The workshops run the entire day and lunch is provided. Attendees are expected to attend the full day of sessions, participate in pre- and post-workshop evaluations via an e-mail survey and brief phone interview, and come to the COACh reception. We encourage all interested to apply as soon as possible as there are a limited number of slots available. For those who qualify, travel and lodging expenses wil be provided. Following each workshop there will be a reception for all interested members of the community.

Future Workshops >>

Nancy Houfek, Head of Voice and Speech, Institute for Advanced Theater Training, Harvard University

Barbara Butterfield, Chief Human Resource Officer for Academic and Staff Human Resources and Affirmative Action, University of Michigan

Jane Tucker, Senior Manager, Sap - Administration Systems Management Group, Duke University

Sandra L. Shullman, Executive Development Group - Columbus, OH

Barbara Butterfield, Chief Human Resource Officer for Academic and Staff Human Resources and Affirmative Action, University of Michigan

Jane Tucker, Senior Manager, Sap - Administration Systems Management Group, Duke University

References

1. Valian, V. Why so slow? the advancement of women (MIT, Cambridge, MA, 1998).
2. Ragins, B.R. & Sundstron, E., Gender and power in organizations: a longitudinal perspective, Psychologicala Bulletin, 1989, 105, 51.
   

Back to top

To be accepted as a leader, both men and women must demonstrate their competence to the group. Women faculty in the chemical sciences are thrown in a leadership role from the first day they enter academia. They must show leadership skills as they move from the first day of teaching a large classroom, to managing graduate students, to chairing departmental and to campus committee assignments, and further up the ladder to being department head or a campus administrator. Developing an effective style of management and leadership is problematic for women in many ways. Because there are so few women scientists currently in leadership positions, women seeking successful styles to emulate are at a serious disadvantage relative to their male colleagues. Ridgeway has found that women must not only demonstrate their leadership competence to a group but that these women must also demonstrate that they are not trying to acquire status at the expense of other members of the group [39] , Women must subordinate and be seen to subordinate their personal needs to the needs of the group [39] . Attempts at self-aggrandizement by women is found to be particularly negatively perceived relative to men. The studies of Eagly et al. [40] that concentrated on evaluations of women as leaders, demonstrate that women are particularly disadvantaged when their style of leading is masculine. Having a style that is assertive to the point of appearing autocratic, rather than cooperative and participative, is especially costly for a woman relative to men. When experiments investigated the effects of autocratic leaders, women were especially negatively evaluated. A highly assertive style is incongruent with the common conception of women and women are penalized if they adopt such a style [40] . What has been clear from COACh trial workshops is that a sharing of effective techniques with other senior women faculty who have developed successful strategies, coupled with the advice of experts in these areas, can have a significant impact on women's careers.

To develop and hone leadership skills, each woman faculty must develop a leadership style that is effective and commensurate with her personal leadership strengths. COACh workshops will assist women by making them aware of effective strategies found by research and experience. For example, Kanter offers a manual in how to achieve power in organizations [41] . She defines power as efficacy in shaping the goals and policies of an organization or group. Activities build power if they are (a) out of the ordinary or pioneering or not part of the job description, (b) visible to others in the group, and (c) relevant to current organizational problems. She advises that people who want to advance should shun routine, invisible jobs. Vilian [26] provides suggestions on how to build power by using a neutral style in professional settings, and learning how to negotiate, bargain, seek promotion, seek challenging assignments and seek information. Women also need skills to recognize and handle biases, the "web of hidden processes that significantly thwart the careers of many women" [17] , and how to best handle the results of such biases. An example drawn from Jacob's C&E News editorial illustrates a common example [17] . A department chairman assigned a male faculty member to lecture in an introductory course and denied the request for a similar teaching assignment by a female colleague because the chair said that students would not accept a woman in that role. The chair assigned her to the more time-consuming and less visible role of teaching a lab course.

Another complicating factor in women's ability to successfully move up the career ladder is the heavier family burden that women tend to carry relative to men. Such additional responsibilities relating to childbirth, infant care and childcare can significantly slow the progress of a woman's career relative to most men. With these additionally responsibilities comes the additional stress as she attempts to find a healthy balance between home and work obligations. COACh found from interviews that many women felt that they needed better coping skills for handling these dual roles, and particularly in the areas of stress management and time management. These areas will be the focus of our second set of workshops.

References

1. Bienenstock, A. Workforce for the 21st Century: The Federal Perspective (National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, 2000).
2. National Science Foundation, Women, Minorities and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering 1998).
3. National Science Foundation, Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities in science and engineering: 1998 Washington DC, 1999).
4. Wilson, R., Promoting Gender Equity, Chronicle of Higher Education, 1999, 46, A16.
5. Wasserman, E.R., Women in the National Academy: Their lives as scientists and as women, Magazine of the Association of Women in Science, 1998, 27, 6-10.
6. Members of the First and Second Committees on Women Faculty in The School of Science. A Study on the Status of Women Faculty in Science at MIT (1999).
7. Assoc. of Amer. Colleges, The Classroom Climate Revisited - Chilly for Women Faculty, Administrators and Graduate Students Washington DC, 1986).
8. Selby, A. Women in Science and Engineering; Choices for Success (NY Academy of Science, 1999).
9. Lawler, A., Tenured Women Battle to Make it Less Lonely at the Top, Science, 1999, 286, 1272.
10. Congressional Commission on the Advancement of Women and Minorities in Science, Engineering and Technology Development, Land of Plenty: Diversity as America's Competitive Edge in Science, Engineering and Technology (Washington, DC, 2000).
11. Brennan, M.B., Women Chemists Reconsidering Careers At Research Universities, Chem & Engin News, 1996, 74, 8.
12. Everett, M.G., Deloach, W.S. & Bessan, S.E., Women in the Ranks, J. Chem. Ed., 1996, 73, 139.
13. Heylin, M., Job Situation for Chemists Takes Turn for the Better, Chem & Engiin News, 1997, 75, 13.
14. Arnold, K. Retaining High Achieving Women in Science and Engineering (Univ of Michigan, 1987).
15. Assoc. of Amer. Colleges. The Classroom Climate Revisited - Chilly One for Women Washington DC, 1982).
16. Mills Women's Leadership Institute, Advancing Women's Leadership in Science (Mills College, Oakland, CA, 1994).
17. Jacobs, M., Editorial on Women in Science, Chem and Engin News, 1998, 76.
18. Rossiter, M.W. A Less than Golden Age for Women in Chemistry, 1970-2000? (Workshop Report on Women in the Chemical Workforce, Washington, DC, 2000).
19. Sonnert, G. & Holton, G. Who Succeeds in Science? The Gender Dimension (Rutgers University Press, 1995).
20. Zuckerman, H. Persistence and change in the careers of men and women scientists and engineers: a review of current research 1-123 (National Technical Information Services, Washington, DC, 1987).
21. Fried, L.P., et al., Career development for women in academic medicine: Multiple interventions in a department of medicine, J. of the Amer. Med. Assoc., 1966, 276, 898.
22. Merton, R.K., The Matthew Effect in Science, Science, 1968, 159, 56.
23. Merton, R.K., The self-fulfilling prophecy, Antioch Review, 1948, 8, 193.
24. Martell, R.F., Lane, D.M. & Emrich, C., Male-female differences: a computer simulation, American Psychologist, 1996, 51, 157.
25. Fiske, S.T. & Taylor, S.E. Social Cognition (McGraw Hill, New York, 1991).
26. Vilian, V. Why so slow? The advancement of women (MIT, Cambridge, MA, 1998).
27. Martin, C.L. & Halverson, C. in Current conceptions of sex roles and sex typing: Theory and research (ed. Carter, D.B.) 123 (Praeger, New York, 1987).
28. Bakan, D. The duality of human existence (Rand McNally, Chicago, IL, 1966).
29. Spence, J.T. & Helmreich, R.L. Masculinity and feminity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates and antecedents (University of Texas Press, Austin, TX, 1978).
30. Butler, D. & Geis, F.L., Nonverbal affect responses to male and female leaders: implications for leadership evaluations, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1990, 58, 48.
31. Heilman, M.E. & Stopeck, M.H., Attractiveness and corporate success: different causal atributions for males and females, Journal of Applied Psychology, 1985, 70, 379.
32. Heilman, M.E., The impact of situational factors on personnel decisions concerning women: varying the sex composition of the applicant pool., Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1980, 26, 386.
33. Sackett, P.R., Dubois, C.L.Z. & Noe, A.W., Tokenism in performance evaluation: the effects of work group representation on male-female and white-black differences in performance ratings, Journal of Applied Psychology, 1991, 76, 263.
34. Sands, R., Faculty Mentoring Faculty in a Public University, Journal of Higher Education, 1991, 62, 174-193.
35. Betz, N.E. in Career counseling for women (eds. Walsh, W.B. & Osipow, S.H.) 237-262 (Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale NJ, 1994).
36. Fassinger, R.E. in The psychology of sex, gender, and jobs: Issues and Solutions (eds. Diamant, L. & Lee, J.) (Greenwood Press, Westport CT, 1999).
37. Phillips, S.d. & Imhoff, A.R., Women and career development: A decade of research, Annual Review of Psychology, 1997, 48, 31-59.
38. Farley, J. in Storming the tower: women in the academic world (eds. Lie, S. & O'Leary, V.) 194-207 (Nichols/Kogan Page, New York/London, 1990).
39. Ridgeway, C.L., Status in groups: the importance of motivation, American Sociological Review, 1982, 47, 76.
40. Eagly, A.H., Karau, S.J. & Makhijani, M.G., Gender and effectiveness of leaders: a meta-analysis, J. of Personality and Social Psychology, 1995, 117, 125.
41. Kanter, R.M. in Discrimination in organizations (eds. Alvarez, R. & Lutterman, K.G.) (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1979).
42. Brennan, M., Networking Tenured Women Chemists, Chem. & Engin. News, 2000, 78, 46.
43. Ragins, B.R. & Sundstron, E., Gender and power in organizations: a longitudinal perspective, Psychologicala Bulletin, 1989, 105, 51.
44. Moskowitz, G.B., Gollwitzer, P.M., Wasal, W. & Schaal, B., Preconscious control of stereotype activation through chronic egalitarian goals, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1999, 77, 167.
45. Blair, I.V. & Banaji, M.R., Automatic and controlled processes in stereotype priming, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1996, 70, 1142.
46. Lane, N.J., Why are there so few women in science?, Nature, 1999, 9.

Back to top