Using social exchange theory to examine minoritized STEM postdocs’ experiences with faculty mentoring relationships

Abstract

Purpose Mentoring postdocs is a shared responsibility and dynamic process that requires a mutual commitment between the faculty mentor and postdoc. The purpose of this study is to understand how minoritized science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) postdocs view and engage in mentoring exchanges with their faculty mentors. In the context of this study, minoritized postdocs include women, people of color, and individuals with international status; faculty mentors include postdocs’ Principal Investigators (PIs). Design/methodology/approach Three researchers and 31 data sources (i.e., interview transcripts) were used to construct the case. Researchers first deductively and independently coded the data sources using Molm’s (2006) social exchange framework to identify examples of direct, generalized, and productive mentoring exchanges. Researchers then used thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006) to identify emergent themes among coded examples of direct, generalized, and productive mentoring exchanges. Findings Data analyses revealed three emergent themes: (1.1) postdocs valued regular meetings and communication with mentors to clarify responsibilities and role expectations, (1.2) postdocs found more value in their interactions with junior faculty PIs who were flexible and open to innovative ideas, and (1.3) postdocs appreciated conversations about short- and long-term career goals and advice with mentors. Originality/value Findings offer implications for faculty and postdocs’ approaches to mentoring relationships, and for approaches to cultivating supportive scholarly communities in STEM higher education. Recommendations include flexibility in research assignments, increased awareness of non-academic careers, and opportunities for informal interactions and intra/interdepartmental community building.

*Striving to Excel in STEM: Insights From Underrepresented, Minoritized Graduate Students With High Academic Ability

“…Briefly, faculty members, STEM departments, and university administrators should create a shared distribution of efforts to improve equity within and across departments. Incentivization and accountability are key for changing faculty culture for the better (Karalis Noel et al, 2021); there are systemic and structural issues that need to be overhauled in academia before any sustainable changes can occur. Department administrators should enhance their accountability systems.…”

The influence of distributive justice on job attitudes and life satisfaction of hotel workers

“…SET theory is conceptualised as a reciprocal system of interaction that operates through the exchange of rewards to facilitate value exchange [ 73 ]. The concept of SET is founded on the idea that the establishment of a relationship between two individuals is facilitated by a systematic evaluation of the costs and benefits involved [ [75] , [76] , [77] ]. The SET framework emphasizes the principle of “reciprocity” as a fundamental guideline for social behaviour [ 78 , 79 ].…”

Striving Transition for University Academics: The Academic Role Identity of Young Postdocs at Universities in China

“…The existence of postdocs at universities means that PhDs who graduated in recent years choose to have temporary work to transition to academic tenure positions. In a growing body of literature, researchers have examined postdocs’ career experiences, including faculty expectations and the treatment of international postdocs (Cantwell & Lee, 2010; Cantwell & Taylor, 2013); career satisfaction (van der Weijden et al, 2015); minority postdocs’ career experiences (Yadav et al, 2020); the transition of university postdocs to non-academic careers (Dorenkamp & Weiss, 2018; Hayter & Parker, 2019); the choice, selection, and recruitment of postdocs (Herschberg et al, 2018; Knaub et al, 2018); academic career prospects and postdocs’ motivation (Fitzenberger & Schulze, 2014; Sauermann & Roach, 2016); research training and attaining faculty careers in the social sciences and STEM fields (Wang & Main, 2021); postdocs’ experiences with faculty and student mentoring relationships (Blaney et al, 2020; Noel et al, 2021) and published outcomes (Ahmed et al, 2015; Cerca, 2016). Furthermore, some research shows concern for postdocs’ well-being and support, such as salaries and other factors (Main et al, 2021; McDowell et al, 2018), the supporting environment and policies (Alund et al, 2020; McAlpine et al, 2017; Puljak & Sharif, 2009; Schneider & van Leeuwen, 2014; Yadav & Seals, 2019), and the relationship between postdocs’ employment and research funds (Cantwell & Taylor, 2015).…”