Student-led research team-building program may help junior faculty increase productivity in competitive biomedical research environment.
Faculty development
Junior faculty
Research teams
Student research assistants
Team-building
Journal
BMC medical education
ISSN: 1472-6920
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Educ
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088679
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 Jan 2021
04 Jan 2021
Historique:
received:
09
09
2020
accepted:
19
11
2020
entrez:
5
1
2021
pubmed:
6
1
2021
medline:
15
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Interdisciplinary research teams can increase productivity among academic researchers, yet many junior investigators do not have the training or financial resources to build productive teams. We developed and tested the acceptability and feasibility of three low-cost services to help junior faculty build and maintain their own research teams. At an urban academic medical centre, we implemented three types of consultation services: 1) giving talks on evidence-based best practices for building teams; 2) providing easy-to-use team building resources via email; and 3) offering a year-long consultation service-co-led by students-that taught faculty to build and maintain research teams. Our primary outcome was the number of faculty who used each service. For the yearlong consultation service, we asked faculty participants to complete three online self-assessments to rate their leadership confidence, the team's performance, and which of the consultation components were most helpful. We used descriptive statistics to evaluate faculty assessment scores at three timepoints by comparing median scores and interquartile ranges. We gave 31 talks on team building to 328 faculty and postdoctoral fellows from 2014 to 2020. Separately, 26 faculty heard about our research team building expertise and requested materials via email. For the consultation service, we helped build or enhance 45 research teams from 2014 to 2020. By the end of the consultation, 100% of the faculty reported they were still maintaining their team. In the initial survey, the majority of participants (95.7%, n = 22) reported having no or few experiences in building teams. Further, when asked to rate their team's performance at 12-months, faculty highly rated many elements of both teamwork and taskwork, specifically their team's productivity (6/7 points), morale (6/7 points), and motivation (6/7 points). By the end of the program, faculty participants also highly rated two components of the consultation program: recruitment assistance (7/10 points) and provision of team management tools (7/10 points). For participating faculty, our program provided valued guidance on recruitment assistance and team management tools. The high demand for team-building resources suggests that junior faculty urgently need better training on how to develop and manage their own team.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Interdisciplinary research teams can increase productivity among academic researchers, yet many junior investigators do not have the training or financial resources to build productive teams. We developed and tested the acceptability and feasibility of three low-cost services to help junior faculty build and maintain their own research teams.
METHODS
METHODS
At an urban academic medical centre, we implemented three types of consultation services: 1) giving talks on evidence-based best practices for building teams; 2) providing easy-to-use team building resources via email; and 3) offering a year-long consultation service-co-led by students-that taught faculty to build and maintain research teams. Our primary outcome was the number of faculty who used each service. For the yearlong consultation service, we asked faculty participants to complete three online self-assessments to rate their leadership confidence, the team's performance, and which of the consultation components were most helpful. We used descriptive statistics to evaluate faculty assessment scores at three timepoints by comparing median scores and interquartile ranges.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We gave 31 talks on team building to 328 faculty and postdoctoral fellows from 2014 to 2020. Separately, 26 faculty heard about our research team building expertise and requested materials via email. For the consultation service, we helped build or enhance 45 research teams from 2014 to 2020. By the end of the consultation, 100% of the faculty reported they were still maintaining their team. In the initial survey, the majority of participants (95.7%, n = 22) reported having no or few experiences in building teams. Further, when asked to rate their team's performance at 12-months, faculty highly rated many elements of both teamwork and taskwork, specifically their team's productivity (6/7 points), morale (6/7 points), and motivation (6/7 points). By the end of the program, faculty participants also highly rated two components of the consultation program: recruitment assistance (7/10 points) and provision of team management tools (7/10 points).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
For participating faculty, our program provided valued guidance on recruitment assistance and team management tools. The high demand for team-building resources suggests that junior faculty urgently need better training on how to develop and manage their own team.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33397349
doi: 10.1186/s12909-020-02396-8
pii: 10.1186/s12909-020-02396-8
pmc: PMC7784259
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3Subventions
Organisme : NIDDK NIH HHS
ID : P30 DK092926
Pays : United States
Organisme : School of Medicine, New York University
ID : The Mentor Development Program from CTSI
Références
Acad Med. 2016 Dec;91(12):1666-1675
pubmed: 27332867
Am J Prev Med. 2008 Aug;35(2 Suppl):S161-72
pubmed: 18619396
Ann Clin Lab Sci. 2018 Jul;48(4):549-552
pubmed: 30143502
Acad Med. 2002 May;77(5):377-84
pubmed: 12010691
Acad Med. 2006 Jul;81(7):668-73
pubmed: 16799296
J Prof Nurs. 2001 Nov-Dec;17(6):291-6
pubmed: 11712114
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Apr 22;111(16):5773-7
pubmed: 24733905
J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2020 Winter;40(1):69-72
pubmed: 32149950
Nurse Educ Pract. 2016 May;18:80-4
pubmed: 27067903
Res High Educ. 2011 Mar;52(2):151-177
pubmed: 22557706
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Oct 11;15(10):
pubmed: 30314271