Department of Surgery, Center for Health Outcomes and Policy, Institute for Health Policy and Innovation (IHPI), Michigan Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Department of Surgery, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan; National Clinician Scholars Program, Institute for Healthcare Policy & Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Department of Surgery, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
J Surg Res. 2020 Oct;254:23-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2020.03.054. Epub 2020 May 8.
To increase workforce diversity among academic medical centers, the Association of American Medical Colleges recommends multiple inclusive strategies for evaluating and hiring candidates. Our objective was to determine (1) usual and inclusive hiring practices used among academic surgery departments and (2) the barriers to utilization of inclusive hiring practices.
We used a qualitative design and conducted semistructured interviews with academic surgery department chairs (n = 19). Participants were interviewed by phone between March 2018 and June 2018 until thematic saturation was reached. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Coding for major themes was conducted independently by two investigators and discussed to consensus iteratively using thematic analysis.
Rather than broad and publicly available postings, many chairs reported soliciting a small number of applications from trusted networks. Although chairs report making efforts to include women or underrepresented minority candidates in interview pools, these efforts are not typically formalized. Chairs often reported an inability to secure diverse applicant pools, given the narrow specialty or clinical niche for which applications were being solicited. A major emergent theme was an assessment of a "candidate's fit" for the department. For this reason, recruiting current or former trainees was considered a safe opportunity for the department, given a perception of loyalty and trust in the internal training program for surgical preparation.
Many chairs rely heavily on internal hires or trusted networks, which may limit both demographic and cognitive diversity. These findings highlight gaps between best inclusive hiring practices described in other industries and usual strategies for recruitment in US academic surgery.
为了增加学术医学中心的员工多样性,美国医学协会建议采取多种包容性策略来评估和招聘候选人。我们的目的是确定(1)学术外科部门常用的和包容性的招聘实践,以及(2)利用包容性招聘实践的障碍。
我们采用定性设计,对学术外科部门主任(n=19)进行了半结构化访谈。参与者在 2018 年 3 月至 6 月期间通过电话接受访谈,直到达到主题饱和。访谈进行了录音,并逐字逐句地转录。两名调查员独立进行主要主题的编码,并使用主题分析进行反复讨论以达成共识。
许多主任报告说,他们不是通过广泛和公开的发布来征集申请,而是从信任的网络中征集少量的申请。尽管主任们表示正在努力将女性或少数族裔候选人纳入面试池,但这些努力通常没有正式化。主任们经常报告说,由于正在征集申请的专业或临床利基狭窄,他们无法获得多样化的申请人池。一个主要的新兴主题是评估候选人是否适合该部门。出于这个原因,招聘现任或前任学员被认为是该部门的一个安全机会,因为人们对内部培训计划在外科准备方面的忠诚和信任。
许多主任严重依赖内部招聘或信任的网络,这可能会限制人口统计学和认知多样性。这些发现突显了美国学术外科中描述的最佳包容性招聘实践与通常的招聘策略之间的差距。