ArticlePloS one2023
Profiling leadership: Attitudes, knowledge and training in the biological sciences.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The development and practice of good leadership skills (distinct from management skills) enhances both an individual's career development, and their organization. However, universities are known to present unique issues around the development, and practice, of good leadership. Good leadership skills should be considered essential for university staff who train (and mentor) staff or students. Currently, there is no clear evidence that staff in the biological (life) sciences undergo formal (routine) leadership skills training (or appraisal). Furthermore, what leadership training this group needs, or wants, is unknown. A questionnaire was designed to explore leadership dimensions (roles, training, perceptions, and attitudes), and incorporated the Leadership Attitudes and Belief scale (LABS) instrument. Including LABS allows evaluation of leadership attitudes as either Systemic (individual responsibility) or Hierarchical (chain-of-command). Self-selecting biological science academics and staff were recruited using an online survey. Analysis focused on academic staff (lecturer/Assistant professor, and above), and explored the relationship of leadership dimensions with key categories (career stage, gender, age, role, and professional experience). Staff were found to be knowledgeable about what leadership is, but strongly desire formal training in leadership skills and practice. Importantly, staff did not have access to specific leadership training (but did have access to management training), but felt strongly that gaining leadership skills would improve their professional skill set. Analysis found that academics in the biological sciences were oriented towards Systemic leadership, a more collective and supportive approach. It was clear that while good leadership skills are highly valued by academic staff, in practice these skills are underprovided in the biological sciences workplace. This work provides a profile, and benchmark, of leadership (current skills, and desired needs) in the biological sciences. These results provide evidence for the need to embed specific leadership skills training into professional development (and teaching) programmes in the biological sciences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.