» Articles » PMID: 20141385

Hierarchy As a Barrier to Advancement for Women in Academic Medicine

Overview
Date 2010 Feb 10
PMID 20141385
Citations 22
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Research on barriers to professional advancement for women in academic medicine has not adequately considered the role of environmental factors and how the structure of organizations affects professional advancement and work experiences. This article examines the impact of the hierarchy, including both the organization's hierarchical structure and professionals' perceptions of this structure, in medical school organization on faculty members' experience and advancement in academic medicine.

Methods: As part of an inductive qualitative study of faculty in five disparate U.S. medical schools, we interviewed 96 medical faculty at different career stages and in diverse specialties, using in-depth semistructured interviews, about their perceptions about and experiences in academic medicine. Data were coded and analysis was conducted in the grounded theory tradition.

Results: Our respondents saw the hierarchy of chairs, based on the indeterminate tenure of department chairs, as a central characteristic of the structure of academic medicine. Many faculty saw this hierarchy as affecting inclusion, reducing transparency in decision making, and impeding advancement. Indeterminate chair terms lessen turnover and may create a bottleneck for advancement. Both men and women faculty perceived this hierarchy, but women saw it as more consequential.

Conclusions: The hierarchical structure of academic medicine has a significant impact on faculty work experiences, including advancement, especially for women. We suggest that medical schools consider alternative models of leadership and managerial styles, including fixed terms for chairs with a greater emphasis on inclusion. This is a structural reform that could increase opportunities for advancement especially for women in academic medicine.

Citing Articles

Language Matters: Is There Gender Bias in Internal Medicine Grand Rounds Introductions?.

Hanna R, Grimm E, Keniston A, Khateeb R, Kara A, Burden M Cureus. 2024; 16(5):e60573.

PMID: 38894797 PMC: 11184544. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.60573.


Group peer mentoring is effective for different demographic groups of biomedical research faculty: A controlled trial.

Pololi L, Evans A, Civian J, McNamara T, Brennan R PLoS One. 2024; 19(3):e0300043.

PMID: 38498502 PMC: 10947691. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300043.


Investigation of Fellowship Leadership in Orthopaedic Musculoskeletal Oncology.

Moore M, Elahi M, Doan M, Pollock J, Makovicka J, Hassebrock J J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev. 2022; 6(6).

PMID: 35696309 PMC: 9191358. DOI: 10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-22-00039.


Experiences of Gender Inequity Among Women Physicians Across Career Stages: Findings from Participant Focus Groups.

Chesak S, Salinas M, Abraham H, Harris C, C Carey E, Khalsa T Womens Health Rep (New Rochelle). 2022; 3(1):359-368.

PMID: 35415713 PMC: 8994436. DOI: 10.1089/whr.2021.0051.


Translating the learning sciences into practice: A primer for clinical and translational educators.

Norman M, Lotrecchiano G J Clin Transl Sci. 2021; 5(1):e173.

PMID: 34733549 PMC: 8532184. DOI: 10.1017/cts.2021.840.