"in order for an individual to be satisfied": IMO, this is the key phrase in the essay you post. It is very important to investigate what makes men & women "satisfied" with re: differential apportionment of time & energy to professional, family, and, if you wish, play activities. I would speculate that results would reflect clear sexual-dimorphism, *ceteris paribus*. BTW, a number of my colleagues combine "play" & professional activities (e.g., attending conferences with family or partner @exotic or other locales of interest). Further, for many, science IS play; that's what creativity & work IS at it's best, isn't it. Maybe some people do science because it's a single-minded passion not simply one of several vocations, roles, avocations, and the like. Are we to denigrate people who compose a satisfying life consistent w/their single-mindedness and preference for more-or-less uninterrupted focus on their scientific careers?
On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Judith S. Weis <jw...@andromeda.rutgers.edu > wrote: > This article from the AWIS newsletter is pertinent to recent discussions > on this list. > > Work-Life Balance and Success in a Scientific Career > > Work-life balance in a rigorous academic career is slowly being adopted as > part of the scientific community’s lexicon, although some resist its > infiltration. Especially in a tough economic climate with a dwindling > number of grants being awarded these days, it is of utmost importance for > researchers to stay on top of their game and produce results. This often > comes at the expense of personal and family obligations, let alone leisure > activities. However, some have realized that leisure is an integral part > of a researcher’s life…not only for work-life balance, but also for the > betterment of ideas and scientific discovery. > > This month in Nature, Dr. Julie Overbaugh from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer > Research Center in Seattle, WA argues, “Scientists should make time for > play to complement their intense work, maintain creativity and keep the > ideas flowing.” She acknowledges that while it is sometimes necessary to > pull all-nighters in the name of pending deadlines, more hours in the lab > does not equate to better results. “In fact,” she notes, “I have many of > my best ideas while walking the dogs in the morning, riding my bike home > from work or weekending in the mountains.” > > For Dr. Quinones-Hinojosa at Johns Hopkins, on the other hand, these types > of activities are utterly incompatible with a serious career in cancer > research. Heidi Ledford of Nature News recently decided to investigate > “24/7 labs” where the number of hours logged is most crucial to success in > the eyes of the PI, and she interviewed the students and postdocs who work > for them. Contrary to many who turned her down due to fear of being > portrayed as “slave-drivers” Dr. Quinones-Hinojosa welcomed her into his > lab, eager to show off his neurosurgery skills and devoted research team > of tired students and postdocs. > > At first glance, it would seem that with 13 concurrent grants, 113 > publications since 2005 and an h index of 27, compared with the average of > 10.7 among his neuroscience colleagues, that the long hours Dr. > Quinones-Hinojosa requires of himself and his team have paid off in > spades. However, it all depends on how you measure success. Attending > late-night lab meetings every Friday and working through all major > holidays, some of the students in this lab cited not being able to see > their families abroad for years. Furthermore, the PI himself admits to > being an absentee father. He notes that while in residency at the > University of California, San Francisco, his three young children thought > he lived at the hospital, and effectively – he did – clocking 140 hours a > week. Yet strangely, he seems to truly enjoy his career and life choices. > > This then begs the question of how to define work-life balance. Some have > argued that this term is insufficient; rejecting the notion that any > semblance of balance between work and family or personal life can > reasonably by achieved in the throes of a research-oriented academic > career. Instead, terms such as “work-life satisfaction” have emerged. This > suggests that whatever ratio of work to personal time needs to be achieved > in order for an individual to be satisfied is sufficient. But one has to > wonder if Dr. Quinones-Hinojosa would even be able to choose his current > work-life ratio without a spouse at home to take care of their three > children? > > Because many women scientists don’t have the luxury of choosing between > work and family, it is vitally important for academic institutions to > adopt flexible work-life policies, and encourage employees to take > advantage of them. At AWIS, we have just begun a new initiative to study > and identify best practices for workplace flexibility in academia. Tools > for Change: A Project for Stepping Up Retention of Women in the Academic > STEM Pipeline is a partnership between AWIS and Dr. Mary Ann Mason from > the Center for Economics & Family Security at UC Berkeley, as well as Dr. > Joan C. Williams from the Center for WorkLife Law at UC Hastings. Funded > by the National Science Foundation (NSF) ADVANCE program, our study will > provide a rigorous economic analysis on the cost of losing precious talent > throughout the "leaky" STEM pipeline and the benefits of implementing > flexible, family-responsive workplace practices. > -- Clara B. Jones [Still playing the game with entropy...] Cell Phone: 828-279-4429
