Effect of Athena SWAN funding incentives on women’s research leadership

Abstract

Is it difficult being a woman scientist?" the biochemist Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin was asked at high table dinner in an Oxford college by the man sitting next to her. "Not since I won the Nobel Prize," she replied. 1 In 1964, the British press had reacted to her award with the headlines: "Oxford housewife wins Nobel" and "British woman wins Nobel Prize-£18 750 prize to mother of three." 2 While such overtly sexist treatment of female scientists by the media is now rare, progress towards gender equality in universities has been astonishingly slow. A UK parliamentary inquiry into women in scientific careers found that with only 17% of professors in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) in 2011-12 women were still under-represented at senior levels across all STEM disciplines. 3 Concerned with the sustainability of increasing the scientific workforce, the inquiry concluded that efforts to inspire more women into science were wasted if they were subsequently disadvantaged compared with men and recommended that universities should do more to support and retain women in scientific careers. 3

Gender diversity in academic medicine

“…Ovseiko and colleagues cite evidence that gender diversity is important because it delivers research that is more interdisciplinary, higher quality, more rigorous, and more relevant 1. Studies have shown that women leaders get higher scores than men in multisource feedback exercises used in the UK to support the appraisal process 3.…”

“…The BMJ analysis article examining the effect of gender diversity incentives in the UK’s National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) funding awards process (doi:10.1136/bmj.m3975)1 has come at an interesting time.…”

“…Ovseiko and colleagues’ analysis1 shows little change from 2006 to 2011 followed by an important improvement in gender balance among leaders of NIHR research themes; by 2016 the proportion of women in that role had risen threefold (to 24%) and the proportion of funding they acquired had increased more than fourfold.…”

Gender parity in scientific authorship in a National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre: a bibliometric analysis

“…23 The profile of gender equity in higher education and research has been raised by the introduction of Athena SWAN-linked funding incentives by the NIHR. [26][27][28][29] While Athena SWAN awards are useful markers of achievement for higher education institutions and research centres and institutes, they alone are insufficient to assess and monitor the progress of NIHR BRCs towards gender equity. 30 In this regard, tracking of the proportion of women and rate of their achievements is important; however, it is not routinely recorded in NIHR BRCs.…”

Covid-19: Why we still need more women in academia

“…Since its inception in 2011 the Athena SWAN initiative has had a substantial effect on the proportion of grants going to female researchers and their teams, say Pavel Ovseiko and colleagues. Because of the way women tend to operate, this has meant research that is more multidisciplinary, rigorous, relevant, and honest 4…”