that women were equally productive in at least some studies, while still promoted more slowly. Thus they are not rewarded, but penalized for accepting service obligations.) Would it make women in academia happy to force men, who dodge the committee and department work or do it badly so they won't be asked again, to do it anyway? Probably not, I say, because the women CARE how the relationships are built and how the day-to-day functioning of the university feels. If they get the reluctant men to do it, it will be done badly if at all, thus it will be likely to make the women less satisfied and contented with their positions, even if they get promoted faster.
Call me an iconoclast, but I think changing the criteria has a much better long-term potential to work, although I see barriers to trying to make this happen.
Cheers,
Laura
Hi Mad Hatter,
Yes, I know men who do exemplary service. I was just pointing out the trend, which sadly is to the other side of the issue.
cheers,
Laura
Yes, Laura, I have to admit I've seen this. And yes, it was men, not women, who did the service badly on purpose. But it's not ALL men who do this, that's all I was saying.
Hi Small Science Woman,
I think the idea of negotiation can work but it's a strategy for smaller institutions; for an R1 renegotiating would be a nightmare. So, still we need some fix that would be both workable and let people get valued for playing to their strengths.
And Mad Hatter, YES there are men who do good service and care, and I'm glad of them. But there are others who try to do a bad job so no one will ever ask them again. I can't believe you haven't noticed them. And I'd be surprised if you'd ever seen a woman do this.
cheers,
Laura
Dear Laura,
I see what you mean. Should we insist that men do something badly that women would do well and care about? Why not try to make sure they simply get credit for doing it well? Iconoclastic, yes. But worthwhile if it could be done. Some small colleges negotiate heavier research, heavier college service, heavier teaching for certain faculty members who want to do these things and do them well. That's fine, but taking someone who is really burned out and making them do service means it won't be done well, and that does happen sometimes.
Hi postdoc girl,
I think you should eat dessert first, that is, I'd make time to be a good guy right away and get into the habit of it. You'll be more comfortable with yourself always if you can do that. I decided to make that change while I was a postdoc and I am glad I did.
Personally, I am expecting to become a good guy later on, not really having time to do anything much for the good of science as a whole yet. Maybe I should start; it might feel better!
Hi Helen,
I'm glad we agree about the power of positive words, saying what we want. And I agree with you that leadership is very important, and that it worked at MIT for a time.
I also think that women who get rewards by doing so-called service work, in academia or industry or wherever, value those rewards. It seems important to recognize that not everyone has exactly the same values or emphases.
cheers,
Laura
I agree Laura that you should always say what you want and not what you don't want. There is power in words and in asking.
And it is possible for one administrator to change things in a department. We've seen it happen many times--MIT is a great example of how a president with a vision can effect change. And then we've seen it evaporate when that person has left.
Without changing the fundamental measures of how scientific success is measured, I think you will always have people who enjoy doing service work or at a minimum feel obligated versus those who will avoid it. And without the distractions and time to perform that service to prevent them from focusing on their science, the no-service folks will usually come out on top.
Do I do service? Absolutely! Would I change it just to get more ahead in my career--no way! And so I am happy...which in the end is what matters to me most.
Dear FBP,
When I was a junior faculty member in biology, the lore was that if there was pie IAKA money, positions, kudos of any kind), the chemists with whom we shared the Norris building would get it all. As I got more mature, I realized that they always asked for it, while we biologists never did. So I believe that there is a power in words, in saying what would be better, in laying out what would actually work. Who knows what budding administrator may read about this idea and try it out? Okay, yes, I'm an optimist!
cheers,
Laura
Hate to say it, but this is pie in the sky bye and bye. Not at all likely, because WHO MAKES THE RULES? The old white male scientists! Their criteria rule our universities. And they train up young men to their same values, so even if/when they retire, it doesn't stop. I'm pretty discouraged about this. I don't disagree that changing the rules would be beneficial, though. I just can't see it happening. FBP
I've already started down this road, helping the postdoc organization and the women's center, etc. I agree, Laura, I wouldn't want to share equally with others who really didn't care if these things worked. And I do a LOT of research too. So I want to be judged fairly based on that, at least. Why not give me extra credit for helping the place work better?
Hey, Laura, we aren't all bad guys. I do my fair share of service, and I may say I do it well. But I guess the generality probably holds true, even if some of us do try. I'm skeptical that universities will consider increasing the value of service, though, as long as outsiders count publications to evaluate them.
