Improving the diversity climate in academic medicine: faculty perceptions as a catalyst for institutional change Article

Full Text via DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181900f29 PMID: 19116484

Cited authors

  • Price EG, Powe NR, Kern DE, Golden SH, Wand GS, Cooper LA

Abstract

  • PURPOSE: To assess perceptions of underrepresented minority (URM) and majority faculty physicians regarding an institution's diversity climate, and to identify potential improvement strategies. METHOD: The authors conducted a cross-sectional survey of tenure-track physicians at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine from June 1, 2004 to September 30, 2005; they measured faculty perceptions of bias in department/division operational activities, professional satisfaction, career networking, mentorship, and intentions to stay in academia, and they examined associations between race/ethnicity and faculty perceptions using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 703 eligible faculty, 352 (50.1%) returned surveys. Fewer than one third of respondents reported experiences of bias in department/division activities; however, URM faculty were less likely than majority faculty to believe faculty recruitment is unbiased (21.1% versus 50.6%, P = .006). A minority of respondents were satisfied with institutional support for professional development. URM faculty were nearly four times less likely than majority faculty to report satisfaction with racial/ethnic diversity (12% versus 47.1%, P = .001) and three times less likely to believe networking included minorities (9.3% versus 32.6%, P = .014). There were no racial/ethnic differences in the quality of mentorship. More than 80% of respondents believed they would be in academic medicine in five years. However, URM faculty were less likely to report they would be at their current institution in five years (42.6% versus 70.5%, P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Perceptions of the institution's diversity climate were poor for most physician faculty and were worse for URM faculty, highlighting the need for more transparent and diversity-sensitive recruitment, promotion, and networking policies/practices.

Publication date

  • 2009

Volume

  • 84

Issue

  • 1