Search

BackgroundStructural mentoring barriers are policies, practices, and cultural norms that collectively disadvantage marginalized groups and perpetuate disparities in mentoring. While these mentoring barriers can be found early in the training pathway, failure to address or overcome these barriers at the postdoctoral training stage has a direct impact on faculty diversity and national efforts to retain underrepresented groups in research careers.MethodsTo better understand the mentoring barriers faced by postdoctoral trainees, and possible ways to address them, a diverse sample of postdoctoral scholars (“postdocs”) from across the United States were asked to participate in focus groups to discuss their training experiences. We conducted five 90-minute focus groups with 32 biomedical postdocs, including 20 (63%) women and 15 (47%) individuals from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups (URG). Participants were well-represented across years of training, and 65% were at least somewhat likely to pursue a research-intensive faculty career, similar to previously reported national averages.ResultsA social ecological framework was used to examine both the upstream and downstream manifestations of structural mentoring barriers, as well as mentor barriers, overall. Themes were categorized on four broad levels: Individual (attitudes, beliefs, knowledge, or behaviors that inform mentoring barriers), Interpersonal (mentoring barriers arising from dyadic, peer, or network relationships), Institutional (departmental, institutional, organizational mentoring barriers), or Systemic (mentoring barriers originating from policies or broad social and cultural norms). Notable structural barriers included (1) academic politics and scientific hierarchy, (2) inequalities resulting from mentor prestige, (3) the (over) reliance on one mentor, (4) the lack of formal training for academic and non-academic careers, and (5) the lack of institutional diversity and institutional mentor training. These structural barriers foster mentoring practices and behaviors that lead to poor work-life balance, poor communication, and research career attrition. To overcome these barriers, postdocs strongly encouraged developing a network or team of mentors and recommended institutional interventions that create more comprehensive professional development, mentorship, and belonging.ConclusionsFor postdoctoral scientists, structural mentoring barriers can permeate down to institutional, interpersonal, and individual levels, impeding a successful transition to an independent research career. It has become clear that large-scale changes in mentoring must come from addressing the policies, practices, and cultural norms that perpetuate poor mentoring. This work provides strong evidence for promoting mentorship networks and cultivating a “mentoring milieu” that fosters a supportive community and a strong culture of mentorship at all levels.

Background The decision of whether to pursue a tenure-track faculty position has become increasingly difficult for undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral trainees considering a career in research. Trainees express concerns over job availability, financial insecurity, and other perceived challenges associated with pursuing an academic position. Methods To help further elucidate the benefits, challenges, and strategies for pursuing an academic career, a diverse sample of postdoctoral scholars (“postdocs”) from across the United States were asked to provide advice on pursuing a research career in academia in response to an open-ended survey question. 994 responses were qualitatively analyzed using both content and thematic analyses. 177 unique codes, 20 categories, and 10 subthemes emerged from the data and were generalized into two thematic areas: Life in Academia and Strategies for Success. Results On life in academia, postdoc respondents overwhelmingly agree that academia is most rewarding when you are truly passionate about scientific research and discovery. ‘Passion’ emerged as the most frequently cited code, referenced 189 times. Financial insecurity, work-life balance, securing grant funding, academic politics, and a competitive job market emerged as challenges of academic research. The survey respondents note that while passion and hard work are necessary, they are not always sufficient to overcome these challenges. The postdocs encourage trainees to be realistic about career expectations and to prepare broadly for career paths that align with their interests, skills, and values. Strategies recommended for perseverance include periodic self-reflection, mental health support, and carefully selecting mentors. Conclusions For early-career scientists along the training continuum, this advice deserves critical reflection before committing to an academic research career. For advisors and institutions, this work provides a unique perspective from postdoctoral scholars on elements of the academic training path that can be improved to increase retention, career satisfaction, and preparation for the scientific workforce.