0:00

[intro music] Welcome

0:00

to Season Three of the National

0:04

Institute of Neurological Disorders

0:04

and Stroke's Building Up the Nerve,

0:08

where we help you strengthen your

0:08

mentoring relationships with tools and

0:11

advice from both trainees and faculty. We know that navigating your career can

0:14

be daunting, but we're here to help.

0:17

It's our job. [music fades]

0:21

I'm Lauren Ullrich, a

0:21

program director at NINDS.

0:25

And I'm Marguerite

0:25

Matthews, a program director at

0:27

NINDS, and we are your hosts today.

0:30

This episode will focus on

0:30

structural interventions around mentoring.

0:34

We know that mentorship

0:34

doesn't happen in a vacuum.

0:36

So what can program directors,

0:36

department chairs and other institutional

0:40

leaders do to create an environment in

0:40

which supportive mentorship thrives?

0:44

[musical interlude]

0:50

Our guests today are Dr. Sherilynn Black, Dr.

0:53

Beronda Montgomery, and Dr. Thomas Schwarz.

0:57

Let's get started with introductions.

0:59

Yes, hello everyone. My name is Sherilynn Black and

1:01

I'm faculty in the School of

1:03

Medicine at Duke University. Uh, I am a social neuroscientist

1:05

and I study how race and forms of

1:09

difference influence organizational

1:09

structures, which I'm sure I'll talk

1:12

more about as the podcast progresses.

1:15

I am also currently serving

1:15

as the Associate Vice Provost

1:18

for Faculty Advancement. So in that role, I do a lot of

1:19

work at the institutional level

1:23

around faculty development support. So mentoring is a huge part of that.

1:27

Um, I also do a lot of work at the

1:27

national level in the mentorship space.

1:31

I currently facilitate a lot of mentoring

1:31

engagement for the Gilliam Fellows

1:35

Program through Howard Hughes Medical

1:35

Institute, and also for the PDEP and

1:39

GDEP awardees for Burroughs Welcome Fund.

1:42

And I've also done a lot of work with

1:42

the National Academies and other national

1:46

entities around thinking about the

1:46

interventions that lead to successful

1:50

mentorship with a specific emphasis

1:50

on cultural awareness and mentorship.

1:55

I would say when I think about my

1:55

mentoring style or philosophy, um, I

2:00

really put an emphasis on authenticity.

2:03

I think that that's what allows

2:03

everyone to thrive and to be

2:05

the best version of themselves. I also believe very deeply in leading

2:07

with my values, and I really try to

2:11

support my mentees to really have a

2:11

clear understanding of who they are and

2:15

what they stand for, and that always

2:15

amplifies the impact of their science.

2:20

And then third, I would say, I like to

2:20

look at systemic issues and changes moreso

2:26

then a deficit based approach about what

2:26

my mentee needs themselves to address.

2:31

So I really try to keep my mentorship

2:31

in those areas and I'll stop there and,

2:36

um, looking forward to the conversation.

2:38

Hi, I'm Beronda

2:38

Montgomery, a Professor of Biology

2:41

and the Vice President of Academic

2:41

Affairs at Grinnell College,

2:45

as well as Dean of the Faculty. My scholarly work is about understanding

2:47

how individuals have a sense of who

2:52

they are, where they are, what kinds

2:52

of communities, they're a part of, um,

2:56

what's going on around them and how they

2:56

should translate that knowledge about

3:00

what's going around them into behaviors

3:00

of success um, and limiting damage.

3:04

And I study all of that in the

3:04

context of how plants understand

3:08

themselves, how humans understand

3:08

themselves in relationships and also

3:12

how mentors and leaders understand

3:12

the work that they should be doing.

3:15

Um, in terms of my mentoring style, I

3:15

would describe it as strengths-based.

3:21

I would describe it as active listening

3:21

based and also understanding community.

3:27

Hi, I'm Thomas

3:27

Schwarz and thank you for letting

3:30

me be a part of this conversation. I'm a professor in the F.M.

3:34

Kirby Neurobiology Center at Boston

3:34

Children's Hospital and in the Department

3:39

of Neurobiology at Harvard Medical School.

3:41

And I'm the director of a

3:41

T32 postdoc training grant.

3:45

So my lab focuses on the cell biology

3:45

of neurons, and we combine very

3:50

basic research into synaptogenesis,

3:50

axonal transport, and mitochondria

3:55

with some more translational

3:55

projects on the cell biological

3:59

basis of neurodegenerative diseases.

4:02

I would say my mentoring style starts

4:02

from, you know, with stay calm and

4:09

also realizing what an honor, it is

4:09

to have people trust you with the

4:15

responsibility for training them. And my philosophy is to try and find the

4:18

right balance between their autonomy and

4:23

independence with having a sense of being

4:23

supported, uh, throughout their training

4:29

by me and by their colleagues in the lab.

4:31

Yeah. Trust has been, uh, a huge theme of

4:31

the season so far, so that's great.

4:36

[musical interlude] Our first question is

4:40

more of a general one.

4:42

Um, what does an environment that

4:42

promotes successful mentorship

4:46

look like and how does leadership

4:46

contribute to this environment?

4:52

When I think

4:52

about, um, environments that promote

4:55

successful mentorship, for me,

4:55

there are a number of features.

4:59

One of them is a recognition of

4:59

individuals and their whole selves.

5:05

Um, not just the science we're

5:05

trying to train them, but how they

5:08

show up prepared to do that science. I think that successful environments

5:10

are focused on two questions: what

5:14

we're going to do, what we're going

5:14

to accomplish in terms of the science,

5:18

but also how we're going to get there. And for me, the mentoring is really

5:20

about how we're going to support

5:23

individuals in advancing their science.

5:26

And I also think that a successful

5:26

mentorship environments have

5:30

both structures of resources

5:30

to support that, but also very

5:33

firm systems of accountability. And when I think about the accountability,

5:36

that's where leaders really have

5:39

the possibility to establish that

5:39

we are a certain type of mentoring

5:44

environment, not just as individual

5:44

good mentors, which we need, but as

5:48

a community and setting up systems

5:48

of reward, as well as accountability.

5:52

I know that when I first

5:52

started as a faculty member and took on

5:57

the responsibility of running a lab, not

5:57

only did I know very little about how

6:00

to run a lab, other than watching all

6:00

the mistakes that my mentors had made,

6:05

but we never talked about mentoring. It wasn't a conversation at all.

6:09

Now this is going back 32 years.

6:11

Um, but I think the institution needs to

6:11

signal from the start, from the moment

6:16

that they hire somebody, that mentoring

6:16

matters and they should make it clear that

6:21

it matters for promotion and it's going

6:21

to matter to the individual's own career.

6:27

Because if you get a reputation for

6:27

being a good mentor, really wonderful

6:31

trainees will, will flock to your door.

6:34

And if you get a reputation for

6:34

being a bad mentor, you know, there's

6:37

some who I compare to the kind of

6:37

mouse strains that eat older pups.

6:42

You know, if you're one of those,

6:42

the smart postdocs are going

6:45

to run in the other direction. So it's a matter of self-interest as well

6:46

as a matter of just doing the right thing.

6:52

Yeah, I would also

6:52

build on that, Tom, and say, you know,

6:55

to me, one of the most successful

6:55

hallmarks of a strong mentorship

6:59

environment is one where the mentor

6:59

has a strong sense of self-awareness.

7:04

I think that it is really critical.

7:06

Um, so much of the mentor

7:06

mentee relationship when it's

7:09

discussed is talking about, you

7:09

know, what is the student doing?

7:12

What's the trainee doing? What's the mentee doing and

7:13

how do we help the trainee?

7:16

But the reality is, if we, as faculty,

7:16

don't understand who we are and the

7:21

kinds of things that are important to

7:21

us as scientists, it's really hard to

7:24

impart that information onto our mentees.

7:27

And I would give the example of, you

7:27

know, a lot of people now are using

7:31

what sort of is colloquially referred

7:31

to as a mentoring compact, uh, or sort

7:34

of these mentorship agreements, I think

7:34

is a new language that's being used.

7:38

And it's really fascinating because if

7:38

you sit down with a faculty member and

7:41

they say, oh, you know, my, my student

7:41

is not able to succeed in this area.

7:45

And it's like, okay great. So tell me, you know, how do you

7:46

think that they should be approaching

7:50

this experience, or this opportunity,

7:50

or this scientific knowledge?

7:54

And the blank stares that you get back

7:54

because it's sort of something that's

7:57

intrinsically bound in their head where

7:57

they say, well, you know, you just

8:01

sort of figure these things out, but a

8:01

good mentor helps to make things that

8:05

are sort of the implicit explicit.

8:07

And you want to see people that have

8:07

a strong sense of self-awareness

8:11

who are clear communicators and

8:11

transparent with their norms and goals

8:15

so that students can be successful.

8:17

I'll sign on to that. I, I want to say one of the things

8:18

that I've found very worthwhile was

8:23

a training program run by CIMER.

8:26

I don't know if people have mentioned

8:26

that previously on these podcasts, but

8:29

this is the Center for the Improvement

8:29

of the Mentored Experience in Research.

8:34

And one of the exercises that they did is

8:34

have us evaluate our own mentoring style.

8:40

I would not have been able to answer the

8:40

question, "what is your mentoring style?"

8:44

before that. Certainly when I started my lab, I

8:44

would've said well-intentioned but

8:48

clueless, and it made you realize that

8:48

there is no single successful mentoring

8:53

style, but you need to understand

8:53

what yours is because that comes

8:58

with it's own set of strengths and

8:58

also weaknesses and vulnerabilities.

9:04

And once you're aware of those, you

9:04

can say, aha, I know my mentoring

9:08

style leads to being indecisive. So I think I have to watch out, [laughs],

9:10

um, and I found that very valuable.

9:15

And so that's definitely

9:15

something I think the institutions

9:18

should strongly encourage.

9:20

Yeah, I will definitely

9:20

give a shout out to CIMER, uh, the

9:22

collaboration work that I do for Howard

9:22

Hughes is in collaboration with CIMER,

9:26

led by Chris Pfund, Angela Byars-Winston,

9:26

Leah Nell Adams, the whole gang.

9:30

Um, and I just want to say that if

9:30

you're interested in their work, um,

9:34

you should definitely go to their

9:34

website because in addition to the

9:37

kinds of trainings that Tom is speaking

9:37

of, there's a host of resources.

9:40

There's literally like library

9:40

of, uh, materials to help you.

9:44

If you're looking for, you know, hard

9:44

references and, um, exercises that you can

9:48

do to improve your mentorship practices.

9:51

So to your

9:51

point, Tom, about having organizations

9:55

help mentors be better mentors, are

9:55

there other ways that programs or

10:01

institutions can support mentors be

10:01

better mentors and set them up for having

10:08

successful mentoring relationships?

10:11

Well, I think it's

10:11

important that the faculty not be alone

10:14

in that and have their own mentors.

10:17

I think even senior faculty need

10:17

to have somebody to turn to when

10:20

they say, "I don't know how to deal

10:20

with this situation," but I think

10:24

junior faculty especially want to

10:24

have somebody who is a successful

10:28

mentor, who they can go to for advice.

10:32

And I think having everyone from

10:32

the start paired up with somebody

10:35

who knows it's their responsibility

10:35

to, to be a mentor to this person.

10:40

And yes, sometimes that's going

10:40

to involve things like, what

10:42

should be my specific aims? But sometimes that's also going to

10:44

be, you know, how do I decide whether

10:48

to take this person into my lab? How do I work most effectively

10:50

with them once they're here?

10:54

And help them find out what their

10:54

proper mentoring style might be.

10:58

In addition to those

10:58

kinds of day-to-day ways, which I think

11:01

are absolutely critical to, to support

11:01

each other through collegiality and kinds

11:05

of the structures of local departments. I've also argued that we have to do

11:07

larger structural things, which really

11:11

mirror what we know works on campuses.

11:13

So we all have offices of research and

11:13

innovation, which have grant writers

11:16

and grant editors and other structural

11:16

supports to help faculty be successful

11:21

at getting grants because it's an

11:21

institutional commitment that faculty

11:25

should be successful at getting grants. And so there are resources invested

11:26

and executive level positions

11:30

with responsibility for that. I would argue that, you know, centers

11:32

for teaching excellence are similar

11:36

in the commitment to pedagogy.

11:39

And so I think one of the bigger

11:39

structural things that we have to do

11:42

in addition to the kind of day-to-day

11:42

on the ground things, are to ask where

11:45

on our campuses there are executive

11:45

level positions and real resources

11:49

invested in local mentoring supports

11:49

so that there's expertise and systems

11:54

to really ensure that it's not just

11:54

good departments with good mentors,

11:58

but commitment to that across campus.

12:01

I'll agree with that,

12:01

Beronda, I think that is spot on and

12:04

that I think things like having a postdoc

12:04

association so that the postdocs also can

12:09

express what their needs are and having

12:09

an office of fellowship development

12:15

that can provide workshops and training.

12:18

You know, they may be much better at

12:18

doing things like bringing in speakers

12:22

from non-academic careers or, um,

12:22

having people talk about what their

12:27

experiences were like on the job search.

12:30

Much better at that sort of

12:30

mentoring than the individual

12:33

faculty in the department will be. I think it's crucial to have all sorts

12:35

of courses like that, that can be offered

12:39

for the fellows, that institutionalizes

12:39

some of the responsibility.

12:43

Is that the sort of thing

12:43

that you were thinking of?

12:45

Absolutely, yes.

12:46

Yeah. And you know, the other thing that I

12:47

would add to that, because I, I very much

12:50

agree with what you're saying, Beronda. Where the resources are is

12:51

where the institution cares.

12:54

So we know that to be true. I would also say at the institutional

12:56

level, you know, we, as leaders, have

13:01

a responsibility to norm set around the

13:01

fact that mentorship is a good thing

13:06

and asking for help is a good thing. And having supportive resources

13:07

and mechanisms to support you

13:11

along the way is a good thing. I think that, um, you know, especially in

13:13

some of the STEM fields, we have developed

13:17

a culture where sort of asking for help

13:17

is maybe viewed as a sign of weakness

13:23

or something that indicates that you are

13:23

not as strong of a scientist or not an

13:26

independent thinker, but actually the

13:26

scientists that I know who are the most

13:31

successful are the ones who are heavily

13:31

mentored at every stage of their careers.

13:35

And I think that, you know, for us as

13:35

faculty, it's really important that we

13:40

norm level set that for our students

13:40

and help them to understand utilizing

13:44

these resources on campus, finding

13:44

multiple mentors, not just looking

13:49

only to their advisors, but looking for

13:49

people who can support them in a number

13:52

of different ways, and really having

13:52

a culture at the institution where

13:56

there is an expectation that you are

13:56

mentors and also that you mentor others.

14:01

I think that really sort of strengthens

14:01

the muscle around mentorship at

14:05

institutions in ways that really

14:05

helps it to become a much more,

14:08

um, sort of pervasive existence.

14:11

And I think it really helps everyone to thrive.

14:13

So along those

14:13

lines, there are some common

14:17

mentoring issues or needs that

14:17

certain groups of trainees encounter.

14:22

So if you think about, um, postdocs,

14:22

often we hear about issues of

14:26

isolation, um, cause they're no

14:26

longer coming in as part of a cohort.

14:30

Or graduate students might talk about

14:30

a lack of clarity around a mentor's

14:34

expectations, or things like this. So are there specific ways to design

14:36

programs to anticipate these kinds

14:44

of needs and try to prevent them

14:44

from happening in the first place?

14:48

I was about to say, I think about some of the things that we've done to try to really

14:50

counteract isolation for post-docs.

14:54

Um, and one of those is to have

14:54

us not just mentor our post-docs

14:59

around many issues, but to have

14:59

kind of departmental wide mentoring.

15:03

So I do some mentoring of postdocs

15:03

on science communication and science

15:06

writing, where I take a group of

15:06

eight to ten postdocs from different

15:09

labs and work together with them. So it allows them to build up some kind

15:10

of peer-peer interactions, while I'm

15:15

really mentoring around my strengths. And then I have other colleagues who

15:17

are really good at working with postdocs

15:20

on specific aims and summary pages.

15:22

And so we've kind of broken it out

15:22

in some of our areas of expertise to

15:27

help the mentors, you know, kind of

15:27

thrive and be motivated, but also to

15:30

build in these built-in cohorts that

15:30

otherwise sometimes postdocs have

15:34

to have the self agency to build. And we've asked, how can we really

15:36

support it on our side, so it's not just

15:39

the ones that have the wherewithal to do

15:39

that, but everyone gets access to some

15:43

of those kinds of structures of support.

15:45

I think for

15:45

graduate students, I hope every

15:48

institution has, you know,

15:48

dissertation advisory committees.

15:52

And that's great because it

15:52

means there's at least going

15:55

to be more than a one-on-one

15:55

relationship, uh, with the students.

15:59

But those committees have

15:59

to be taken very seriously.

16:02

They have to meet at least once every

16:02

nine months, they have to meet more

16:06

often if there's a perceived problem. And the way we've been doing it in the,

16:08

uh, the program in neuroscience at Harvard

16:13

is that at the start of the meeting, the

16:13

student leaves the room and the mentor

16:19

gives their perspective, and then the

16:19

mentor leaves the room and the student

16:23

can raise any issues that they don't

16:23

want to discuss in front of the advisor.

16:27

And we can ask bluntly, are you

16:27

getting enough time with your advisor?

16:32

Are you getting enough attention? Do you feel like you understand

16:34

what your advisor expects of you?

16:37

And we can see whether

16:37

the two are misaligned.

16:39

And then we'll come together and

16:39

then we'll talk about that Western

16:42

blot, or that, you know, mouse

16:42

behavior or whatever it might be.

16:46

Um, but then at the end we also can

16:46

say, and if you have any issues,

16:51

you know, we're here for you. You can come back to us if

16:52

there are problems, either

16:56

scientific or non-scientific.

16:58

And I think it's great that we can have

16:58

that safety net for graduate students.

17:03

We'd love to do that for post-docs, but

17:03

at most institutions, I think, the number

17:08

of post-docs is so large, and the number

17:08

of faculty is so small and so stressed out

17:14

that no one has the bandwidth for that.

17:17

Um, and I think that's where things like

17:17

the, the group mentoring that you were

17:21

talking about Beronda, and a postdoc

17:21

association, those are all so good for

17:26

letting the postdocs feel like they're not

17:26

alone in their foxhole, but that they're

17:30

really part of a, a community also.

17:33

And when they can, they

17:33

should seek out other faculty.

17:36

It's not going to be as intensive

17:36

as the attention that a grad student

17:39

gets, but, uh, but it needs to be

17:39

an opportunity when they need it.

17:44

For the graduate

17:44

student situation, are there systems in

17:47

place to deal with an issue when there

17:47

is misalignment or there is a problem

17:51

where the graduate student either

17:51

needs, um, to be say, removed from

17:56

the situation, or certainly needs to

17:56

have like serious mediation happening?

18:01

So yes, so the graduate

18:01

programs are watching the situations

18:05

closely and if there is a problem of

18:05

any sort, you know, in the progress of

18:10

the student or the relationships in the

18:10

lab or the relationship with a mentor.

18:14

You know, difficult situations

18:14

like the mentor leaves for another

18:17

institution or the, or the mentor dies.

18:20

Then the program has to step in and

18:20

with the student's best interests at

18:24

heart, not the mentors best interests,

18:24

but the students, you know, figure out

18:29

what's the solution to that problem. And sometimes it means switching labs.

18:33

Sometimes it means staying on your

18:33

project, but working in a different

18:36

room, sometimes it means having

18:36

some other sort of an intervention.

18:40

But, the program has

18:40

responsibility for that.

18:43

The advisory committee has to make

18:43

sure the people running the program

18:47

know exactly what the problems

18:47

are when problems like that arise.

18:51

And Tom, that's actually

18:51

something I was going to draw back on your

18:55

earlier comment, um, but you're, you're

18:55

touching on a point I think is really

18:59

critical and should be underscored, which

18:59

is that oftentimes people don't realize

19:03

or think about the fact that mentorship

19:03

practices are deeply tied to the culture

19:07

and the climate in a department, right?

19:10

Like right now, so many institutions

19:10

are sort of having these really

19:14

deep looks at, you know, what's

19:14

the climate like on campus?

19:16

What's the culture? Do people feel valued? Um, is it an equitable space?

19:20

And you know, for example, we're

19:20

talking about postdocs feeling isolated,

19:24

and I think the question was, are

19:24

there things that could be done, you

19:28

know, preemptively or proactively?

19:30

Absolutely. If you already know that the numbers

19:31

are disproportionate, especially if

19:35

you're thinking about things like, you

19:35

know, postdocs from underrepresented

19:38

groups, whether it's gender, whether

19:38

it's race or ethnicity, I think that

19:42

it sort of behooves institutions

19:42

to be proactive about this and

19:45

think, you know, in a very real way. If we are bringing in scientists

19:47

X to train in our space, it's our

19:51

responsibility to make sure they're

19:51

coming into an environment where

19:54

they can thrive and be successful. So if we know that isolation is an

19:56

issue, that should be something that

19:59

the programs are thinking about before

19:59

they agree to bring postdocs in.

20:03

I feel that way also about

20:03

the graduate student question.

20:06

Um, I think that we really need to sort

20:06

of get out of the headspace that it's

20:09

up to mentees and trainees to ameliorate

20:09

their own situations and really think more

20:14

about the system that they're coming into. Is this system equitable?

20:18

Are there appropriate mentorship

20:18

practices that everyone has

20:21

access to and is able to thrive? And if not, it's a really good

20:23

opportunity for the faculty and

20:26

leaders of the program to think about

20:26

ways that they can improve the local

20:30

environment for all of the trainees.

20:32

I think related to

20:32

what you're saying too, Sherilynn, I

20:35

think about the fact that in a lot of

20:35

our spaces, there is something that I

20:39

talk about is restorative mentoring that

20:39

has to happen, where we have students

20:43

and postdocs, they're mal-mentored. They're not mentored well.

20:47

And sometimes there are these structures

20:47

in place that Tom has talked about, but

20:51

sometimes these students are seeking out

20:51

other people who they know to be good

20:54

mentors to help them get back on track.

20:57

And they often do this from

20:57

the, the sense of, can I have a

21:00

confidential conversation with you? And so we have mentors doing

21:02

this restorative mentoring to get

21:05

students and postdocs back on track. They then go back to the lab of

21:07

someone, complete their degree or

21:11

get a job placement, and the person

21:11

who you had to intervene for is the

21:15

one who gets the credit for that. And I think we have to start to ask

21:17

how do we really look at the systems?

21:21

Because if we look at it now, there

21:21

are often women and faculty of

21:24

color who are taking on this load of

21:24

restorative mentoring, which may be

21:28

distracting them from progressing.

21:30

So I think, you know, when you talk

21:30

about looking at the system and asking

21:34

about culture and climate, there are a

21:34

lot of those things that are going on.

21:37

And there will always be a need

21:37

for some restorative mentoring.

21:40

But then again, that's a role for leaders

21:40

to step in and say, how are we protecting

21:45

people who we know may be doing that. Our mentoring awards now you have

21:47

to put a list of students and

21:50

postdocs that you've mentored. Well, I've done restorative mentoring

21:51

for 50 that I can never list their name

21:55

because I promised them that I wouldn't. And so sometimes the people who

21:57

are doing the most work aren't even

22:01

eligible for our mentoring award. So how can leaders set up structures

22:02

to reward all kinds of mentoring

22:07

that happens in these spaces.. And I think that goes to that very

22:08

important point you were making,

22:11

Sherilynn, that we have to look at the

22:11

structures and understand there's some

22:15

things we can't mentor our way out of. As important as mentoring is, we can't

22:17

mentor our way out of sexism or racism.

22:21

And so we have to understand where

22:21

mentoring is situated and where there's

22:25

a role for leaders to step in and really

22:25

deal with some of these other issues.

22:29

And honestly, you know,

22:29

I really do frame this as an equity issue.

22:34

If you think about the attrition that

22:34

we've had from the scientific workforce

22:38

broadly, I'm talking from undergraduate,

22:38

even younger maybe, all the way up.

22:43

We say we want a diverse workforce. We say we want people with

22:45

different perspectives and norms

22:47

that will expand our thinking

22:47

and creativity and innovation.

22:51

Those may be some of the people who

22:51

are not properly mentored, right?

22:54

And so without having that structural

22:54

support, we're seeing all of this

22:59

attrition of these groups out of STEM.

23:01

So to me, it really makes it, like,

23:01

an ethical imperative that program's

23:07

really think about mentorship as

23:07

a part of the equity conversation.

23:11

And I think a lot of times, you know,

23:11

it's really attractive for people to

23:15

take the equity conversation down to

23:15

things like demographics and raw numbers.

23:19

But if you're not thinking about

23:19

the environment, the mentorship, the

23:22

ability of the trainees to thrive to

23:22

be able to be successful, then all of

23:27

the numbers increase is for nothing.

23:29

If at the end of the day, these people

23:29

are not matriculating all the way through

23:32

to success in the scientific workforce. So I really hope that we can do,

23:35

sort of, more of looking at these as

23:40

intersectional, as opposed to looking

23:40

at them as two separate issues.

23:44

So thinking about

23:44

that, addressing mentorship and being

23:49

proactive, are there ways to incentivize

23:49

good mentorship instead of always like

23:55

maneuvering around bad mentorship or

23:55

having to have systems in place that you

24:00

know, are dealing with the aftermath of

24:00

poor mentorship or a lack of mentorship.

24:05

Are there things that you're implementing

24:05

at your universities or that you

24:09

think should be implemented, um, that

24:09

can help really with being proactive

24:14

and incentivizing those who maybe

24:14

they want to be great mentors, they

24:19

just don't know how, or they haven't

24:19

yet been given the tools to advance

24:23

in flexing that mentoring muscle.

24:25

I would say that that

24:25

making those training courses available

24:29

and not just available, but you know,

24:29

pressing people to take them and having

24:34

the conversations from the Chair, from

24:34

the Dean, early on that says, this is

24:39

going to matter to you, and it's going

24:39

to matter to the people who you have a

24:42

responsibility for, is really important.

24:45

It signals from the start that this

24:45

is something that, that matters.

24:48

I know when I started not here, but

24:48

at another institution, there was

24:53

a meeting with the Dean for all the

24:53

new junior faculty and the take home

24:58

message from that was when it comes

24:58

time for promotion, don't think that

25:03

by being the best teacher there has

25:03

ever been here, you will get promoted.

25:07

If your research isn't world-class,

25:07

you're not going to get promoted, but we

25:12

do want you also to do well at teaching.

25:15

The word mentoring, you know,

25:15

responsibility for graduate students,

25:18

all of that, never ever came up.

25:20

So I think if those conversations

25:20

from the very start you've said,

25:24

this matters, you know, it is a

25:24

part of your job responsibility.

25:28

And it's more than that, it's like a

25:28

sacred trust that you have to these

25:32

people whose careers are in your hands.

25:35

Yeah. You know, it's interesting. Um, I'm a social neuroscientist, I

25:36

guess I didn't say that during my intro.

25:39

So I'm very interested in human

25:39

behavior and what motivates people.

25:42

So when you talk about incentives,

25:42

I always think about, you know, what

25:46

matters to the people that you're

25:46

wanting to be effective mentors.

25:50

That's where you end up

25:50

doing the incentivizing.

25:54

Um, you know, at the end of

25:54

the day as faculty, we all want

25:57

our science to be excellent. We all want to be able to be

25:58

successful, to expand our research

26:01

programs and, you know, tackle

26:01

interesting questions and, you know,

26:06

sort of train the next generation. And so to me, Um, I think it's

26:08

really important to tie mentorship

26:12

to the mentors professional success.

26:14

I think what happens a lot of times is,

26:14

you know, it's viewed as, well, that's a

26:18

student and if the student cannot adapt to

26:18

environment X, then that's on the student.

26:23

It's not on the mentor. But really helping people to see,

26:24

you know, you two are a pair,

26:27

you're coming into this as a pair

26:27

of scientists who are working

26:31

collaboratively to solve a problem. And if it's viewed as a communal

26:33

shared responsibility, I think a lot of

26:38

times there's a lot more emphasis and

26:38

determination from the faculty to engage.

26:44

And I also agree with you, Tom, I

26:44

think, you know, if you want to ask

26:48

people to do something, you have to give

26:48

them the resources to be good at it.

26:51

And I think what happens a lot of

26:51

times is, you know, grant announcements

26:54

will come out or, um, there'll be

26:54

other things where, you know, it's

26:58

asking faculty to like work on your

26:58

mentorship, but then they say how.

27:01

And so if you're not providing

27:01

the, the courses or the trainings

27:05

to do it, and you're not providing

27:05

capacity building exercises, I

27:08

think it can be very overwhelming. And so then they will, in term, you know,

27:10

turn back to the practices that they

27:14

experienced themselves, which may or may

27:14

not have been the healthiest practices.

27:18

Um, and then the last

27:18

thing that I'll say is.

27:21

You know, I know at Duke, we've just

27:21

done a pretty comprehensive look at

27:25

our tenure standards across the board. And the reality is, you know, for

27:27

faculty getting tenure, getting

27:31

advancement or promotion, regardless

27:31

of what kind of faculty title or

27:35

rank you hold, um, is very important.

27:38

And so if mentorship is a part of

27:38

that equation and you know that it

27:41

is part of what determines if you are

27:41

viewed as successful in your field.

27:45

I do think that it's something that

27:45

people will take more seriously.

27:48

I also know that some of the changes

27:48

that NIH has made, where there are

27:52

mentorship courses and trainings that are

27:52

required to get, you know, be eligible

27:56

for certain funding opportunities. That makes a big difference.

27:59

So really tying the incentives to

27:59

the things that scientists care

28:02

about really seems to matter in

28:02

terms of motivating people properly.

28:06

I just want to make a quick point about incentives. I think that we also have to be clear

28:08

that the incentives have to be commiserate

28:12

with the behaviors that we want to see. And I think just from a very brief study I

28:14

did a few years ago, on many campuses the

28:19

mentoring awards are not as prestigious

28:19

or have the same kind of dollar value

28:24

to them that a research grant would. And for me, myself and my career,

28:26

I years ago was called and said

28:30

that I had been nominated for a

28:30

mentoring award by my college.

28:33

And the reward was that communications

28:33

and branding was going to come

28:36

out and take pictures of me that

28:36

would be posted across campus.

28:40

And so I had to ask a primarily white

28:40

institution, "well, who gets the

28:44

most out of a black woman's picture

28:44

of being posted across campus?"

28:48

They are getting more than I'm getting for

28:48

the supposed recognition of my mentoring.

28:53

And if we really want mentoring to count,

28:53

we have to have mentoring awards that are

28:57

named after someone who has prestige in

28:57

the field and it goes on your CV and will

29:02

matter when people are reviewing your CV

29:02

for promotion, letters, and merit raises.

29:06

So I said to them, we need the

29:06

equivalent of the Sherilynn

29:09

Black Award for Mentoring! I don't want to be on the lamppost.

29:12

I want a named award on my CV.

29:15

And so I think we really have to ask

29:15

ourselves, even when we put incentives

29:18

in place, are they true incentives

29:18

that are going to encourage people to

29:22

take this as seriously as you would

29:22

getting an early career research award?

29:26

And we know how to do

29:26

that, if we so choose.

29:28

Beronda, I happily

29:28

award you the first ever [laughter]

29:33

Sherilynn Black Mentorship Award.

29:34

Yes! You heard it hear first!

29:34

You heard it here first!

29:37

It's a hot take, it's

29:37

a hot take [laughter].

29:40

So we have, we

29:40

have a mentoring award like that.

29:43

It is named, and it is something

29:43

that two people a year get

29:46

and you can put it on your CV. And I have to hope that it helps.

29:50

Yes

29:50

When you're

29:50

turning in an F32 or a K99, to

29:54

say, is this person a good mentor?

29:57

Yes! They got an award for it. I certainly know that when I sit

29:59

on the study section that reviews

30:01

those, if somebody says they've

30:01

got a mentoring award, it's kind

30:05

of hard to fault them for that.

30:07

mmhmm

30:07

So those things

30:07

do matter, that's a great idea.

30:10

So I actually, I want

30:10

to go back to something Sherilynn and

30:13

Beronda touched on, which is this issue

30:13

around culture and climate, and you

30:18

know, what are some strategies that

30:18

programs can use to be proactive around

30:24

issues of inclusion, whether it's

30:24

race, ethnicity, disability, gender,

30:29

um, you know, all the various aspects

30:29

of ourselves that we bring to the lab.

30:33

Well, I really go

30:33

back to something that Sherilynn said

30:36

is that we can't separate the issues.

30:38

And I think that you know, of the

30:38

work that's been coming out of, uh,

30:41

University of Wisconsin, Madison, some

30:41

of Sherilynn's work and other people's

30:45

work, there's a lot of work now about

30:45

cultural competence and mentoring.

30:49

And there's a lot of questions, not

30:49

just about cultural competence, but

30:53

understanding that we still live in

30:53

environments that have structural

30:57

racism and structural sexism. And so we have to be willing to have

30:59

tough conversations about how that

31:02

shows up in our spaces at the same time

31:02

that we're talking about mentoring.

31:06

Because the reality is that we're

31:06

people doing the mentoring and we

31:10

don't leave all of these social issues

31:10

at the door of our labs and offices

31:14

when we walk into these spaces. And so I've been encouraged, you

31:15

know, to look at some of the work by

31:18

Angela Byars-Winston and others who

31:18

are really centering how do we have

31:23

conversations about these issues in

31:23

the context of human interaction,

31:26

including mentoring relationships

31:26

and leadership relationships.

31:29

Yeah, and I

31:29

would add to that, you know, that

31:32

the scholarship is critically

31:32

important for faculty to understand.

31:35

Um, I just want to put in a plug as

31:35

an intervention scientist myself, you

31:39

know, uh, this is a field with just as

31:39

many experts as any other scientific

31:44

field that I urge you to explore the

31:44

literature, look at the practices, um,

31:48

you know, look at the experimentation. Um, I always give the example of,

31:50

if I was wanting to do an experiment

31:54

on T-cells, I would not read a

31:54

book in the popular press, and

31:57

then think that I was ready to go. I would talk to an immunologist

31:58

and I would understand, you know,

32:02

what's at stake so that I could

32:02

truly be rigorous and excellent.

32:04

And I think, um, in the area of mentorship

32:04

and areas relating to diversity and

32:08

equity work, unfortunately, I think a lot

32:08

of institutions tend to, you know, make

32:13

sort of jumps that are based off of how

32:13

we feel about things instead of what the

32:17

data and evidence show we should be doing. Um, so to that end one thing that I

32:19

would say about, you know, thinking

32:23

about a first step, of thinking about

32:23

how to make spaces more equitable, I

32:27

always tell schools that I'm working

32:27

with, you know, don't make assumptions

32:31

about what the issues are in your unit. Understand context by getting that

32:33

information from the constituents

32:37

you say you most want to serve.

32:39

So doing these climate surveys, which

32:39

a lot of people have tried to do over

32:44

the last few years, some, you know, have

32:44

done them to better degrees than others.

32:48

There are a lot of validated instruments

32:48

that are out there for departments to

32:52

use, to get a really clear understanding

32:52

of, um, what's actually going on

32:56

with the lived experience of all

32:56

the constituent groups in your unit.

33:00

I'm talking faculty, staff, and students. And you know, I've heard some people say,

33:02

oh, we already know what the issues are.

33:06

But if that's the case, that means

33:06

that one of two things is happening.

33:09

One, you knew that issues existed

33:09

that were making it challenging

33:12

for people in your units and

33:12

you didn't do anything about it.

33:15

Or two, you knew that there were

33:15

issues going on, but you did not

33:19

take the time to get help from

33:19

expertise about how to address them.

33:23

So neither of those is a good practice

33:23

in mentorship or leadership, if you

33:26

really want to seek equity in units. So I really urge people to not make

33:28

assumptions about lived experiences.

33:33

Do those surveys, do focus groups, give

33:33

opportunities for authentic feedback.

33:38

That really goes far to help to provide

33:38

context and norm setting for scientists

33:43

who are interested in making spaces

33:43

more equitable and being proactive

33:46

about it, because understanding the

33:46

culture and the ethos of the space

33:50

where you're training people will help

33:50

all the people in the unit, not just

33:54

people from underrepresented groups

33:54

or people who might be in a position

33:57

where they may need additional support.

33:59

Well said, and I

33:59

would say that it's one of those

34:03

things that the institution has to

34:03

push or the leadership of a program,

34:06

of a department, of an Institution. When we've done those climate surveys,

34:09

they were very revealing and the listening

34:14

labs and focus groups very helpful.

34:17

And it was far too easy to say,

34:17

"Hey, I've done this for 30 years, I

34:22

think, you know, I'm cool, I'm cool."

34:25

But you go to the listening labs, you

34:25

look at the survey and you do learn.

34:29

It really is a productive engagement.

34:32

So we're going to

34:32

have a lightening round for each of you

34:35

to tell us about some innovative practices

34:35

that excite you about mentoring and that

34:40

other people should consider bringing

34:40

to their programs or institutions.

34:45

You know, there are a

34:45

lot of exciting things around mentorship

34:49

that I've seen happening, both at Duke

34:49

and, um, sort of at the national level.

34:55

I can give a couple of really cool things. The first thing I'll say is, you know,

34:57

I was formerly a PI of an IMSD program,

35:02

and one of the things that we did in that

35:02

program that was really successful was

35:05

we were really huge fans of vertically

35:05

integrated mentoring structures.

35:09

So instead of just having a situation

35:09

where, um, you know, there's an advisor

35:14

and their graduate student, for example,

35:14

we formed, um, what we colloquially

35:18

referred to as "science squads" [chuckles]

35:18

where we had an undergraduate student,

35:23

a graduate student, a post-doc and a

35:23

faculty that were all together, that were

35:27

all sort of disciplinarily, um, similar

35:27

in terms of the kinds of questions that

35:32

they wanted, but it also gave everyone

35:32

a chance to sort of get to know someone

35:36

else in their discipline, have a sort of

35:36

safe space to be able to talk about issues

35:40

that were going on and really helped

35:40

the students to learn how to do peer

35:45

mentoring, how to do, um, you know, sort

35:45

of the near peer communications that are

35:49

so important for scientific development.

35:51

So, you know, anything that you

35:51

can do where you look at sort

35:54

of paired forms of mentorship. I always think that those are

35:56

a really great way to start.

35:59

I just saw a talk, um, at an NIH panel

35:59

I did recently from the University of

36:03

Kentucky, where they're doing pairs

36:03

of mentors for junior faculty and

36:07

senior faculty from underrepresented

36:07

groups that are coming in.

36:10

I thought that sounded like a really

36:10

interesting idea to provide community,

36:14

um, and a very specialized kind of

36:14

mentoring for underrepresented faculty.

36:17

I would also say that anything with

36:17

mentoring that allows for increased

36:23

self-awareness of the mentor, especially

36:23

when positionality is involved and we're

36:27

talking about faculty and students. I think that, you know, anything that's

36:29

going on that helps to raise awareness,

36:33

how we ourselves can have better

36:33

understanding of our own mentoring

36:36

practices, more cultural awareness,

36:36

more values-based leadership practices.

36:41

All of those really excite me

36:41

because what that means is that

36:45

both directions of the mentorship

36:45

relationship will be more fulfilling.

36:48

It won't just be the faculty

36:48

always being the person to give.

36:52

It will be a more bi-directional

36:52

relationship that usually

36:55

helps everyone involved.

36:57

I would say one of

36:57

the innovative practices that I've seen,

37:00

that I'm really excited about is following

37:00

the expertise and not the presumed,

37:05

um, who has the greater standing. And so we have moved to some models and

37:07

spaces I've been in where non-tenured

37:10

faculty are the mentors for senior

37:10

faculty and teaching because they

37:14

have the expertise in teaching. We have students doing the mentoring

37:16

around social communication,

37:20

because they are the ones who are

37:20

out there using Twitter to start

37:23

things like Black in X weeks. And so we have really started to

37:24

choose mentors based on expertise,

37:28

not on perceived hierarchy. And it's really flipping

37:30

things on their head. I'm really enjoying seeing

37:32

how this is playing out.

37:35

I love that.

37:36

Yeah, that's fantastic. I'll say along with that, the idea that

37:38

the PI should show their vulnerability,

37:44

should not feel obliged to feel like

37:44

they know all the answers, but should

37:49

be able to, you know, admit that

37:49

they too may have imposter syndrome.

37:53

That they too may have insecurities.

37:56

That they don't know the answer to things. That is, I think really important

37:58

for the mentoring relationship and it

38:03

sets up the pathway that can be a real

38:03

partnership and not always the, you

38:09

know, the authority and the trainee.

38:11

Yeah, and the last thing

38:11

that I'll say, that I think is really

38:15

interesting is, you know, we've added

38:15

something to our mentorship practices

38:19

at Duke that we're piloting right now,

38:19

which is, um, you know, engaging career

38:24

coaching as a part of mentorship. And I know a lot of people are doing

38:26

career coaching, but what's unique

38:28

about what we're doing with it is

38:28

that we are doing career coaching

38:31

with a culturally aware lens. So we have a career coach who's actually

38:33

gotten training, um, on sort of the

38:38

foundational elements of coaching,

38:38

but it's doing it specifically to

38:41

enhance, um, and sort of bring cultural

38:41

awareness and infuse it into all of

38:45

the career decisions that are happening

38:45

as the trainees are being mentored.

38:50

So we're currently piloting this with

38:50

junior faculty in our School of Medicine,

38:54

with the idea that we will look to see,

38:54

does this improve their ability to sort

38:59

of bring their whole self into their

38:59

career decisions and make decisions that

39:03

are more in line with their cultural

39:03

perspectives and values as they go

39:06

throughout their scientific training. [musical interlude]

39:12

So thank you all

39:12

for sharing your wisdom today.

39:15

And can I ask each of you for

39:15

one last piece of parting advice?

39:19

The parting advice

39:19

that I would give is that mentoring

39:22

really should be about helping the person

39:22

being mentored move towards their full

39:27

self, as a scholar, as a person, and the

39:27

contributions that they want to make.

39:31

And I think that we need people who are

39:31

being mentored to really focus on what

39:34

unique contributions they could bring and

39:34

find the mentoring networks that help.

39:38

Otherwise, we keep reproducing versions

39:38

of people who are already in these spaces,

39:42

and if we're really going to move to where

39:42

we want to be, we need new approaches, new

39:46

views, and that comes from people really

39:46

holding on to the unique contributions

39:49

that they want to make and finding

39:49

the mentors that help them do that.

39:52

You know, I think

39:52

I would say that, um, it's really

39:56

important for us as faculty to

39:56

approach mentorship with humility.

40:00

There is a phenomenon in psychology

40:00

called the Dunning-Kruger effect

40:03

and the idea behind that is that

40:03

we tend to overestimate our ability

40:06

to deal with complex issues. And there's been a lot of research lately

40:08

showing that things like race and gender

40:12

fall under the umbrella of complex issues.

40:14

I would certainly anticipate that

40:14

mentorship would be another very sort of

40:18

socially constructed, complex set of human

40:18

relationships that would be challenging.

40:23

So I think it's important to approach

40:23

it with humility, with the understanding

40:27

that you may not always get everything

40:27

right, or even sometimes your instincts

40:30

about what to do may not be right. But also realizing you should never

40:32

underestimate the importance of you

40:36

trying, because the impact of you being an

40:36

effective mentor and really trying to, you

40:42

know, add to and cultivate someone else's

40:42

life will have such long lasting impact.

40:46

It's always worth the attempt,

40:46

while always sort of keeping

40:49

humility that this is a lifelong

40:49

process of learning in this area.

40:53

And I would just

40:53

add that it's one of the most

40:57

rewarding aspects of our job. It's both a sacred responsibility, but

40:59

it's also something that is, uh, as

41:04

satisfying as anything you'll publish,

41:04

as anything that you'll discover to

41:09

know that you have managed to support

41:09

and guide and allow another scientist

41:16

to reach their full potential. It's a tremendously rewarding

41:18

thing and people should embrace

41:22

that role wholeheartedly.

41:24

And

41:24

Marguerite, what's your advice?

41:28

Maybe less

41:28

advice and more encouragement of folks

41:31

who are on the faculty hunt to find

41:31

institutions and programs that value

41:36

mentorship and are going to invest in

41:36

you as a mentor and provide or give

41:43

you access to resources that will

41:43

help you, um, continue to be a better

41:48

mentor, whether it's just starting out

41:48

or being someone who's a full professor

41:52

and been in that position for decades. What about you, Lauren?

41:57

I think I want

41:57

to underscore something Sherilynn

41:59

said earlier, which is that you

41:59

don't have to reinvent the wheel.

42:04

There is a huge literature out there.

42:06

And as scientists, like our first instinct

42:06

should be to go to the literature and

42:11

see what have people tried before? What has worked?

42:14

What's the evidence base

42:14

around what we're doing?

42:17

And then collect data to see whether

42:17

the programs we're implementing

42:22

are working as intended, or maybe

42:22

they have unintended consequences.

42:26

And these are incredibly complex

42:26

environments where you have all

42:29

these different people, right? It's not just the mentor-mentee, it's

42:30

a whole suite of mentors and mentees

42:35

in this, um, this social situation.

42:37

So, you don't have to go it alone.

42:39

You don't have to go by your gut. You can go to the experts and get help.

42:43

[outro music] So that's all we have time for

42:47

today on Building Up the Nerve.

42:51

This season, we are ending every

42:51

episode with a reflection question.

42:55

So this episode, we invite you to

42:55

reflect on how does the way your

42:58

program or workplace is structured

42:58

influence the quality of mentoring

43:02

received by the various participants,

43:02

and what changes could you make to

43:06

help both mentors and mentees thrive?

43:10

Thank you to our guests this week

43:10

for sharing their expertise and thank

43:13

you to NINDS program director, Dr.

43:15

Bob Riddle, who composed

43:15

our theme song and music.

43:19

And that's a wrap for Season Three!

43:21

You can find past episodes of this

43:21

podcast and many more grant application

43:25

resources on the web at ninds.nih.gov.

43:31

Be sure to follow us on Twitter

43:31

@NINDSDiversity and @NINDSFunding.

43:36

You can email us questions and ideas for

43:36

Season Four at [email protected].

43:43

Make sure you subscribe to the podcast

43:43

on apple podcasts or your podcast app

43:48

of choice so you don't miss an episode. We'll see you next season.