Cost Benefits

1. Cost Benefits ADVANCE Auburn: SEM Transformation Through “Small Wins” National Science Foundation - PAID

2. Program Participants Dr. Donna L. Sollie, PI Dr. Overtoun Jenda, Co-PI Dr. Marie Wooten, Co-PI Dr. Dan Svyantek, Co-PI Dr. Alice Smith, Co-PI Dr. Toni Alexander, Faculty Associate Ms. Daydrie Hague, Faculty Associate Regina Halpin, Consultant Robin Taylor, Consultant Bonnie Wilson, Consultant Kristin Cullen, Graduate Student Assistant Katie Gunther, Graduate Student Assistant Rachel Birmingham, Graduate Student Assistant Victoria Brown, Graduate Student Assistant Ozge Sumer, Graduate Student Assistant

3. Gender Inequities Academia particularly S&E disciplines remain inhospitable to the representation and advancement and inclusion of women (Bilimoria et al., 2008).

4. Gender Inequities Systematic, historical and widespread inequities persist at every stage of the academic pipeline: hiring, tenure, promotion and leadership. National Academies’ Report: Beyond Bias and Barriers

5. What needs to change? Transform structures and culture Work practices Character of the workplace Social Schemas: bias

6. Benefit of Change Create a workplace that is supportive and motivating for all its employees, not just women and other minority groups.

7. NSF ADVANCE IT “fund innovative programs to result transforming practices, policies, climate and culture” National Science Foundation, 2005

8. “Small Wins Approach” Transforming a workplace through a series of small positive changes used to improve the working environment for those who are disproportionately affected by unsupportive and inconsiderate practices in the workplace. Meyerson et al., 2000

9. AU - PAID To determine the Cost Benefits of the NSF ADVANCE Programs. To develop a framework for understanding how organizations can enable gender equity through use of small wins.

10. Purpose Seek in depth information from ADVANCE institutions concerning their conception, implementation, effectiveness, longevity, time and personnel investment, and short-term and long-term costs. Identify initiatives that have proven to be cost effective and beneficial, and determine the costs/benefits ratio of “small wins” practices. Capture and disseminate information on “small wins” best practices so that others in the Advance Community can benefit from our collective knowledge.

11. Assessment “What was done” Check web sites NSF-mandated annual reports Publications

12. Survey of Initiatives Mentoring programs were the most common initiative, followed by family-friendly policies such as family leave beyond FMLA. Many institutions also had initiatives to promote leadership opportunities and professional development (leadership training, tenure and promotion workshops, etc.). Very few institutions have programs to facilitate women’s participation in key academic committees. Very few have theater programs to foster communication.

13. Grouping of Initiatives Recruitment and hiring Search committee training Dual hiring Mentoring Research funding and resources Family friendly policies Professional Development for Women Leadership Opportunities

14. Method Survey created to rank perceived costs/benefits of identified initiatives. E-mail sent to program PI, describing the goal of the survey, and inviting participation. Non-response follow up after two weeks.

15. Programs Surveyed Total of 73 Advance IT and PAID Programs Contacted A total of 36 institutions responded 14 PAID and 22 IT 49.3% response rate

16. Institutions that Responded Cal Poly Pomona DePauw University Furman University Grand Valley State University Hunter College Gender Equity Project Idaho State University Marshall University Michigan Technological University New Mexico State University New Mexico State University North Dakota State University Ohio State University Oklahoma State University Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Rutgers University University of Alabama University of California - Irvine University of Colorado-Boulder University of Delaware University of Miami University of Missouri - Columbia University of Montana University of Nebraska-Lincoln University of Nevada Desert Research Institute University of North Carolina-Charlotte University of Oklahoma - Norman Campus University of Puerto Rico-Humacao University of Rhode Island University of Texas-El Paso University of Washington University of Wisconsin-Madison Utah State University Vassar College Virginia Tech Washington State University Wayne State University

17. Survey Scoring Perceived COST Perceived BENEFIT Very High Cost Very High Benefit Very Low Cost Very Little Benefit Moderate Cost High Cost Moderate Benefit High Benefit Low Cost Low Benefit 1 2 3 4 5 Initiative 1 2 3 4 5 X +/- SD X +/- SD 29 items Rate perceived costs and benefits of various initiatives Open-ended responses included as well

18. Results : High Benefit / Low Cost

19. Results : Continued

20. Results • Facilitating women’s participation in key academic committees has the greatest benefit, relative to cost. • Publicizing family friendly policies is also highly beneficial for faculty. • Mentoring programs are also relatively cost effective and highly beneficial, the most benefit comes from programs that focus on the following: • The promotion and tenure process • The culture of department (only slightly less effective/more costly )

21. Results • Lecture series by senior women from the university have a very low cost relative to perceived benefits. • Mentoring programs that focus on the culture of the university and work-family balance are equally beneficial (although work-life balance is slightly more costly). • Also considered highly beneficial relative to cost were: • Implementing grant writing/publication workshops. • Facilitating the use of family-friendly policies. • providing mentoring programs that focus on understanding teaching.

22. Comments from Participants Change takes time. Critical mass makes a differences. Women in senior positions changes everything.

23. The High Cost of Time • While many effective programs are low-cost in terms of operational expenses, they require much time and dedication. • Course buy-outs for grant PI • Full-time administrative staff • Course buy-outs for other faculty members outside the grant

24. Interventions and Change Criteria Low Cost Quick High Effect

25. Types of Interventions Mentoring Family Friendly Policies Training Work-Life Policies

26. Mentoring Promotion and tenure process Teaching in discipline Research in discipline Balancing work and personal life

27. Mentoring—Best Practices External mentor program for pre-tenure faculty Group mentoring Group mentoring for women interested in leadership Informal mentoring through networks developed on seed grants

28. Family Friendly Policies Parental leave Dual-partner hiring Publicizing family-friendly policies

29. Training Interventions • Facilitating women’s participation in key academic committees • Grant-writing and publication workshops which provide sample materials • Committee training • Hiring • Promotion/tenure

30. Work-Life Policies Websites to access policies Modified duties policies which benefits both men and women Array of new work-life policies New child care facility Spousal-partner employment or accommodation Campus wide Quality of Work-Life Council

31. Recommendations: Support for a transformation team including senior faculty leaders and administrators, focused on comprehensively tackling the issues of women’s under-representation. Combination of top-down and grassroots change efforts to remove barriers constraining women and to improve the academic climate.

32. Recommendations: Broader dissemination of information on available gender equity resources, using multiple communication channels. Institutionalized data collection and reporting techniques across Advance institutions. Bilimoria et al., 2008

33. Challenges and Next Steps: “An organizational transformation project is an incubator for generating ideas and initiatives and testing them for their feasibility, acceptability and sustainability.” “Future empirical research should attempt to identify the specific circumstances and structures needed for effective gender equity solutions within a comprehensive change project.”

34. References • Bilimoria, D., Joy, S. & Liang, X. (2008). Breaking barriers and creating inclusiveness, lessons of organizational transformation to advance women faculty in academic science and engineering, Human Resource Management 47:423-441. • Heylin, M. (2005). Salaries and jobs: Chemists with jobs post solid pay gains, but prognosis for chemical job market remains murky, Chemical & Engineering News 83: 41-44. • Meyerson, D.E. & Fletcher, J.K. (2000). A modest manifesto for shattering the glass ceiling, Harvard Business Review 78: 127-135.

35. Acknowledgements Christine Curtis Professor Chemical Engineering Alice Hogan National Science Foundation