Research Center
AWIS provides a unique national platform where essential research meets advocacy, innovation and practice in supporting the advancement of women in STEM.
Jump to Research Hub:
Transforming STEM Leadership Culture
2019 AWIS Membership Report
Women now earn more than half of all STEM degrees1, a pinnacle and necessary credential for advancement in many STEM professions. However, women remain in STEM occupations at half the rate of men.
Women leave their STEM fields after they have expressed an interest in STEM, have succeeded in rigorous programs to develop their knowledge, earned college-level degrees, and entered the workforce. Research has repeatedly demonstrated that diverse teams, especially in leadership, outperform homogeneous teams in innovation, research quality, decision-making, and complex thinking and bolster their organization’s financial success2. Despite the benefits of diversity in leadership, organizations are not adequately addressing the barriers women, especially women of color, encounter in their pursuit of STEM leadership roles. In fact, among the primary reasons cited by a diversity of women for leaving their STEM fields altogether are pay and promotion inequities3. This second report in the AWIS Grand Challenge Series, Transforming Leadership Culture, deepens our understanding of the leadership barriers STEM women face and provides organizations with steps they can take to create more inclusive leadership cultures.
Tweet
Introduction
Despite evidence that diversity in leadership is good for innovation and for organizational financial outcomes in the public and private sector, AWIS research has shown that gender and racial disparities in leadership positions are still pervasive in STEM. Organizations continue to promote homogeneity among their leadership teams through cultures rife with bias and microaggressions that inhibit women’s advancement and prevent institutions from making full use of the leadership talent they already have, but often overlook.
This new AWIS research contributes to our understanding of systemic barriers to equitable leadership and provides key steps to creating more innovative and productive leadership teams. In this report, we share straightforward and attainable steps organizations can take to:
- Expand their leadership talent pools
- Fairly evaluate candidates for leadership roles
- Cultivate more inclusive leadership cultures
AWIS research that follows is based on our analysis of data on leadership positions in academia, government, and industry as well as findings from our 2019 AWIS Membership Leadership Survey. AWIS research shows plainly across academia, government and industry that a diversity of skilled STEM-trained women are absent from leadership positions and explores the underlying reasons why.
With data illustrating the leadership patterns for 1.2 million STEM degree earners1; over 350 leadership positions at U.S. national laboratories and research facilities4; over 6,000 leadership positions at U.S.-based biotechnology companies making their initial public offerings since 20135; and 125 women among our AWIS membership, this report offers valuable insights into the state of leadership inclusion across STEM in the U.S.
Report at a Glance
The representation of women in STEM leadership grows in disparity with rank, while the opposite is true for men. This is especially problematic for Black, Latinx, and Indigenous women.
Our analysis of National Science Foundation data shows women as whole earned over half of all bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degrees in STEM, while women of color earned 20 percent of bachelor’s and master’s degrees and about 15 percent of doctoral degrees. Generally speaking, as they progress up the faculty ranks, the proportion of women, especially Black/African American, Latinx and Indigenous women, sharply declines. At the dean and president level, this also disproportionately affects Asian women.
For men, the opposite is true. Men’s representation grows the higher up the academic hierarchy they go, especially white and Asian men. Black/African American, Latinx and Indigenous men’s representation remains stagnant across the ranks.
In academic STEM, search committees regularly attribute the absence of women, especially women of color, among their candidate pools and hires to a lack of available women. However, our previous research demonstrates that job unavailability and barriers to getting hired are a major reason Black and Indigenous women leave their STEM fields6. A diverse pool of skilled STEM women is out there, but organizations must make concerted efforts to expand their networks to include them.
Only two of the 42 labs* included in this analysis are directed by women, both of whom are white. White men hold 306 of the 478 leadership positions at the labs (64 percent). Women of color occupy 3 percent of lab leadership roles, while white women and men of color hold 24 percent and 9 percent respectively.
In addition, when women are in leadership positions at the labs, they have greater representation in positions that are not directly STEM-oriented, such as human resources, general counsel, communications, and business development. Women lead 36 percent of these positions, which tend to offer lower pay and less influence over the trajectory of R&D. Roughly 4 percent of STEM leadership roles are held by women of color and 22 percent by white women.
Increasing diversity in the workforce is a necessity no matter where you work, but the bottom line is that it is not enough to hire the best people; you have to provide programs that support them and help them grow their skills, whether they are scientific, technical or managerial.
Despite women’s high representation in biotech fields, they are still significantly marginalized when it comes to leadership.
Our institutions have not progressed in the way they treat women who raise issues of discrimination. Historically, when women raise the alarm of fairness, men, and sometimes other women, in positions of power shut them down. We are ignored, ridiculed, defamed, and are more closely investigated than the accused… Eliminating the discrimination is not only the right thing to do, but the smartest way to move our entire economy to its highest potential.
Pervasive organizational culture issues undermine women’s leadership pursuits.
Notably, women of color are significantly more likely to face assumptions that they are more junior or have less experience than they do and to have someone else take credit for their ideas. In essence, women are not able to simply do their jobs. They must spend extra time and effort justifying their existence and navigating microaggressions and biases, which add up over time and contribute to talent attrition.
1. Broaden your network.
When conducting leadership searches, organizations often miss out on talented leaders because the networks they use for outreach are ineffective and driven by homophily. Taking time to assess and broaden your network helps ensure a diverse and skilled candidate pool8.
2. Re-think your leadership evaluation.
Processes for promotion and evaluation must be transparent, applied consistently, and based on evidence, not bias. Creating clear and consistent evaluation criteria and ensuring reviewers applying them are trained in anti-bias will lead to more equitable and diverse leadership outcomes. These steps to align criteria with needed skills also help mitigate tokenism in leadership assignments.9.
3. Learn from your employees.
Organizations can learn a lot from their employees about the leadership opportunities they want, the experiences they have had, and how current policies and processes affect them. Taking the time to incorporate a diversity of employees’ views helps update offerings, policies, and processes and contributes to a sense of employee belonging and inclusion3.
4. Offer leadership development opportunities.
As our survey shows, employees are actively seeking opportunities to develop their leadership skills. Offering employees a variety of avenues for leadership development, whether in-house or in the local community, meets their needs and builds the organizational leadership talent pool9.
5. Evenly distribute and recognize service work.
Women, especially women of color, unevenly carry the bulk of the service workload in their organizations, particularly diversity and inclusion work. This labor is often undervalued and unrecognized and rarely contributes to promotability. Organizations should more evenly distribute the service workload across all employees and recognize the valuable role it plays in leadership development, for example, by incorporating it into the evaluation process more
substantially10,11.
6. Address microaggressions and biases.
Microaggressions and bias in organizational culture undermine collaboration, fair evaluation, and the utilization of expertise for innovation. Training employees on microaggressions and bias in a way that builds shared responsibility for respectful workplaces and contributes to inclusive leadership cultures incorporates these values into the daily fabric of your organization, rather than viewing them as something separate12.
7. Cultivate accountability.
Organizations that hold themselves accountable for disparities in leadership and the underlying cultural issues at play are more successful at implementing change efforts. Accountability means acknowledging where things are not going well, taking responsibility for them, and demonstrating active and visible steps to meet the commitment to equity and inclusion.
8. Communicate.
Transparent communication about pathways to leadership roles, the reasons decisions are made, and how promotion processes are applied not only creates a greater sense of awareness of available opportunities, but also builds trust that decisions are made, and opportunities are offered fairly. Transparency also helps organizations hold themselves accountable.3,9.
About the Authors
 |
Aspen Russell is AWIS’ Research Assistant. They have an undergraduate degree in computer science from American University and actively research and advocate for STEM equity in industry and academia. |
|---|---|
 |
Heather Metcalf, PhD is AWIS’ Chief Research Officer. She has undergraduate degrees in applied mathematics and computer science, master’s degrees in computer science and gender studies, and a doctorate in higher education science and technology policy. |
Acknowledgements
We would like to express our gratitude to Dr. Jennifer Blum for her biotechnology initial public offering data analysis efforts; Maria Ibañez and Jossie Flor Sapunar, from the AWIS Communications team, for their editorial and production oversight on this report; Alan Chewning and Andrea Lucy, from the AWIS Membership team, for conducting survey outreach to our members; and all of the AWIS members who participated in the survey and shared their valuable experiences with us. Thank you also to Selena Robleto of Red Velvet Creative for the design of this report.
About AWIS
The Association for Women in Science (AWIS), founded in 1971, is the leading organization that advocates on behalf of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) to achieve business growth, social change, and innovation. We are dedicated to driving excellence in STEM by achieving equity and full participation of women in all disciplines and across all employment sectors. AWIS has helped guide Congress, the United Nations, pharmaceutical, biotech, institutions and other professional organizations on decisions and best practices to achieve gender diversity and positive system transformation in STEM. AWIS is a global network with 80 grassroots chapters and affiliates connecting more than 100,000 professionals in STEM with members, allies and supporters worldwide. Learn more about the contributions of AWIS at awis.org. Follow us at @AWISNational.
Sources
- Metcalf, H. and Russell, A. (2019). AWIS Original Analysis of 2015 NSF Survey of Doctorate Recipient and IPEDS Data.
- AWIS (2017). Biotech boom a bust for women. Retrieved from https://awis.org/biotech-boom-a-bust-for-women/.
- Metcalf, H., Russell, D., & Hill, C. (2018). Broadening the science of broadening participation in STEM through critical mixed-methodologies and intersectionality frameworks: American Behavioral Scientist, 62(5):580-599. Retrieved from https://awis.org/broadening-science-broadening-participation-stem-critical-mixedmethodologies-intersectionality-frameworks/.
- Metcalf, H. (2019). AWIS Original Analysis of National Lab leadership positions posted on lab websites.
- Metcalf, H., Russell, A., and Blum, J. (2019). AWIS Original Analysis of US-based Biotechnology Company IPO Data, 2013-2018.
- Metcalf, H. (2016). Broadening the study of participation in the life sciences: How critical theoretical and mixed-methodological approaches can enhance efforts to broaden participation. CBE – Life Sciences Education, 15(3): 1-11. Retrieved from https://awis.org/broadening-science-broadening-participation-stem-critical-mixedmethodologies-intersectionality-frameworks/.
- Master Government List of Federally Funded R&D Centers. Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/ffrdclist/#agency.
- Metcalf, H., Kelley, E., Clark, J., Russell, A. & Koster, J. (2018). Revolutionizing the STEM entrepreneurship ecosystem. Retrieved from https://awis.org/revolutionizing-the-stem-entrepreneurship-ecosystem-report.
- Dean, D. & Koster, J. (2014). Equitable solutions for retaining a robust workforce: Beyond best practices. Academic Press.
- Misra, J., Lundquist, J. H., & Templer, A. (2012). Gender, work time, and care responsibilities among faculty. Sociological Forum, 27(2): 300-323.
- Baez, B. (2000). Race-related service and faculty of color: Conceptualizing critical agency in academe. Higher Education, 39(3), 363-391.
- AWIS (2017). Creating equitable STEM workplaces by addressing unconscious bias. Retrieved from https://awis.org/creating-equitable-stem-workplaces-by-addressing-unconscious-bias/.
