Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Promotion and tenure policies for team science at colleges/schools of medicine

  • Susan M. McHale (a1), Damayanthi (Dayan) Ranwala (a2), Deborah DiazGranados (a3), Dee Bagshaw (a4), Erich Schienke (a5) and Arthur E. Blank (a6)...

Abstract

Introduction:

Advancing understanding of human health promotion and disease prevention and treatment often requires teamwork. To evaluate academic medical institutions’ support for team science in the context of researchers’ career development, we measured the value placed on team science and specificity of guidance provided for documenting team science contributions in the promotion and tenure (P&T) documents of Colleges/Schools of Medicine (CoMs) in the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences’ Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program.

Method:

We reviewed complete P&T documents from 57 of 63 CTSA CoMs to identify career paths defined by three dimensions: academic rank (associate versus full professor), tenure eligibility (tenure track versus not), and role (research, clinical, education, and administrative), and we rated team science value and documentation guidance for each path. Multilevel models were estimated to compare team science value and documentation guidance as a function of the three career path dimensions while accounting for the clustered data (N = 357 career paths within 57 CoMs).

Results:

Team science value was greater for associate than full professors, non-tenure-eligible versus tenure-eligible positions, and roles prioritizing clinical, education, and administrative responsibilities versus those prioritizing research. Guidance for documenting team science achievements was more explicit for roles that prioritized research.

Discussion:

Although P&T policies at most CTSA institutions express value for team science, inconsistent within-institutional patterns of recognition and reward across career paths may have implications for researchers’ involvement in team science. We discuss the implications of our findings for research and for P&T policies that promote team science.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Promotion and tenure policies for team science at colleges/schools of medicine
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Promotion and tenure policies for team science at colleges/schools of medicine
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Promotion and tenure policies for team science at colleges/schools of medicine
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

Address for correspondence: S. McHale, PhD, 114 Henderson, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA. Email: mchale@psu.edu

Footnotes

Hide All

After first author, authorship order was randomly determined.

Footnotes

References

Hide All
1. Bennett, LM, Gadin, H, Marchand, C. Collaboration and Team Science Field Guide. Washington, DC: National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 2018.
2. Institute of Medicine. The CTSA Program at NIH: Opportunities for Advancing Clinical and Translational Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2013.
3. NCATS Advisory Working Group on the IOM Report: The CTSA Program at NIH. [Internet], 2014 [cited May 2018]. https://ncats.nih.gov/files/CTSA-IOM-WG-report-5-2014.pdf
4. Stokols, D, et al. The science of team science: overview of the field and introduction to the supplement. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2008; 35: S77S89.
5. Wuchty, S, Jones, B, Uzzi, B. The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science 2007; 316: 10361039.
6. Disis, M, Slattery, J. The road we must take: multidisciplinary team science. Science Translational Medicine 2010; 2: 22cm9.
7. Singh, J, Fleming, L. Lone inventors as sources of breakthroughs: myth or reality? Management Science 2010; 56: 4156.
8. Mazumdar, M, et al. Evaluating academic scientists collaborating in team-based research: a proposed framework. Academic Medicine 2015; 90: 13021308.
9. Klein, JT, Falk-Krzesinski, HJ. Interdisciplinary and collaborative work: framing promotion and tenure practices and policies. Research Policy 2017; 46: 10551061.
10. Cook, NJ, Hilton, ML. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2015.
11. Bennett, LM, Gadlin, H. Supporting interdisciplinary collaboration: the role of the institution. In: O’Rourke M, Crowley S, Eigenbrode SD, Wulfhorst JD, eds, eds. Enhancing Communication and Collaboration in Interdisciplinary Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2014. 356384.
12. Kanfer, R, Frese, M, Johnson, R. Motivation related to work: a century of progress. Journal of Applied Psychology 2017; 102: 338355.
13. Thompson-Klein, J, et al. Promotion and tenure in interdisciplinary team science: an introductory literature review. In: Oral presentation at National Academies Workshop on Institutional and Organizational Supports for Team Science. Washington, DC. October 24, 2013.
14. Meyers, F, et al. Strengthening the career development of clinical translational scientist trainees: a consensus statement of the clinical translational science award (CTSA) research education and career development committees. Clinical and Translational Science 2012; 5: 132137.
15. Bunton, S, Mallon, W. The continued evolution of faculty appointment and tenure policies at U.S. medical schools. Academic Medicine 2007; 82: 281289.
16. Brody, A, et al. Best practices and inclusion of team science principles in appointment promotion and tenure documents in research intensive schools or nursing. Nursing Outlook 2019; 67: 133139.
17. Hall, KA, et al. Recognition for team science and cross-disciplinarity in academia: an exploration of Promotion and Tenure Policy and Guideline Language from Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Institutions. In: Paper presented at: National Academies Workshop on Institutional and Organizational Support for Team Science. Washington, DC, October 24, 2013.
18. Ku, MC, et al. Recognition for team science and interdisciplinarity in academia: an analysis of promotion and tenure policy language from clinical and translational award institutions. In: Poster presented at: Annual International Science of Team Science Conference. Evanston, IL, June 24–27, 2013.
19. Canadian Academy of Health Sciences. Academic Recognition of Team Science. [Internet], 2017 [cited January, 2019]. https://www.cahs-acss.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/2017-06-22-Team-Science-Exec-Sum-Eng-FINAL-Web.pdf
20. The Academy of Medical Sciences, Team Science. [Internet] 2016, [cited January 2019]. http://www.acmedsci.ac.uk/policy/policy-projects/team-science/
21. National Cancer Institute, NCI Team Science Toolkit. [Internet], 2011 [cited January 2019]. https://www.teamsciencetoolkit.cancer.gov/Public/Home.aspx
22. Association for Interdisciplinary Studies (AIS). Guidelines for Tenure and Promotion for Interdisciplinary Faculty. [Internet], 2016 [cited January 2019]. https://oakland.edu/Assets/Oakland/ais/files-and%20documents/AIS_Tenure_Promotion_Guidelines.pdf
23. Fontanarosa, P, Bauchner, H, Flanagin, A. Authorship and team science. Journal of the American Medical Association 2017; 318: 24332437.
24. Allen, L, et al. Publishing: credit where credit is due. Nature 2014; 508: 312313.
25. Syed, M, Nelson, S. Guidelines for establishing reliability when coding narrative data. Emerging Adulthood 2015; 3: 113.
26. Aiken, LS, West, SG. Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1991.
27. Lotrecchiano, G, Falk-Krzesinksi, HJ, O’Rourke, M. Reward and recognition across the spectrum: attending to the needs of multiple collaboration stakeholders in the professions and learning. In: Oral presentation. Science of Team Science Conference. Clearwater Beach, FL, June 13, 2017.
28. Pincus, HA, et al. Evaluation and the NIH clinical and translational science awards: a ‘‘Top Ten’’ list. Evaluation & the Health Professions 2013; 36: 411431.
29. Hall, KL, et al. The science of team science: a review of the empirical evidence and research gaps on collaboration in science. American Psychologist 2018; 73: 532548.
30. Tebes, JK, Thai, ND. Interdisciplinary team science and the public: steps toward a participatory team science. American Psychologist 2018; 73: 549562.

Keywords

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

Promotion and tenure policies for team science at colleges/schools of medicine

  • Susan M. McHale (a1), Damayanthi (Dayan) Ranwala (a2), Deborah DiazGranados (a3), Dee Bagshaw (a4), Erich Schienke (a5) and Arthur E. Blank (a6)...

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.