Professional networks, science ability, and gender determinants of three types of leadership in academic science and engineering

被引:33
作者
Parker, Marla [1 ]
Welch, Eric W. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Illinois, Dept Publ Adm, Chicago, IL 60607 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Leadership; productivity; Academic science; Gender and social networks; STRUCTURAL-ANALYSIS; SOCIAL NETWORKS; INFORMATION; SCIENTISTS; IMPACT; WOMEN; ORGANIZATIONS; CONSEQUENCES; ASSOCIATIONS; INVOLVEMENT;
D O I
10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.01.001
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
This paper examines the factors associated with holding leadership positions among men and women academic scientists. We develop hypotheses for three determinants of leadership: professional, networks, science ability, and gender. We test the resulting model on the likelihood of holding three different types of academic science leadership-research center leadership, university administrative leadership, and discipline leadership. Findings show that while science productivity and reputation are strongly associated with having either a center or discipline leadership position, they are less strongly associated with administrative leadership. Also, larger and more dense collaboration networks predict having a center leadership position, but the opposite is true for holding an administrative leadership position. Women are more likely to be in discipline leadership positions and less likely to be a leader of a research center or have an administrative university leadership position. Finally, having more women in the network reduces the likelihood of holding discipline or center leadership positions. Interpretations of findings and conclusions explore the potential implications for theory, practice and policy. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:332 / 348
页数:17
相关论文
共 111 条
[1]   Reconsidering the impact of gender stereotypes on the advancement of women in organizations [J].
Agars, MD .
PSYCHOLOGY OF WOMEN QUARTERLY, 2004, 28 (02) :103-111
[2]   Leadership: What It Means, What It Does, and What We Want to Know About It [J].
Ahlquist, John S. ;
Levi, Margaret .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, VOL 14, 2011, 14 :1-24
[3]   Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study [J].
Ahuja, G .
ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCE QUARTERLY, 2000, 45 (03) :425-455
[4]  
Aldrich H., 1977, ACAD MANAGE REV, V2, P217, DOI DOI 10.2307/257905
[5]   CUMULATIVE ADVANTAGE AND INEQUALITY IN SCIENCE [J].
ALLISON, PD ;
LONG, JS ;
KRAUZE, TK .
AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1982, 47 (05) :615-625
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2009, STAND DEF FIN DISP C
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2006, BIAS BARR FULF POT W
[8]  
[Anonymous], 1986, HDB THEORY RES SOCIO
[9]  
[Anonymous], 1974, The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations
[10]  
[Anonymous], 1992, NETWORKS ORG STRUCTU