Gender Differences in Self-reported Faculty Developmental Networks.

Scholars have long recognized gender variation in social relationship dynamics. However, how gender shapes developmental networking relationships for career advancement, particularly among university faculty members, is understudied. This area of research is important since women comprise an increasing proportion of faculty and yet report receiving less mentoring and lower career satisfaction, productivity, and advancement than their male counterparts. This cross-sectional study assessed gender differences in self-reported dimensions of faculty participants' developmental networks by collecting information on relationships with developers, who are people who have taken concerted action and offered professional and personal guidance to help participants advance in their careers over the past year. The investigators used egocentric network data from an electronically administered Mentoring Network Questionnaire collected from 159 faculty involved in a mentoring intervention during the pandemic. Faculty were from multiple Southwest and Mountain West institutions. Statistical analyses were performed using the Chi-squared test, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and unadjusted multilevel regression. Female faculty chose developers of lower gender diversity than male faculty (p=0.01). Compared to male faculty, female faculty reported receiving more psychosocial support from individual developers (p=0.03). Female faculty members' developers were more often characterized as friends and less often described as sponsors and allies than male faculty, based on relative levels of career and psychosocial support that individual developers provided (p<0.001). No gender differences were found in other network characteristics. Female faculty build developmental networks that have different factors compared to male faculty. Greater levels of psychosocial support and fewer allies and sponsors for female faculty may have long-term implications for differential career advancement for women vs. men in academic careers. Strategies to enhance networking should address gender differences and include a structured framework for assessing network gaps.

Inequity Analysis in Faculty Recognition Awards at a School of Medicine.

As part of developmental networks, sponsors help provide recognition and visibility opportunities to their faculty protégés. Recognition awards given to the School of Medicine (SOM) faculty are an important mechanism for acknowledging what is valued in academic medicine. Beyond their impact on individual careers, awards help define the culture and climate of an organization. The literature suggests inequities in recognition awards for women and racial/ethnic underrepresented minority faculty. The study's purpose was to examine the characteristics of the awardees relative to the SOM faculty in a minority-serving institution in a minority-majority state. In this observational cross-sectional study, 47 SOM faculty were recognized between 2000-2023 as Regents' Lecturers (9), Regents' Professors (20), Community Engagement Awardees (5), and Gold-headed Cane Awardees (13). SOM sought nominations which a search committee competitively reviewed. Award recipients were characterized by their department, rank, academic track, degree, country of origin, sex, and race/ethnicity, and were compared to all SOM faculty. Male faculty were more likely than women faculty to receive an award (p=0.04). Faculty with tenure, Ph.D. degree, or Professor rank were more likely to receive an award than their counterparts (p<0.001, all analyses). Faculty in basic and diagnostic specialties were more likely to receive an award than medical or surgical specialties (p<0.001). Although rates of awards for racial/ethnic URM faculty were about half that of non-URM faculty, this difference did not reach statistical significance (p=0.14). In addition to demonstrating sex-related inequity in awards, recognized faculty are traditionally associated with the scholarship of discovery compared to other models of scholarship or clinical activity. Sponsors should promote women, physicians, and clinician educators for recognition awards to advance their academic careers. SOM leaders need to examine award criteria and processes to ensure recognition of the diversity of talents and achievements that are critical to the future of academic medicine.

Mentoring Network Questionnaire Support Scales Reliable and Valid with University Faculty.

The Developmental Network Questionnaire (DNQ) is used in business to self-assess relationships with developers, or people who support one's career. The Mentoring Network Questionnaire (MNQ) is an online modification of the DNQ and includes two scales that rate developer's contributions to career or psychosocial help. The psychometrics of these scales for different populations are unreported. This study analyzed the construct validity and reliability of the two scales measuring support provided by developers of university faculty. Mentors and mentees (G=156) from multiple Southwestern and Mountain West universities rated 741 developers on the MNQ's five-item career- and psychosocial-support scales. Participants responded on a seven-point scale ranging from "never, not at all" to "to the maximum extent possible." Multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (MCFA) using Mplus and the multi-level reliability coefficient omega assessed construct validity and internal consistency reliability, respectively. Results supported the validity of two latent constructs of career- and psychosocial support, each measured by the established five-item scale: Comparative fit index (CFI)=.93, Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI)=.91, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)=.06, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR): W=.09, B=.10. The measurement model was improved when the "removes barriers" item was removed from the career-support scale (CFI=.96, TLI=.95, RMSEA=.05, SRMR: W=.06 B=.09. Factor loadings at both the within- and between-levels were strong and statistically significant. Reliability omegas ranged from .85 to .92. Career and psychosocial support provided to university faculty by developers in their networks may be validly and reliably measured at both the within- and between-levels by a modified four-item career support scale and the original five-item psychosocial support scale from the DNQ and the modified MNQ. Limitations include reduced statistical power due to small sample size and lack of testing at the university level. Future work will assess the responsiveness of these scales to measuring change over time in the amount of support provided.

Curriculum-based Faculty Training in Networking: Knowledge and Self-efficacy Outcomes.

Although the advantages of developmental networks are well-known, most faculty do not know how to participate in such networks actively. Additionally, institutions face challenges in teaching faculty the best practices of networking. This deficiency constitutes a critical gap in the literature, which may slow career advancement for faculty, particularly from underrepresented groups. The study's purpose was to examine the effectiveness of a curriculum-based faculty training in developmental networks, utilizing the Extension for Community Health Outcomes (ECHO) platform. In this pre-post study, 33 faculty members participated in the intervention utilizing eight modules involving four competencies. Each module followed a standard format, including a short didactic, two facilitated case study discussions based on real-life scenarios, and self-reading of selected literature. Outcomes included (i) change in knowledge scores obtained from two questions per module and (ii) self-efficacy scores measured on a scale of 0-100. Paired student's t-test and mixed model regression analyses were used. A significant increase in knowledge score was documented using mixed model regression for 4 of the eight modules (mean change score 0.4-0.8, p≤0.03 for all analyses). The proportion of faculty participants reporting correct knowledge items for all modules increased from 49.8% (pre) to 64.3% (post), which was statistically significant (p<0.001). Significant increases in paired self-efficacy scores were reported for each of the eight modules (mean change score 17-37, p<0.05 for all analyses). This study highlights the importance of curriculum-based training in networking. Participants showed a significant increase in pre-post networking self-efficacy and knowledge scores. Our ECHO-based curriculum, facilitator training, and manual enable easy implementation in other institutions, ensuring scalability and adaptability. Our analysis provides the evidence basis for examining the impact of a developmental network intervention in enhancing individual career networks.