IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v7y2018i5p71-d142983.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How the Demographic Composition of Academic Science and Engineering Departments Influences Workplace Culture, Faculty Experience, and Retention Risk

Author

Listed:
  • Eric E. Griffith

    (Department of Anthropology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA)

  • Nilanjana Dasgupta

    (Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA)

Abstract

Although on average women are underrepresented in academic science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) departments at universities, an underappreciated fact is that women’s representation varies widely across STEM disciplines. Past research is fairly silent on how local variations in gender composition impact faculty experiences. This study fills that gap. A survey of STEM departments at a large research university finds that women faculty in STEM are less professionally satisfied than male colleagues only if they are housed in departments where women are a small numeric minority. Gender differences in satisfaction are largest in departments with less than 25% women, smaller in departments with 25–35% women, and nonexistent in departments approaching 50% women. Gender differences in professional satisfaction in gender-unbalanced departments are mediated by women’s perception that their department’s climate is uncollegial, faculty governance is non-transparent, and gender relations are inequitable. Unfavorable department climates also predict retention risk for women in departments with few women, but not in departments closer to gender parity. Finally, faculty who find within-department mentors to be useful are more likely to have a favorable view of their department’s climate, which consequently predicts more professional satisfaction. Faculty gender and gender composition does not moderate these findings, suggesting that mentoring is equally effective for all faculty.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric E. Griffith & Nilanjana Dasgupta, 2018. "How the Demographic Composition of Academic Science and Engineering Departments Influences Workplace Culture, Faculty Experience, and Retention Risk," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-25, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:7:y:2018:i:5:p:71-:d:142983
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/7/5/71/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/7/5/71/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elizabeth A. Corley, 2005. "How Do Career Strategies, Gender, and Work Environment Affect Faculty Productivity Levels in University‐Based Science Centers?1," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 22(5), pages 637-655, September.
    2. Barry Bozeman & Monica Gaughan, 2011. "Job Satisfaction among University Faculty: Individual, Work, and Institutional Determinants," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 82(2), pages 154-186, March.
    3. Mariateresa Torchia & Andrea Calabrò & Morten Huse, 2011. "Women Directors on Corporate Boards: From Tokenism to Critical Mass," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(2), pages 299-317, August.
    4. Diana Bilimoria & Susan Perry & Xiangfen Liang & Eleanor Stoller & Patricia Higgins & Cyrus Taylor, 2006. "How Do Female and Male Faculty Members Construct Job Satisfaction? The Roles of Perceived Institutional Leadership and Mentoring and their Mediating Processes," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 355-365, May.
    5. Ronda Callister, 2006. "The Impact of Gender and Department Climate on Job Satisfaction and Intentions to Quit for Faculty in Science and Engineering Fields," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 367-375, May.
    6. Lisa Hope Pelled, 1996. "Demographic Diversity, Conflict, and Work Group Outcomes: An Intervening Process Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(6), pages 615-631, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Georgios N. Aretoulis, 2018. "Gender Based Perception of Successful Construction of Project Managers’ Attributes," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-18, July.
    2. Ian Burn & Michael E. Martell, 2022. "Gender typicality and sexual minority labour market differentials," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 60(4), pages 784-814, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eric W. Welch & Yamini Jha, 2016. "Network and perceptual determinants of satisfaction among science and engineering faculty in US research universities," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 290-328, April.
    2. Feldy Marzena & Bojko Marta, 2020. "Job Expectations and Satisfaction Among Scientists," Marketing of Scientific and Research Organizations, Sciendo, vol. 35(1), pages 1-28, March.
    3. Muhammad Ali & Yin Ng & Carol Kulik, 2014. "Board Age and Gender Diversity: A Test of Competing Linear and Curvilinear Predictions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 125(3), pages 497-512, December.
    4. Sabharwal, Meghna, 2011. "Job satisfaction patterns of scientists and engineers by status of birth," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 853-863, July.
    5. Irina Frei & Christian Grund, 2022. "Working-time mismatch and job satisfaction of junior academics," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 92(7), pages 1125-1166, September.
    6. Nuria Reguera-Alvarado & Pilar Fuentes & Joaquina Laffarga, 2017. "Does Board Gender Diversity Influence Financial Performance? Evidence from Spain," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 141(2), pages 337-350, March.
    7. Fogarty, Timothy J. & Reinstein, Alan & Heath, Rebekah A. & Sinason, David H., 2017. "Why mentoring does not always reduce turnover: The intervening roles of value congruence, organizational knowledge and supervisory satisfaction," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 63-74.
    8. Benkraiem, Ramzi & Boubaker, Sabri & Brinette, Souad & Khemiri, Sabrina, 2021. "Board feminization and innovation through corporate venture capital investments: The moderating effects of independence and management skills," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    9. Lu, Yun & Ntim, Collins G. & Zhang, Qingjing & Li, Pingli, 2022. "Board of directors’ attributes and corporate outcomes: A systematic literature review and future research agenda," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    10. M. Teresa Antonio-García & Irene López-Navarro & Jesús Rey-Rocha, 2014. "Determinants of success for biomedical researchers: a perception-based study in a health science research environment," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1747-1779, December.
    11. Tleubayev, Alisher & Bobojonov, Ihtiyor & Gagalyuk, Taras & Glauben, Thomas, 2020. "Board gender diversity and firm performance: Evidence from the Russian agri-food industry," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 23(1), pages 35-53.
    12. Trinh, Vu Quang & Trinh, Hai Hong & Nguyen, Thi Hong Hanh & Vo, Xuan Vinh, 2023. "Board gender diversity and firm-level climate change exposure: A global perspective," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 55(PB).
    13. Laura Baselga-Pascual & Antonio Trujillo-Ponce & Emilia Vähämaa & Sami Vähämaa, 2018. "Ethical Reputation of Financial Institutions: Do Board Characteristics Matter?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(3), pages 489-510, March.
    14. Xu, Lei & Ou, Amy Y. & Park, Haemin Dennis & Jiang, Han, 2024. "Breaking barriers or maintaining status quo? Female representation in decision-making group of venture capital firms and the funding of woman-led businesses," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 39(1).
    15. Ishmael Tingbani & Lyton Chithambo & Venancio Tauringana & Nikolaos Papanikolaou, 2020. "Board gender diversity, environmental committee and greenhouse gas voluntary disclosures," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2194-2210, September.
    16. Florence Villesèche & Evis Sinani, 2023. "From Presence to Influence: Gender, Nationality and Network Centrality of Corporate Directors," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 37(2), pages 486-504, April.
    17. Nadia Loukil & Ouidad Yousfi, 2022. "Do CEO’s traits matter in innovation outcomes?," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 375-403, September.
    18. Joanna Tyrowicz & Siri Terjesen & Jakub Mazurek, 2017. "All on board? New evidence on board gender diversity from a large panel of firms," GRAPE Working Papers 5, GRAPE Group for Research in Applied Economics.
    19. Bruno Trezzini, 2008. "Probing the Group Faultline Concept: An Evaluation of Measures of Patterned Multi-dimensional Group Diversity," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 339-368, June.
    20. Vincenzo Scafarto & Federica Ricci & Elisabetta Magnaghi & Salvatore Ferri, 2021. "Board structure and intellectual capital efficiency: does the family firm status matter?," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 25(3), pages 841-878, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    gender; STEM; climate; retention; faculty;
    All these keywords.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:7:y:2018:i:5:p:71-:d:142983. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.