Article

journal of Empirical on Human Research Ethics Are Leadership and Management 1-16 © The Author(s) 2016 Reprints and permissions: Essential for Good Research? sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav 001: 10.117711556264616668775 An Interview Study of jre.sagepub.com Genetic Researchers ®SAGE

Alison L. Antes', Adelina Mart', and James M. DuBois'

Abstract Principal investigators are responsible for a myriad of leadership and management activities in their work. The practices they use to navigate these responsibilities ultimately influence the quality and integrity of research. However, leadership and management roles in research have received scant empirical examination. Semi-structured interviews with 32 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded genetic researchers revealed that they considered leadership and management essential for effective research, but their scientific training inadequately prepared them. We also report management practices that the researchers described using in their labs, as well as their perceptions of a proposed intervention to enhance laboratory leadership. These findings suggest best practices for the research community, future directions for scientific training, and implications for research on leadership and management in science.

Keywords leadership, management, research integrity, responsible conduct of research, training, leadership development, professional development, researchers, scientists

Introduction Peterson, & Mumford, 2012). This is notable given the siz- able scientific workforce, the immense investments made in A recent article describes why researchers were referred by research, and the social consequences ofthe work (Freedman, their institutions for research compliance or integrity reme- Cockburn, & Simcoe, 2015; Hurley, 2003; Ladd, Lappe, diation training (DuBois, Chibnall, Tait, & Vander Wal, McCormick, Boyce, & Cho, 2009; McCormick, Boyce, 20l6a). The authors, who run the training program, found Ladd, & Cho, 2012). Thus, there is a pressing need to exam- that most researchers who were referred are successful and ine the role of leadership in science. never intended to break research rules. The most common Leadership in science exists at multiple levels (Robledo reason for referral (49%) was failure to provide adequate et al., 2012). Leadership and management activities essen- oversight of their labs or studies, which, in turn, led to more tial to the are performed by institutional serious lapses in compliance or research integrity. These administrators (Ball, 2007; Billot, 2010; Hansson & oversight failures were frequently related to deficiencies in Monsted, 2008), project coordinators and lab managers managing workloads and setting priorities. (Pryor, Habermann, & Broome, 2007; Rico-Villademoros The quality and integrity of scientific work depend et al., 2004), and principal investigators (PIs; K. Barker, largely on the leadership and management practices of 2010; Kvaskoff & McKay, 2014). Our focus in the present investigators. Activities such as cultivating a lab culture, effort is PIs and the leadership and management responsi- mentoring trainees, assembling teams, training and supervis- bilities they encounter as they lead their research labs. ing staff, solving technical problems, and improving work processes are integral to good research (Adamo, Bauer,

Berro, Burnette, & Hartman, 2012; Bennett, Gadlin, & IWashington University School of Medicine. St. Louis. MO. USA Levine-Finley, 2010; Cohen & Cohen, 2012; Gray, 2008; Nosek et al., 2015; Roberts, Kavussanu, & Sprague, 2001; Corresponding Author: Alison L. Antes, Division of General Medica' Sciences. Washington Sapienza, 2004). Yet how scientists navigate the numerous University School of Medicine. 4523 Clayton Avenue, Campus Box 8005, social and organizational dimensions of scientific research St. Louis, MO 631 10, USA. has received virtually no attention (Hurley, 2003; Robledo, Email: [email protected]

Downloaded from jre.sagepub.eom at UTHSC AT SAN ANTONIO on November 3, 2016 2 Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

We explored the perspectives of National Institutes of 1957; Knorr, Mittermeir, Aichholzer, & Waller, 2009). Health (NIH)-funded genetic researchers regarding leader- Although we know very little about leadership and manage- ship and management in their research. Specifically, our ment in scientific research, it is clear that leadership is par- intention was to gather evidence to understand whether ticularly critical when the nature of work is complex and investigators attribute significance to leadership and man- creative (Frankel, Leonard, & Denham, 2006; M. D. Mumford, agement in their performing research. We also sought to Gibson, Giorgini, & Mecca, 2014; M. D. Mumford, Scott, understand how prepared investigators felt to perform Gaddis, & Strange, 2002). Leaders of creative work identify leadership and management responsibilities after complet- and coordinate requisite expertise for projects, create shared ing their scientific training and to identify practices that mind-sets about mission direction, define strategies for they use. carrying out the work, and orchestrate an environment characterized by intellectual stimulation, communication, What Are Leadership and Management? and productive conflict (Gemmill & Wilemon, 1994; M. D. Mumford & Licuanan, 2004; Robledo et aI., 2012). Leadership may be the most written-about phenomenon in In performing these key activities, leaders engage in a human life (Hogan & Kaiser, 2005; Zaccaro, 2014). Indeed, complex array of behaviors-some more traditionally asso- an extensive literature examining leadership and manage- ciated with "management" (e.g., planning, obtaining ment in organizations exists in the psychology and manage- resources, providing feedback) and others more tradition- ment disciplines (Bass & Bass, 2008; Day, 2014; DeRue, ally associated with "leadership" (e.g., coaching, modeling, Nahrgang, Wellman, & Humphrey, 2011; Schein, 2010; building relationships, and providing socio-emotional sup- Yukl, 1989). In this literature, scholars debate the impor- port, particularly in the face of obstacles and setbacks; M. tance of distinguishing between leadership and manage- D. Mumford, Scott, & Gaddis, 2003; National Research ment; indeed, they are both essential and often overlap Council, 2015b). The describes some (National Research Council, 2015b; Northouse, 2013). interpersonal elements of scientific work (e.g., communica- The many models and theories of leadership and man- tion, shared values, and trust) in the mentoring and team agement reflect in part their complexity and context-depen- science literatures (Adams, 2014; Bird, 2001; Gewin, 2015; dent nature (Marion & Uhl-Bien, 2001; National Research Straus, Johnson, Marquez, & Feldman, 2013), but gener- Council, 2015b). Some scholars describe leadership as hav- ally, the social dynamics of the research context are over- ing a longer term orientation and management a shorter looked. The collective nature of scientific research (Adams, term focus. Leaders are forward-thinking and change-ori- 2014; Binz-Scharf, Kalish, & Paik, 2015; Ledford, 2015) ented, while managers focus on consistency and efficiency suggests models of shared and distributed leadership may in accomplishing tasks (Kotter, 2008; Maccoby, 2000). be appropriate in scientific work (Bolden, 2011; Drath Thus, theories of leadership often emphasize mechanisms et aI., 2008; Friedrich, Vessey, Schuelke, Ruark, & such as vision, inspiration, and relationships aimed at influ- Mumford, 2009). These models emphasize the need to draw encing people, and models of management emphasize 011 requisite expertise at necessary points during projects, mechanisms such as planning, directing, and organizing and they construe leadership as the collective mind-sets and aimed at overseeing work (Bass, 1990; Conger, 1999; practices that facilitate direction, alignment, and Maccoby, 2000; Zaleznik, 1977). commitment. Overall, leadership and management may be defined as In addition, scientific research is highly project-based. the social mechanisms and organizational processes by This implies that what constitutes effective leadership may which people achieve success through collective effort vary at different stages (Buijs, 2007; Robledo et al., 2012). (Kaiser, Hogan, & Craig, 2008). Notably, effective leader- Thus, PIs likely need to be highly adaptive as they manage ship may require hierarchical and distributed forms of influ- different projects and teams, particularly as they engage dif- ence (Pearce, 2004); however, contemporary leadership ferent individuals, from staff to students, post-docs, peers, theories increasingly define leadership as a dynamic, shared and superiors (Bonetta, 2006; Chi, 2010; Cohen & Cohen, social process, rather than a quality of specific individuals 2012). Models of leadership emphasizing pragmatic forms per se (Avolio, Walumbwa, & Weber, 2009). of leadership-using technical expertise and problem-solv- ing strategies as means to enhance individual and group How Are Leadership and Management capacity to perform work effectively-may also be particu- Germane to Scientiftc Research? larly appropriate in the scientific context (M. D. Mumford et aI., 2003; M. D. Mumford & Van Doom, 2001). In the existing small body of empirical evidence, leadership Finally, considerations about integrity, transparency, and in scientific groups and organizations is associated with ethics are integral to performing scientific work (Bird, research team attitudes and scientific performance outcomes 2014; Buck, 2015; Devereaux, 2014; Macrina, 2014). In (Andrews & Farris, 1967; Barnowe, 1975; Baumgartel, orchestrating research, some of the considerations

Downloaded from ire.saaepub.ccm at UTHSC AT SAN ANTONIO on November 3, 2016 Antes et 01. 3

researchers encounter include using best practices to ensure Furthermore, although tenuous, there may be an assumption data integrity, avoiding biases that undermine objective that scientific work can advance even in spite of poor lead- methods and interpretations, executing peer review fairly, ership (Hogan & Kaiser, 2005; Sapienza, 2004). complying with research regulations, and managing compe- The contemporary scientific community recognizes that tition and pressure (De Vries, Anderson, & Martinson, scientific work is not a sole endeavor (Bennett et aI., 2010; 2006; DuBois, 2004; DuBois et al., 2016b; Nuzzo, 2015; Hemlin, Allwood, Martin, & Mumford, 2013). However, Parker, Vermeulen, & Penders, 2011). Furthermore, scien- the romantic notion of an individual scientist working alone tists must model responsible behaviors to those whom they to achieve breakthroughs lingers in thinking about scientific train, mentor, and manage (Bird & Sprague, 2001; Ripley, work (M. D. Mumford et al., 2003). This notion may Markowitz, Nichols-Casebolt, Williams, & Macrina, 2012). account at least in part for the neglect of the social nature of Navigating this environment requires leadership and man- the modern scientific enterprise. In addition, researchers agement skills in their highest form. Individuals must view the scientific process as an objective, dispassionate engage in self-evaluation and continually scrutinize and endeavor--one potentially devoid of significant human and improve work processes and practices (Ashford & DeRue, social elements (Markowetz, 2015; McCormick et aI., 2012; Unsworth & Mason, 2012). Although moral and posi- 2012). However, the recent recognition of the fallibilities of tive forms of leadership are not the only viable models of the scientific process (Collins & Tabak, 2014; Nuzzo, 2015) leadership (M. D. Mumford & Fried, 2014), matters of have highlighted that science is, in fact, a deeply human integrity and ethics are elemental to notions of scientific endeavor. Nonetheless, these notions may have fostered the work (Kalichman, 2014b). Thus, models of leadership in sidelining of the social dimensions of science. scientific research should consider practices, such as mod- eling ethical behavior and creating ethical work climates (Barnett & Vaicys, 2000; Brown & Trevino, 2006), associ- Research Questions ated with rigorous, transparent, and ethical research. In sum, researchers work in a complex professional envi- Overall, models of leadership in science are in their ronment on multi-faceted, high-demand work. This work infancy. Future work must examine leadership in science as requires leadership and management. The objective of the its own phenomenon as existing models (which typically present study was to provide initial empirical evidence focus on corporate and political settings) may be inadequate regarding the importance that genetic researchers attach to for explaining leadership in this unique context (Arnon, leadership and management in their scientific work. Overall, 1989; National Research Council, 2015b; Robledo et aI., we addressed the following questions: 2012). In the health care setting, for example, attempts to adopt Six Sigma management strategies-which have been Research Question 1:Do PIs perceive leadership and man- successful in transforming manufacturing industries-have agement activities as essential to conducting effective yielded limited evidence oftheir effectiveness (DelliFraine, research? Wang, McCaughey, Langabeer, & Erwin, 2013). Research Question 2: How prepared did they feel for these activities after completing their scientific training? Why Have Leadership and Management in In addition, we identified management practices that suc- Scientific Research Been Overlooked? cessful, funded investigators use in their work and inquired about their openness to an intervention aimed at fostering There are several potential reasons that the scientific com- effective lab practices. munity has overlooked leadership and management in per- forming scientific work. These reasons relate primarily to assumptions about the nature of researchers and the nature Method of scientific work. Study Design and Sample Researchers tend to be autonomous, self-driven individ- uals who are intrinsically motivated by their work (M. D. We conducted semi-structured interviews with NIH-funded Mumford et aI., 2003). Thus, the notion that researchers genetic researchers at Washington University School of require external motivation, such as motivation provided Medicine in St. Louis, a research-intensive medical center through the influence of a leader, seems dubious (M. D. that has one of the four human genome sequencing centers Mumford et al., 2014; Robledo et aI., 2012). Indeed, given funded by the National Human Genome Research Institute. the self-confident, conscientious, and achievement-oriented Our target sample was biomedical researchers conducting nature of scientists, it may be difficult for leaders to engage diverse types of research (e.g., lab, human, and animal) in influence attempts (M. D. Mumford et aI., 2003; Robledo funded across NIH institutes but sharing a common focus et aI., 2012). However, as outlined above, models of dis- on genetic or genomic science. At this stage, to foster inter- tributed and pragmatic leadership may be appropriate. pretation of our findings, we focused within one academic

DO'M'lloaded from jre.sagepub.com at UTIiSC AT SAN ANTONIO on November 3, 2016 4 Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics medical center to minimize the potential for differences for their reactions to a potential program aimed at providing attributable to varied institutional cultures. PIs with guidance in lab leadership and management. We identified PIs funded through R (research), P (cen- A secondary area of focus was PIs' perspectives on ethical ter), U (collaborative), or K (career development) grants and social issues in research. In this manuscript, we report using the NIH RePORTER database. We sought investiga- on the primary focus-leadership and management. tors diverse in career stage; hence our inclusion of PIs A member of our study team (A.M.) conducted the inter- funded on K grants. A keyword search (e.g., gene, genetic, views after training provided by the first author. For the genomic, exome) of project abstracts active as of September convenience of the PIs, we allowed them to choose whether 2014 yielded 407 unique project PIs at Washington to participate via telephone (n = 20) or in-person (n = 12). University. We utilized institutional or lab websites to The average length of the interviews was 34 min (SD = 16). identify the gender of the investigators so that we could All of the participants gave consent for us to audio-record stratify our sample proportionally for gender representa- the interview. To obtain demographics, we asked partici- tion among the funded investigators (70% male, 30% pants to describe their career stage and type of research. We female). We also stratified our sample across the NIH insti- collected data on their degrees and whether they were origi- tutes that had funded the research. nally from the United States or an international background We randomly sampled 30 to 35 investigators at a time via biographical information posted online on institutional across the two strata in each of four rounds of recruitment. or lab websites. We began to achieve saturation of themes at To refine the initial RePORTER query, we reviewed the about 20 interviews, but completed 32 interviews to ensure project descriptions to ensure that the projects did involve a that the themes remained consistent upon achieving a fuller, primary or secondary aim in genetics or genomics and more representative sample in terms of gender and career replaced (at random) those that did not. In total, we emailed stage. A professional transcriptionist transcribed the inter- 135 investigators inviting them to participate in a 30- to views verbatim. 45-minute telephone or in-person interview focused on ''understanding the challenges and practices of researchers Data Analysis in genetic and genomics." We followed up after 1 week with a second email and a phone call. We received responses We performed a content analysis of the interview transcripts from seven (5%) declining to participate, 11 (8%) indicating (Roller & Lavrakas, 2015; Vogt, Vogt, Gardner, & Haeffele, they did not consider themselves genetic researchers, and 32 2014) using an inductive coding scheme developed from (24%) agreeing to participate. The Washington University in the participants' responses. First, one member of the study St. Louis institutional review board approved this study (ID team (A.L.A.), an organizational psychologist, read the 201409169). PIs received a consent information sheet via transcripts to identify themes and subthemes present in the email before participating in the study and had the opportu- responses and to develop a coding guide consisting of the nity to ask questions before the interviews began. themes and their descriptions. The senior author (J.M.D.) reviewed the coding guide. Next, A.L.A. and A.M. met to Data Collection discuss the coding scheme before applying it to 10% of the interviews. Both coders read the transcripts and indicated The interview script consisted of open-ended questions whether each theme was present or not present by entering with follow-up questions used as needed and as time per- 1 (present) or 0 (not present) in a Microsoft Excel spread- mitted. The experience of the senior investigator (lM.D.), sheet used to manage the data. After independent coding, and his research on professionalism and responsible con- the coders met to discuss issues that had arisen in applying duct in research (DuBois, 2004; DuBois et al., 2016b), as the coding scheme and reached consensus about any differ- well as the first author's familiarity with the leadership lit- ences in interpretation. Before A.M. proceeded to code the erature (Antes & Mumford, 2012; Antes & Schuelke, 2011; remaining transcripts, we established that the guide could M. D. Mumford, Antes, Caughron, & Friedrich, 2008) be applied with satisfactory inter-rater agreement (Kappa = guided the generation of interview questions. However, .74). We report frequencies and percentages for the themes questions were intentionally broad in focus to avoid prim- that emerged in the interviews and provide quotes to illus- ing participants to discuss leadership and management. Our trate the PIs' responses. opening question was simply, "Thinking about what it takes to do your research effectively, in addition to scientific Results knowledge and technical expertise, what skills have you found that you need?" The overall focus of our interview As shown in Table 1, the participants consisted of 32 NIH- was to understand whether PIs viewed leadership and man- funded investigators who described their career stage as agement as important to their research and to discover prac- very junior (16%), somewhat junior (25%), mid-career tices they utilize. In addition, we asked the participants (41%), or senior (19%); 69% were male and 31% female.

DO'M1loaded from jre.sagepub.com at UTHSC AT SAN ANTONIO on November 3, 2016 Antes et 01. 5

Table I. Sample Demographics. The most common responses included management skills (56%). Investigators described needing to manage not No. of % of researchers researchers only people in particular but also projects. Next, investiga- tors highlighted the importance of collaboration skills Type of research' (44%), including being able to bring together multiple peo- Human 13 41 ple and work well with diverse individuals. Relatedly, Animal 20 63 investigators reported needing interpersonal skills (41%)- Bench 19 59 skills that foster their ability to interact well with people and Computational/statistical 9 28 communicate with them. Level of experience A small subgroup of investigators (16%) specifically Very junior/early career 5 16 mentioned leadership skills, or activities related to leader- Somewhat junior 8 25 ship, such as motivating or inspiring people and creating a Mid-career 13 41 caring environment. Overall, investigators utilized "man- Senior 6 19 Type of degree agement" more commonly in their terminology to describe their work-related tasks. Notably, just 9% of investigators PhD only 22 69 MD/PhD both 10 31 mentioned "mentoring," or mentoring activities, such as Gender developing the skills of others, teaching, supporting, or Male 22 69 guiding. This is interesting considering that, of the terms Female 10 31 used in scientific research, mentoring is more common than Nation of origin management or leadership. The United States 18 56 International 13 41 PIs Described Learning Necessary Skills Through Unknown 3 Trial and Error Note. Pis = principal investigators. 'Many Pis (66%) indicated multiple types; accordingly percentages equal We asked researchers how they learned the skills that they more than 100. need that are not scientific in nature. As shown in Table 3, the most common response, provided by 73% of the inves- tigators, was that they learned to navigate management and Their research included human (41%), animal (63%), bench leadership responsibilities "on-the-job" through "trial-and- (59%), and computational/statistical (28%) research; many error." Investigators described a process of making mis- investigators (66%) indicated that their research involved takes and then trying something new, and they portrayed the multiple types. The majority of participants (69%) had a learning process as occurring "on the fly," through "osmo- PhD degree, and 31% had an MD and PhD degree. sis," through "trial by fire," or by "playing it totally by ear." Approximately 41% were originally from an international Several PIs specifically noted the lack of formal training location. Nearly all of the investigators reported having on these issues, and many emphasized the need to learn these multiple ongoing collaborations at the institution and exter- skills earlier. In addition, several described their lack of skills nal to the institution. All but a small subgroup of the "very and the slow learning process as "haphazard and hazardous" junior" investigators reported having post-docs, graduate and "high-stakes." One described worrying about having det- students, and/or undergraduates working in their labs. rimental effects on the careers of individuals in the lab stat- ing, "You hope that you don't ruin someone's life in the PIs Spontaneously Reported That Leadership process. It's pretty high stakes to be learning on-the-job." and Management Skills Are Essential Many of the investigators specifically noted that their graduate or post-doctoral experience did not adequately Our first question was general before we probed more spe- prepare them; however, 33% reported that their graduate cifically about issues related to leadership and management. training or post-doctoral experience provided some devel- We began by asking investigators to describe what skills, in opment in this regard. Another 40% mentioned learning addition to scientific knowledge and technical expertise, some of these skills from mentors or other models. they have found that they need to do research effectively. As However, a sub-set of these individuals reported learning shown in Table 2, leadership and management skills emerged practices to avoid by working with poor models. Finally, as the dominant theme. Nearly all investigators (97%) indi- 30% of the researchers who were also physicians (those cated one or more leadership or management skill. (The one with MD/PhD degrees) mentioned that their medical resi- investigator who did not mention a leadership or manage- dency assisted in learning skills necessary for interacting ment skill was a member of the "very junior" group.) well with others.

Downloaded from jre.sagepub.com at UTHSC AT SAN ANTONIO on November 3, 2016 6 Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

Table 2. Leadership and Management Skills Needed for Effective Research (N = 32).

No. of times % of Illustrative quotes addressed researchers

Management skills "One big thing is management, and that's the thing that I kind of wasn't 18 S6 quite expecting when I started, but it is a pretty big responsibility ... that is a component in my career." "Managing people, and every PI I've ever talked to, this is where we have no idea what we're doing." Collaboration skills "You need to be able to negotiate and collaborate well with multiple 14 44 people from multiple different backgrounds." "Being able to rely on other people, and to be able to bring lots of different groups together is a skill that I definitely rely on." Interpersonal skills "Being able to communicate with people in my lab that are coming from 13 41 all sorts of different diverse areas and backgrounds, both domestic and foreign researchers." "Interact in a productive way with other people ... communicating with them ... and listening to them." Business skills "Figuring out budget issues and how much to pay people, how to you II 34 know, write job ads, interview people .... " "How to budget a lab, I've never learned that, I sort of really have to learn on the fly." Intellectual qualities "Curiosity and perseverance are the most important things." 10 31 "Organization, logical thinking, reasoning, and perseverance, these are all important characteristics." Leadership skills "Being an effective leader to motivate them for what needs to be done S 16 for the lab." "In terms of environment ... it's critical for me that people who come to the lab ... demonstrate an innate ability to care about each other. Most of science is failure ... so you need people who will care for you." Mentoring skills "A PI is also a mentor, so we really need to train students in the science 3 9 the right way. They're not just coming to the lab to work for the lab, they came here for their training .... "

Note. The only additional response provided was writing skills. which 12 (38%) Pis mentioned. Pis = principal investigators.

PIs Reported Being Unprepared for Lab "[It's] shocking the dramatic transition that occurs, the Management Responsibilities type of responsibilities and time management from going from post-doc to running a lab ... you go from doing the We asked PIs how well prepared they felt when they started work to managing the work and redefine what works their careers to navigate issues in research that are not sci- means." entific in nature or to mentor trainees and manage staff. Most were forthcoming about lacking preparation. Overall, PIs Described Key Leadership and Management 50% felt that they were inadequately prepared, and 40% Practices described being modestly prepared. Notably, just 10% stated that they were prepared (n = 30; two responses were We asked the PIs to describe their mentoring practices or un-codeable due to unclear answers). Several mentioned management style at this point in their careers. With the that they had been overly confident, and others noted that exception of a couple "very junior" investigators, most PIs training for science is different from the skills needed for were able to articulate their approach to managing their running a lab. A couple speculated that they might be fur- labs. Overall, the themes included a constructive set of ther ahead in their careers if they had been better prepared. practices (shown in Table 4). Although most of the mid- As illustrated in the following quotes, the PIs described the career and senior PIs reported feeling fairly confident in early stages of their careers, in particular, as challenging. their approach at this stage, some noted the need for con- One researcher noted, "I would say that's [management] tinual refinement, feedback, and adjustment. In addition, a something that I wasn't prepared for, it was sort of like couple noted that they recognized that they may need to jumping into the deep end as far as that goes." Another change practices such as being rigid about deadlines, too described the transition to running a lab as follows: "hands off," or "micro-managing."

Downloaded from jre.sagepub.com at UTHSC AT SAN ANTONIO on November 3, 2016 Antes et 0/. 7

Table 3. Methods for Learning Necessary Skills.

No. of times % of Illustrative quotes addressed researchers

On-the-job, trial- "When you start your own lab it's sort of the ultimate on the job training 22 73 and-error because before that you're taught how to be a scientist, you're not taught how to be a lab manager." "I set up my own lab, and so there were a lot of mistakes made right away, but I think I always look back on myself and reflect on myself and the situations and learn through those mistakes." "Navigating that is totally by trial and error. I'm not even sure, I'm getting better, I'm probably better now over time, but you know, it needs constant refinement." Mentors or other "I think I learned by observing my former advisor. I was very lucky to be a 12 40 models student and a post-doc with two fantastic mentors." "Seeing what's worked in other labs and doing those things, and what hasn't worked in other labs, and trying not to do those things." Graduate or "I trained a grad student before, especially when I was a post-doc, so it's not 10 33 post-doctoral a total shock to me." experience "I was very fortunate to be in a really large, well-funded lab in my post-doc where I was allowed to do a fair amount of mentoring there." Natural ability "I'm a people person; I like to interact with people." 4 13 "Some of it, I think, comes from temperament." Medical residency "Being a resident and running resident teams or being a fellow and running 3 30' a clinical team, kind of helped translate into how do you get everybody to work together towards a common goal." "For the people aspect of it, the residency actually was really a great training ... it involved a lot of interaction with people."

Note. n = 30 (2 un-codeable responses). Pis = principal investigators. '10 Pis were MD/PhDs; therefore. the denominator for this statistic was 10.

Of the themes reported, the top responses included commitment required of a PI. We described a feedback fostering open communication (41%) and meeting regu- and coaching intervention that would utilize a lab climate larly (38%). The underlying theme of these responses survey to obtain feedback about lab practices and culture was problem solving. Open communication and regular from members of the lab and the PI's own self-assessment. meetings allowed the lab to address problems immedi- Subsequently, PIs would receive aggregated results and ately and move projects forward. Several PIs also noted coaching in areas of desired change in lab practices. After being available daily for ad hoc meetings. Some (28%) developing an initial plan for change, coaching would take emphasized the critical importance of finding a balance place quarterly via telephone to assist PIs with following between guiding people while also encouraging them to through on their plans. be independent. In addition, one third (31%) noted the A majority of PIs (74%) strongly supported the program importance of personalizing one's management or men- and described it as valuable (n = 31; one response was miss- toring style to individual needs. Other themes included ing due to time constraints). A small group (19%) was creating a positive environment (28%) and setting clear unsure about the proposed intervention or thought it could deadlines (25%). be potentially useful. Only two individuals (6%) stated that it was not a good idea, citing that it may be time-consuming PIs Welcomed a Proposed Management or difficult to get anonymous feedback from members of Intervention the lab. Several of the PIs' statements illustrated their open- ness to improving their management practices and reiter- We wanted to ascertain whether investigators would wel- ated their recognition of the importance oflab management. come programs intended to assist them with lab leadership One researcher indicated, and management. Rather than asking them about their general interest, we contextualized this question by asking "I would welcome it. I would always like to improve my lab, the PIs about their reactions to a specific hypothetical improve the culture in the lab, and any advice or belp tbat I can intervention-c-one that would be intensive in terms of the get from the outside I would welcome."

Downloaded from jre.sagepub.com at UTHSC AT SAN ANTONIO on November 3, 2016 8 Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

Table 4. Mentoring and Management Practices (N = 32).

No. of times % of Illustrative quotes addressed researchers

Foster open "If something isn't working out, there's a communication that occurs; how 13 41 communication do we try to fix that?" "I really encourage the people in the lab to speak their mind, I listen to them, I consult with them on many, many things before I make a decision." Meet regularly "Meet with everybody on a regular basis, at least once a week, to have 12 38 them update me with what's going on." "Review everybody's work at least once a week pretty thoroughly to go through all of the technical details ... usually I talk with them briefly [on a daily basis 1 .... " Personalize approach to "I take time to get to know people, trying to understand their level of 10 31 each individual expertise, their strengths maybe gaps exist in their training ... I establish a relationship then try to be attentive to different styles and different individual needs." "I tend to adapt my management style to individual needs." Guide while encouraging "They're supposed to be learning how to be independent, so I try to 9 28 independence encourage that .... I give advice and they comment, but I try to give them opportunity to really shape their own research." "I think on one hand, to be really close to my trainees and trying to understand what they are doing, advising them, and at the same time giving them significant freedom in what they are doing from day to day." Create positive "I want everyone in this lab to be happy .... I want to make sure this is an 9 28 environment environment I provide. I try very hard to make everybody comfortable and happy." "Research is never going to be a very smooth process ... people in my lab deal with that very well .... For my part, you have to have patience ... we always stick together and try to find the solution for the problems." Set clear deadlines "I set pretty firm guidelines in terms of what I expect .... I don't tell them 8 25 how to get them done, I just kind of set the bar." "We usually discuss what the projects for the week are, and what our goals are for when those projects are complete ... and how to adjust plans if things aren't going according to the plan." Expect self-motivation "My expectation is you drive yourself .... You need to be self-driven." 5 16 "I expect people to be self-motivated, and to generate their own thoughts .... I work well with people who are kind of self-driven."

Our question prompted another researcher to note, those who supported the proposed program emphasized that Pis at early career stages in particular might benefit. As I said, you're not taught management .... Am I managing However, one PI's comment highlighted the importance of most efficiently? I don't know .... I would be open to hearing the timing of interventions, noting that something like this about ideas ... I'd be flexible to change; it would be good to might be most appropriate once one's research team started have feedback. to get particularly complicated.

Finally, another investigator stated, I would say I wouldn't have felt much value for it maybe five years ago. It's kind of at a point where there's enough going on If! look back ... and I look at tbe single thing that I've screwed in a lab where it starts to get complicated personnel wise; then up the most it would be management ... management and that would start to be really useful. In a small lab with junior management practices, and execution. Anything that helps that faculty, I wouldn't necessarily find value in it, but at this point game would be better, and especially if people are like, you I would .... You don't even know what your issues are going know, particularly focused on science. to be until you're kind of in the middle of it.

Although what we proposed was intensive, several of the Discussion PIs stressed that they liked the tailored nature of the pro- gram, and that there is a need generally for leadership and Our interviews with NIH-funded genetic researchers revealed management resources tailored to scientists. About half of that researchers consider leadership and management

Downloaded from jre.sagepub.com at Un-iSC AT SAN ANTONIO on November 3, 2016 Antes et 01. 9 essential for performing research effectively. However, PIs addition, if extant resources and programs are available, reported that they were inadequately prepared to navigate leaders should ensure that they are sufficiently advertised, the social and organizational elements of their scientific particularly when onboarding new investigators. Not only careers based solely on their scientific training. They could such efforts improve practices in performing scien- emphasized that they learned the necessary leadership and tific work and enhance the quality oftraining and mentoring management skills on-the-job through trial-and-error. of junior scientists, but support from administrative offi- Notably, the traditional means used to impart scientists with cials may also influence the broader institutional culture. requisite knowledge and skills-namely, mentoring and Finally, institutions should assess the outcomes of such pro- graduate training-did not appear to be significant sources grams and share their findings with others in the scientific for learning to perform leadership and management activi- community. ties central to research. Certainly, scientific training affords trainees with problem-solving skills that may facilitate Educational Implications acquiring such expertise through experience (K. Barker, 2010), but this study reinforces the proposal that the scien- Of course, a major issue moving forward is what should be tific community must better prepare scientists to navigate the nature of training and development efforts for scientists. these aspects of their careers (Evans, 2012; Hede, 2007; A set of established approaches for leadership and manage- Kvaskoff & McKay, 2014; Laursen, 2014; Leiserson & ment development and education exist in the organizational McVinney, 2015; Seeliger, 2012). The present effort pro- psychology and business disciplines (Day, Fleenor, Atwater, vides some recommendations for how to approach such an Sturm, & McKee, 2014; DeRue & Myers, 2014; Doh, 2003; effort. However, we need additional research on approaches Snook, Nohria, & Khurana, 2011), which may provide best for developing scientists' leadership and management practices to guide future work. However, it is unclear which skills and basic research on leadership and management in techniques and topics translate to the scientific context, research. reinforcing the importance of defining learning objectives and assessing the outcomes of training and developmental interventions (Antes & Schuelke, 2011; Arthur, Bennett, Best Practices Edens, & Bell, 2003; Riggio, 2008). Our findings suggest several best practices for researchers. In addition to traditional training models, we should also Overall, it is important to be intentional about leadership explore other potentially viable developmental techniques, and management practices that one uses and to refine these such as providing investigators feedback from lab climate practices continually across one's career. Elemental to this surveys and coaching (Ely et a!., 20 I0; Feldman & Lankau, effort is openness to feedback from lab members and advice 2005; M. D. Mumford, Peterson, & Robledo, 2013). from peers and colleagues. In addition, one must be mindful Notably, new measures of leader effectiveness tailored to of the outcomes of different approaches to coordinating and the scientific enterprise may be necessary to assess training monitoring the work of research team members. Important and developmental interventions (and such measures would practices include fostering open communication and meet- facilitate research efforts as well). Furthermore, future dis- ing regularly, particularly to serve the interest of trouble- cussion about leadership and management training and shooting problems. It is also important to be attentive to the development for investigators should consider educational individual needs of those whom one manages or mentors practices in undergraduate and graduate education in the and to balance providing appropriate guidance while also sciences (National Research Council, 2015a). allowing independence. Finally, it is prudent to gauge and Although additional basic research on scientific leader- monitor the work group climate or culture within a lab, ship and management must guide appropriate content, working toward fostering one conducive to creativity, integ- existing evidence suggests that social judgment and inter- rity, and productivity. Our findings also suggest that scien- personal skills, in addition to problem-solving skills and tists, particularly those early in their careers, should seek technical expertise, underlie leadership in professional set- out available resources and training opportunities. Finally, tings. Such competencies include the ability to build and it is important for researchers to be mindful that their behav- maintain relationships, present oneself well, communicate iors and practices as lab directors and research mentors effectively, build teams, and support others (R. A. Barker, have a lasting impact on those within their labs. 1997; Hogan & Kaiser, 2005; M. D. Mumford et a!., 2003; These points imply broader practical recommendations M. D. Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, & Jacobs, 2000). for leaders of research institutions. In the academic setting Indeed, the PIs in our interviews emphasized the impor- studied in the present effort, investigators desired access to tance of these skills, and they appear to be emphasized in leadership and management resources and training opportu- existing, albeit limited, leadership training programs offered nities tailored to scientists. Institutional leaders should for scientists (Laursen, 2014). Coupled with scientists' assess whether such a need exists in their organizations. In existing problem-solving skills and technical expertise,

Downloaded from jre.sagepub.com at UTHSC AT SAN ANTONIO on November 3, 2016 10 Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

enhanced social and interpersonal skills would likely better well-executed training would save investigators time by equip investigators for responsibilities such as fostering an helping them to address issues before they emerge and open, innovative, high-integrity work environment, engag- being more mindful about practices that foster successful ing others in participatory decision making, and effectively research. Indeed, some of the PIs in this study reported distributing leadership among lab members or research learning things the "hard way" and speculated that this had team members (Salazar, Lant, Fiore, & Salas, 2012). slowed them down; others have reinforced the hazards of However, to be effective and credible, leadership develop- learning to lead "on-the-fly" (Kreeger, 1997). Overall, this ment programs, particularly those focusing on emotional potential critique reinforces the need to utilize best prac- and interpersonal competencies, must be grounded in tices and assess leadership development and training research (Riggio & Lee, 2007). efforts to demonstrate their value. In addition, offering In addition, business skills, such as planning, budget- support and services on-demand, for instance, through ing, staffing, monitoring progress, and setting priorities, consultation services or access to online resources, might are imperative (Hogan & Kaiser, 2005; T. V. Mumford, allow investigators to obtain the right kind of information Campion, & Morgeson, 2007). Indeed, the investigators and assistance at the right times. we interviewed raised this point. Such skills assist Second, engaging issues related to "soft skills" and ask- researchers with tasks such as hiring and training staff, ing for assistance to improve one's practices may be unfa- planning project timelines and milestones, and overseeing miliar to researchers who tend to be analytic, self-reliant, work. In designing training and development interven- and self-confident (Feist, 1998). Moreover, those trained in tions, it may also be necessary to consider the relative pri- the life and physical sciences may be skeptical of the ority of different competencies at different stages in a insights about leadership and management practices offered scientist's career (M. D. Mumford, Marks, Connelly, by the social sciences (Sapienza, 2004). However, research- Zaccaro, & Reiter-Palmon, 2000). In addition, develop- ers are naturally open-minded, which many mitigate these mental efforts should consider the dynamic needs of concerns (Robledo et al., 2012). It is important, however, to investigators across the stages of scientific projects (Antes consider how to best frame such efforts. It is unclear to what & Schuelke, 2011; National Research Council, 2015b), extent investigators find different terminology appealing- including how investigators simultaneously manage mul- for example, career development, professional develop- tiple projects in multiple stages. Moreover, the skills ment, leadership development, or management training. investigators need may also vary depending on the level of Finally, although leadership training and development support provided by institutions such as support in budget are certainly not a panacea, future work might consider development and management. whether a leadership and management framework provides Another model for training and developing researchers an umbrella for integrating the currently disparate conver- would prepare them to be reflective and adaptive in their sations about topics such as mentoring, responsible conduct approach to leading and managing in their labs and across in research, professionalism, mentoring, research rigor and their careers (Ashford & DeRue, 2012; Nesbit, 2012). Such transparency, and team science. These topics all highlight an approach would encourage investigators to recognize social and organizational dimensions in designing, per- leadership and management responsibilities and roles in forming, and communicating scientific work. Such an scientific work and foster a leader self-identity (Day & approach might answer calls to make responsible conduct Harrison, 2007; Pearce, 2007). A reflective, adaptive of research training more relevant to the daily work of sci- approach allows individuals to change and tailor their lead- entists and to explore ways to foster engagement of ethical ership style and practices appropriately for a given context, issues in research through connecting them directly to the project, or career stage, and it facilitates self-directed learn- practice of science (Devereaux, 2014; Kalichman, 2014a; ing and growth by encouraging individuals to extract les- Smith,2001). sons from their experience (Ashford & DeRue, 2012; Cohen & Cohen, 2012; Puccio, Mance, & Zacko-Smith, 2013). Research Agenda The comments of the participants in our study suggest that they engage in this reflective approach to some extent intui- Notably, the basis for effective leadership development tively, and formal training could provide support and interventions is an understanding of the practice of leader- knowledge to accelerate this natural approach to developing ship and management in science. Thus, there is an urgent leadership skills. need for empirical research examining the social and orga- Several practical considerations emerge from these nizational elements of scientific research. This research points. First, investigators already juggle many duties and should examine the mechanisms and processes proposed in responsibilities (James, 2011; National Science Board, the existing, although scarce, literature on scientific leader- 2014). Thus, it may seem unreasonable to suggest that ship (Hemlin et a!., 2013; M. D. Mumford et al., 2003; they participate in leadership training. Theoretically, National Research Council, 2015b; Robledo et a!., 2012).

Downloaded from ire.sacepub.ccm at UTHSC AT SAN ANTONIO on November 3, 2016 Antes et 0/. II

For instance, this work might examine processes in team life, or physical science disciplines may be best equipped alignment and knowledge integration (Drath et a1., 2008; to use social science methods to test research questions Salazar et a1., 2012). Other issues such as conflict resolu- while also appreciating unique features of specific scien- tion, project management, building a lab culture, cross-cul- tific disciplines. However, funding agencies and journals tural communication, and interacting with difficult typically focus on specific diseases or disciplines. colleagues may also be fruitful directions (K. Barker, 2010; Research issues that span all scientific research do not Cohen & Cohen, 2012). There is an existing, expansive have clear funding or publication outlets (Ioannidis, base of related research in the workplace psychology and Fanelli, Dunne, & Goodman, 2015). Often, this work is disciplines, but future research published in a wide range of disciplines, making it diffi- must take into account the unique qualities of scientific cult for scholars studying similar issues to locate other work and the distinct qualities of staff and collaborators authors' work (Ioannidis et al., 2015). In addition, these engaged in it. efforts are likely to be unfunded secondary projects of Future work must also examine explicit connections interest to individual researchers, and as such, poten- between leadership and management practices and the eth- tially funded inadequately to address the necessary large ics, integrity, and transparency of research. With a few nota- and complex questions. ble exceptions-for instance, an investigator recounted realizing that inadequate oversight of a graduate student Limitations had comprised the integrity of data generated during the student's tenure in the lab-investigators in our study gen- These findings provide some useful future directions for erally did not raise such connections. Two opposing expla- research, training, and development regarding leadership nations may account for this. Investigators may implicitly and management in science, but they are not without limita- acknowledge the connection between practices they use to tions. The first limitation relates to the generalizability of manage their research and the effectiveness and integrity of the findings because the PIs were at one academic institu- the research. Alternatively, PIs may lack awareness of the tion. However, this allowed us to hold constant the potential significance of ethical issues in their work (McCormick influence of institutional culture, which was not of interest et al., 2012). It is also important to understand connections in this particular study. In addition, we ensured that our between management practices and the productivity of sci- sample was diverse and representative of biomedical entific labs and teams-what practices yield scientific pro- researchers conducting NIH-funded genetic research. They ductivity while also supporting the quality and integrity of were diverse in terms of nation of origin (i.e., international the work? or the United States), and they conducted varied types of The present study focused primarily on management research (e.g., human, animal, computational) funded by a issues in the lab setting, but future work should also con- variety of NIH institutes. They were also diverse in career sider the multiple levels at which investigators may lead in stage, and our sample was representative of the NIH-funded their careers and the multiple types of scientific organiza- population in terms of gender. tions (M. D. Mumford et al., 2003). For example, leader- Another potential limitation includes that the investiga- ship takes place in collaborative teams, including multi-site tors self-selected as volunteers for the interview study. and international teams, in scientific disciplines (e.g., lead- Therefore, they may be those most interested in issues ership roles in a professional society), in communities and related to operating a lab or leading a research team. Indeed, among the public, and in administrative roles (e.g., a divi- their responses suggested that they were reflective about sion chief or department chair). In addition, leadership their lab management practices. Overall, it is unclear across multiple levels must be considered, for instance, whether our findings would generalize to other groups of how administrative leadership at the organizational or scientists in other settings. departmental level influences leadership within labs (Bland Finally, all of our participants could be considered highly & Ruffin, 1992; Robledo et a1., 2012). Future research on successful. They are PIs at a leading medical research cen- leadership and management in science will also need to ter with NIH funding. Although this is a limitation in terms consider differences and commonalities across academic, of the generalizability of findings, it is also a strength. in industry, and entrepreneurial organizational contexts (M, terms of learning about the management practices of suc- D. Mumford et a1.,2003). cessful researchers. To address these research questions about scientific leadership, we must consider several significant practical Conclusion issues that emerge. Notably, who should study, fund, and publish "" (Hu, 2016) on leadership and In conclusion, the NIH-funded PIs whom we interviewed at management in research? Interdisciplinary teams com- a top-tier U.S. academic medical center decidedly indicated prised of social scientists and those from specific social, that leadership and management are essential to performing

Downloaded fromjre.sagepub.com al UTHSC AT SAN ANTONIO 00 November 3, 2016 12 Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

effective research. Moreover, they observed that scientific Developing Human Resources, 13, 318-365. doi:10.1l771 training does not prepare researchers for these activities, 1523422311424710 and they encouraged the development of programs to better Amon, I. (1989). Agricultural research and transfer. train investigators. Ultimately, equipping investigators to New York, NY: Elsevier. Arthur, W., Bennett, W., Edens, P. S., & Bell, S. T. (2003). navigate the social and organizational dimensions of scien- Effectiveness of training in organizations: A meta-analy- tific work serves to foster the quality, integrity, and societal sis of design and evaluation features. Journal of Applied impact of scientific research. However, efforts must follow Psychology, 88,234-245. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.234 best practices in leadership development and assessment, Ashford, S. J., & DeRue, D. S. (2012). Developing as a leader: The and empirical research on leadership and management in power of mindful engagement. Organizational Dynamics, 41, science should serve as their basis. Several practical con- 146-154. doi:1 0.1 016/j.orgdyn.2012.01.008 cerns emerge in light of the foregoing observations, such as Avolio, B., Wa1nmbwa, F., & Weber, T. J. (2009). Leadership: who should study, fund, and publish such work. We hope Current theories, research, and future directions. Annual that the present study inspires the scientific community to Review of Psychology, 60, 421-449. doi:1 0.1146/annllIev. take on this challenge. psych.60.110707.16362l Ball, S. (2007). Leadership of academics in research. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, Acknowledgments 35,449-477. We would like to thank Mobolaji Fowose for assistance with the Barker, K. (2010). At the helm: Leading your laboratory. Cold literature search. Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. Barker, R. A. (1997). How can we train leaders if we do not know Authors' Note what leadership is? Human Relations, 50, 343-362. Barnett, T., & Vaicys, C. (2000). The moderating effect of indi- The content is solely the responsibility ofthe authors and does not necessarily represent official views of the National Institutes of viduals' perceptions of ethical work climate on ethical jndg- ments and behavioral intentions. Journal of Business Ethics, Health. 27,351-362. Barnowe, J. T. (1975). Leadership and performance out- Declaration of Conflicting Interests comes in research organizations: The supervisor of scien- The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with tists as a source of assistance. Organizational Behavior respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this and Human Performance, 14, 264-280. doi:10.10161 article. 0030-5073(75)90029-X Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leader- Funding ship: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19-31. doi: 10.1 016/0090-2616(90)90061-S The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support Bass, B. M., & Bass, R. (2008). The Bass handbook of leadership: for the research, authorship, and/or publication ofthis article: This Theory, research, and managerial applications (4th cd.). study was supported in part by a National Center for Advancing New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. Clinical and Translational Science Award, 2UL1 TR000448-06, Baurngartel, H. (1957). Leadership style as a variable in research and by the National Human Genome Research Institute, administration. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2, 344-360. KOlHG008990. doi: 10.2307/2391 003 Bennett, L. M., Gadlin, H., & Levine-Finley, S. (2010). References Collaboration and team science: A field guide. Bethesda, Adamo, J. E., Bauer, G., Berro, M., Burnette, B. K., & Hartman, MD: National Institutes of Health. K. A. (2012). A roadmap for academic health centers to Billot, J. (2010). The changing research context: Implications establish good laboratory practice-compliant infrastructure. for leadership. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Academic Medicine, 87, 279-284. Management, 33, 37-46. doi:10.1080/1360080X.2011.53701 0 Adams, L. G. (2014). Putting together a scientific team: Binz-Scharf, M. C., Kalish, Y., & Paik, L. (2015). Making sci- Collaborative science. Trends in Microbiology, 22,483-485. ence: New generations of collaborative knowledge pro- doi:1 0.1016/j.tim.2014.05.001 duction. American Behavioral Scientist, 59, 531-547. Andrews, F. M., & Farris, G. F. (1967). Supervisory practices and doi: 10.1177/0002764214556805 in scientific teams. Personnel Psychology, 20, Bird, S. J. (2001). Mentors, advisors and supervisors: Their 497-515. doi:10.11111j.1744-6570.l967.tb02446.x role in teaching responsible research conduct. Science and Antes, A. L., & Mnmford, M. D. (2012). Strategies for leader Engineering Ethics, 7,455-468. cognition: Viewing the glass "half full" and "half empty." Bird, S. J. (2014). Socially responsible science is more than "good Leadership Quarterly, 23, 425-442. doi:lO.1016/j. science." Journal ofMicrobiology & Biology Education, 15, leaqua.2011.10.001 169-172. doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v15i2.870 Antes, A. L., & Schuelke, M. J. (2011). Leveraging technol- Bird, S. J., & Sprague, R. (2001). Mentoring and the responsi- ogy to develop creative leadership capacity. Advances in ble conduct of research: Reflections and future. Science and

Downloaded fromjre.sagepub.com at UTHSC AT SAN ANTONIO on November 3, 2016 Antes et 0/. 13

Engineering Ethics, 7, 451-453. doi:10.1007!s11948-001- Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 0001-2 1(1),43-50. doi: 10.1525/jer.2006.1. 1.43 Bland, C. J., & Ruffin, M. T., IV. (1992). Characteristics of a pro- Doh, J. P. (2003). Can leadership be taught? Perspectives from ductive research environment: Literature review. Academic management educators. Academy of Management Learning & Medicine, 67, 385-397. Education, 2, 54-67. Bolden, R., IV. (2011). Distributed leadership in organizations: Drath, W. H., McCauley, C. D., Palus, C. J., Van Velsor, E., A review of theory and research. International Journal of O'Connor, P. M., & McGuire, J. B. (2008). Direction, align- Management Reviews, 13, 251-269. doi:10.1111/j.1468- ment, commitment: Toward a more integrative ontology of 2370.2011.00306.x leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 19, 635-653. Bonetta, L. (Ed.). (2006). Making the right moves: A practical DuBois, J. M. (2004). Is compliance a professional virtue of guide to scientific management for postdocs and new faculty. researchers? Reflections on promoting the responsible con- Chevy Chase, MD: Howard Hughes Medical Institute. duct of research. Ethics & Behavior, 14, 383-395. doi:10.l2071 Brown, M. E., & Trevino, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A s153270lgeb1404_8 review and future directions. Leadership Quarterly, 17, 595- DuBois, J. M., Chibnall, J. T., Tait, R. C., & Vander Wal, J. S. 616. doi:l 0.1016/j.leaqua.2006.1 0.004 (2016a). Lessons from researcberrebab. Nature, 534,173-175. Buck, S. (2015). Solving reproducibility. Science, 348, 1403. DuBois, .T. M., Chibnall, J. T., Tail, R. C., Vander Wal, J. S., doi: 10.1126/science.aac8041 Baldwin, K. A., Antes, A. 1., & Mumford, M. D. (20l6b). Buijs, J. (2007). Innovation leaders should be controlled schizo- Professional Decision-Making in Research (PDR): The valid- phrenics. Creativity and Innovation Management, 16, ity of a new measure, Science and Engineering Ethics, 22, 203-210. 391-416. doi: 10.1007/s1l948-015-9667-8 Chi, K. R. (2010). Running the show. Nature, 467, 240-241. Ely, K., Boyce, L. A., Nelson, J. K., Zaccaro, S. J., Hernez- doi: 10.1038/nj7312-240a Broome, G., & Whyman, W. (2010). Evaluating leadership Cohen, C. M., & Cohen, S. L. (2012). Lab dynamics: Management coaching: A review and integrated framework. Leadership and leadership skills for scientists (2nd ed.). Cold Spring Quarterly, 21,585-599. Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. Evans, L. (2012). Leadership for researcher development: What Collins, F. S., & Tabak, L. A. (2014). NUl plans to enhance repro- research leaders need to know and understand. Educational ducibility. Nature, 505, 612-613. Management Administration & Leadership, 40, 423-435. Conger, J. A. (1999). Charismatic and transformational lead- doi:1 0.1177117411.43212438218 ership in organizations: An insider's perspective on these Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and developing streams of research. Leadership Quarterly, 10, artistic creativity. Personality and Review, 145-179. 2,290-309. Day, D. V. (Ed.). (2014). The Oxford handbook of leadership and Feldman, D. c., & Lankan, M. J. (2005). Executive coach- organizations. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. ing: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Day, D. V., Fleenor, J. W., Atwater, L. E., Sturm, R. E., & McKee, Management, 31,829-848. doi:10.1l77/0149206305279599 R. A. (2014). Advances in leader and leadership develop- Frankel, A. S., Leonard, M. W., & Denham, C. R. (2006). Fair and ment: A review of25years of research and theory. Leadership just culture, team behavior, and leadership engagement: The Quarterly, 25, 63-82. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.004 tools to achieve high reliability. Health Services Research, Day, D. V., & Harrison, M. M. (2007). A multilevel, identity- 41, 1690-1709. doi: 10.1lll/j.l475-6773.2006.00572.x based approach to leadership development. Human Freedman, L. P., Cockburn, 1. M., & Simcoe, T. S. (2015). The Resource Management Review, 17, 360-373. doi:lO.10161 of reproducibility in preclinical. research. PLoS j.hmlr.2007.08.007 Biology, 13(6), elO02165. doi:10.l371/journal.pbio.1002165 DelliFraine, J. L., Wang, Z., McCaughey, D., Langabeer, J. R., Friedrich, T. L., Vessey, W. B., Schuelke, M. J., Ruark, G. A., & & Erwin, C. O. (2013). The use of six sigma in health care Mumford, M. D. (2009). A framework for understanding col- management: Are we using it to its full potential? Quality lective leadership: The selective utilization of leader and team Management in Healthcare, 22, 210-223. expertise within networks. Leadership Quarterly, 20, 933-958. DeRue, D. S., & Myers, C. G. (2014). Leadership development: Gemmill, G., & Wilemon, D. (1994). The hidden side of lead- A review and agenda for future research. In D. V. Day (Ed.), ership in technical team management. Research Technology The Oxford handbook of leadership and organizations (pp. Management, 37, 25-32. 832-855). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Gewin, V. (2015). Recipe for a team. Nature, 523, 245-247. DeRue, D. S., Nahrgang, J. D., Wellman, N., & Humphrey, S. doi: 10.1038/nj7558-245a E. (2011). Trait and behavioral theories of leadership: An Gray, B. (2008). Enhancing transclisciplinary research through integration and meta-analytic test of their relative validity. collaborative leadership. American Journal of Preventive Personnel Psychology, 64, 7-52. Medicine, 35(2, Suppl.), S124-S132. Devereaux, M. L. (2014). Rethinking the meaning of ethics in RCR Hansson, F., & Monsted, M. (2008). Research leadership as entre- education. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 15, preneurial organizing for research. Higher Education, 55, 165-168. doi: 1O.l128/jmbe.v 15i2.857 651-670. doi: 10.1007/s1 0734-007-9081-5 De Vries, R., Anderson, M. S., & Martinson, B. C. (2006). Normal Hede, K. (2007). Managing scientists. Science, 318, 993-995. Misbehavior: Scientists talk about the ethics of research. doi:1 O.l126/science.318.5852.993

Downloaded from jre.sagepub.com at UTHSC AT SAN ANTONIO on November 3, 2016 14 Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

Hemlin, S., Allwood, C. M., Martin, B., & Mumford, M. D. Leiserson, C. E., & McVinney, C. (2015). Lifelong learning: (2013). Introduction: Why is leadership important for creativ- Science professors need leadership training. Nature, 523, ity in science, technology, and innovation? In S. Hemlin, C. 279-281. doi: 10.1 038/523279a M. Allwood, B. Martin, & M. D. Mumford (Eds.), Creativity Maccoby, M. (2000). Understanding the difference between man- and leadership in science, technology, and innovation (pp. 1- agement and leadership. Research Technology Management, 26). New York, NY: Routledge. 43(1),57-59. Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2005). What we know about Macrina, F. L. (2014). : Text and cases in leadership. Review of General Psychology, 9, 169-180. responsible conduct of research (4th ed.). Washington, DC: doi: 10.1 03711 089-2680.9.2.169 American Society for Microbiology Press. Hu, J. C. (2016). Studying the science of science. Science. Marion, R., & Uhl-Bien, M. (2001). Leadership in complex orga- doi:10.1126/science.caredit.a1600051. Retrieved from http:// nizations. Leadership Quarterly, 12, 389-418. www.sciencemag. org! careers/20 16/03 Istudying -sci ence-sci ence Markowetz, F. (2015). You are not working for me; I am work- Hurley, J. (2003). Scientific research effectiveness: The organ- ing with you. PLoS Computational Biology, 11 (9), e 1004387. isational dimension. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbL1004387 Academic. McConnick, J. B., Boyce, A. M., Ladd, J. M., & Cho, M. K. Ioannidis, J. P. A., Fanelli, D., Dunne, D. D., & Goodman, S. (2012). Barriers to considering ethical and societal implica- N. (2015). Meta-research: Evaluation and improvement tions of research: Perceptions oflife scientists. A.JOB Primary of research methods and practices. PLoS Biology, 13(10), Research, 3(3), 40-50. doi: 10.1 080/21507716.2012.680651 e l 002264. doi: 10.1371/joumal.pbio.l 002264 Mumford, M. D., Antes, A. L., Caughron, 1. J., & Friedrich, T. James, A. (2011). Too many tasks. Nature, 475, 257. doi: 10.10381 L. (2008). Charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic lead- nj7355-257a ership: Multi-level influences on emergence and perfor- Kaiser, R. B., Hogan, R., & Craig, S. B. (2008). Leadership and mance. Leadership Quarterly, 19, 144-160. doi:10.1016/j. the fate of organizations. American Psychologist, 63, 96-110. 1eaqua.2008.0 1.002 doi: 10.1 037/0003-066X.63 .2.96 Mumford, M. D., & Fried, Y. (2014). Give them what they want Kalichman, M. W. (2014a). A modest proposal to move RCR or give them what they need? Ideology in the study of lead- education out of the classroom and into research . .Journal of ership . Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, 622-634. Microbiology & Biology Education, 15, 93-95. doi: 10.11281 doi: 10.1 002/Job.1921 jmbe.v15i2.866 Mumford, M. D., Gibson, c., Giorgini, v., & Mecca, J. (2014). Kalichman, M. W. (2014b). Rescuing responsible conduct of Leading for creativity: People, products, and systems. In D. research (RCR) education. Accountability in Research, 21, V. Day (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of leadership and orga- 68-83. doi:l 0.1 080/08989621.2013.822271 nizations (pp. 757-782). New York, NY: Oxford University Knorr, K., Mittermeir, R., Aichholzer, G., & Waller, G. (2009). .Press. Leadership and group performance: A positive relation- Mumford, M. D., & Licuanan, B. (2004). Leading for innovation: ship in academic research units. In F. M. Andrews (Ed.), Conclusions, issues, and directions. Leadership Quarterly, Science productivity: The effectiveness of research groups 15,163-171. in six countries (pp. 95-120). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Mumford, M. D., Marks, M. A., Connelly, M. S., Zaccaro, S. J., & University Press. Reiter-Palmon, R. (2000). Development ofleadership skills: Kotter, J. P. (2008). Force for change: How leadership differs Experience and timing. Leadership Quarterly, 11, 87-114. from management. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. doi: I0.1 0 16/S 1048-9843 (99)00044-2 Kreeger, K. Y. (1997, March 3). Researchers setting up labs must Mumford, M. D., Peterson, D., & Robledo, 1. (2013). Leading sci- learn skills on the fly. The Scientist. Retrieved from http:// entists and engineers: Cognition in a socio-technical context. www.the-scientist.coml? articles. view larticleN 0118333 Ititlel In S. Hemlin, C. M. Allwood, B. Martin, & M. D. Mumford Researchers-Setting-Up-Labs-Must-Learn-Skills-On-The- (Eds.), Creativity and leadership in science, technology, and Flyl innovation (pp. 29-57). New York, NY: Routledge. Kvaskoff, M., & McKay, S. D. (2014). Education: Scientists Mumford, M. D., Scott, G. M., & Gaddis, B. (2003). Leadership in need leadership training. Nature, 506, 159. doi:l0.l0381 scientific organizations. In J. Hurley (Ed.), Scientific research 506l59c effectiveness: 771e organisational dimension (pp. 69-99). Ladd, J. M., Lappe, M. D., McCormick, J. B., Boyce, A. M., & Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic. eho, M. K. (2009). The "how" and "whys" of research: Life Mumford, M. D., Scott, G. M., Gaddis, B., & Strange, J. M. (2002). scientists' views 0 f accountability . Journal of Medical Ethics, Leading creative people: Orchestrating expertise and rela- 35,762-767. doi:l0.1136/jme.2009.03178l tionships. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 705-750. doi:10.l0l61 Laursen, L. (2014). Leaming to lead a lab. Science. Retrieved S1048-9843(02)00158-3 from http://www.sciencemag. orgl careers/20 l4/02lleaming- Mumford, M. D., & Van Doom, J. R. (2001). The leadership of lead-lab pragmatism: Reconsidering Franklin in the age of charisma. Ledford, H. (2015). Team science: has become Leadership Quarterly, 12, 279-309. all the rage as scientists tackle society's biggest problems. But Mumford, M. D., Zaccaro, S. J., Harding, F. D., & Jacobs, T. O. there is still strong resistance to crossing borders. Nature, 525, (2000). Leadership skills for a changing world: Solving com- 308-311. doi:l 0.1 038/525308a plex social problems. Leadership Quarterly, 11, 11-35.

Downloaded from jre.sagepub.com at UlHSC AT SAN ANTONIO on November 3, 2016 Antes et 0/. 15

Mumford, T. V., Campion, M. A., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Riggio, R. E. (2008). Leadership development: The current state The leadership skills strataplex: Leadership skill require- and future expectations. Consulting Psychology Journal: ments across organizational levels. Leadership Quarterly, 18, Practice and Research, 60, 383-392. doi:l0.l0371l065- 154-166. 9293.60.4.383 National Research Council, (2015a). Professional develop- Riggio, R. E., & Lee, J. (2007). Emotional and interpersonal ment and education for team science. In N. J. Cooke & M. competencies and leader development. Human Resource L. Hilton (Eds.), Enhancing the effectiveness of team sci- Management Review, 17,418-426. ence (Committee on the Science of Team Science, Board on Ripley, E., Markowitz, M., Nichols-Casebolt, A., Williams, L., Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences, Division of & Macrina, F. (2012). Guiding the next generation of NIH Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education) (pp. 97-124). investigators in responsible conduct of research: The role of Washington, DC: National Academies Press. the mentor. Accountability in Research, 19, 209-219. doi:1 O. National Research Council, (2015b). Team science leader- 1080108989621.2012.700880 ship. In N. J. Cooke & M. L. Hilton (Eds.), Enhancing the Roberts, G. c., Kavussanu, M., & Sprague, R. L. (2001). effectiveness of team science (Committee on the Science of Mentoring and the impact of the research climate. Science Team Science, Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory and Engineering Ethics, 7, 525-537. doi:10.l007/sl1948- Sciences, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences 001-0010-1 and Education) (pp. 125-148). Washington, DC: National Robledo, 1. C., Peterson, D. R., & Mumford, M. D. (2012). Academies Press. Leadership of scientists and engineers: A three-vector model. National Science Board. (2014). Reducing investigators' admin- Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, 140-147. istrative workload for federally funded research. Arlington, Roller, M. R., & Lavrakas, P. J. (2015). Applied qualitative VA: National Science Foundation. research design: A total quality framework a.pproach. New Nesbit, P. L. (2012). The role of self-reflect ion, emotional manage- York, NY: Guilford Press. ment offeedhack, and self-regulation processes in self-directed Salazar, M. R., Lant, T. K., Fiore, S. M., & Salas, E. (2012). leadership development. Human Resource Development Facilitating innovation in diverse science teams through Review, 11, 203-226. doi:10.1177/1534484312439196 integrative capacity. Small Group Research, 43,527-558. Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th Sapienza, A. M. (2004). Managing scientists: Leadership strat- ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. egies in scientific research (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Nosek, B., Alter, G., Banks, G., Borsboom, D., Bowman, S., Wiley. Breckler, S., & Yarkoni, T. (2015). Promoting an open Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4th research culture: Author guidelines for journals could help to ed.), San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. promote transparency, openness, and reproducibility. Science, Seeligcr, J. (2012). Scientists must be taught to manage. Nature, 348,1422-1425. doi:l0.l126/science.aab2374 483,511. doi:10.1038/48351la Nuzzo, R. (2015). Fooling ourselves. Nature, 526, 182-185. Smith, D. H. (2001). Notes on pilgrimage to science: A fly on tbe doi: 10.1038/526182a wall. Science and Engineering Ethics, 7,615-634. Parker, J. N., Vermeulen, N., & Penders, B. (2011). Admin burden Snook, S. A., Nohria, N., & Khurana, R. (Eds.). (2011). The hand- is part of the job. Nature, 476,33. doi:l0.1038/476033c book for teaching leadership: Knowing, doing, and being. Pearce, C. L. (2004). The future of leadership: Combining ver- Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. tical and shared leadership to transform knowledge work. Straus, S. E., Johnson, M. 0., Marquez, C., & Feldman, M. D. Academy of Management Executive, 18(1), 47-57. (2013). Characteristics of successful and failed mentoring Pearce, C. L. (2007). The future of leadership development: The relationships: A qualitative study across two academic health importance of identity, multi-level approaches, self-leader- centers. Academic Medicine, 88, 82-89. ship, physical fitness, shared leadership, networking, creativ- Unsworth, K. L., & Mason, C. M. (2012). Help yourself: The ity, emotions, spirituality and on-boarding processes. Human mechanisms through which a self-leadership intervention Resource Management Review, 17, 355-359. influences strain. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Pryor, E. R., Habermann, B., & Broome, M. E. (2007). Scientific 17,235-245. misconduct from the perspective of research coordinators: Vogt,P. W., Vogt, E. R., Gardner,D. c., & Haeffele, L. M. (2014). A national survey. Journal of Medical Ethics, 33, 365-369. Selecting the right analyses for your data: Quantitative, qual- doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.016394 itative, and mixed methods. New York, NY: Guilford Press. Puccio, G. J., Mance, M., & Zacko-Smith, J. (2013). Leadership Yuki, G. (1989). Managerial leadership: A review of the- and followership in science and technology. In S. Hernlin, C. ory and research . Journal of Management, 15, 251-289. M. Allwood, B. Martin, & M. D. Mumford (Eds.), Creativity doi:10.1177/014920638901500207 and leadership in science, technology, and innovation (pp. Zaccaro, S. J. (2014). Leadership memes: From ancient 287-315). New York, NY: Routledge. and literature to twenty-first century theory and research. In Rico-Villademoros, F., Hernando, 1'., Sanz, J.-L., Lopez-Alonso, D. V. Day (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of leadership and A., Salamanca, 0., Camps, C., & Rosell, R. (2004). The role organizations (pp. 13-39). New York, NY: Oxford University of the clinical research coordinator-data manager-in oncol- Press. ogy clinical trials. BMC Medical Research Methodology, Zaleznik, A. (1977). Managers and leaders. Harvard Business 4(6), 1-9. Review, 55, 67-78.

Downloaded from jre.sagepub.com at UniSC AT SAN ANTONIO on November 3, 2016 16 Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

Author Biographies professional interests include health policy, chronic disease prevention, and physical activity promotion. She contributed to Alison L. Antes is the assistant director of the Center for Clinical the data collection and data analysis, and she edited the manuscript. and Research Ethics at Washington University School of Medicine where she co-directs a course on the responsible conduct of James M. DuBois is the director of the Center for Clinical and research. Her research emphasizes ethical decision making in Research Ethics and of the Professionalism and Integrity in research, leadership and professionalism in research, and instruc- Research Program (PI Program) at Washington University tion on the responsible conduct of research. She helped to concep- School of Medicine. He conducts social science research on tualize the study design, contributed to analysis and interpretation mental health research ethics, instruction on the responsible of the data, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. conduct of research, and factors that foster or impair research integrity. He helped to conceptualize the study, contributed to Adelina Mart is a graduate of the Master of Public Health development of the interview guide and the interpretation of Program at Washington University in St. Louis. Her research and data, and edited tbe manuscript.

Downloaded from jre.sagepub.com at UTJ-/SC AT SAN ANTONIO on November 3, 2016