Researchers have found that completing a PhD in environments where teams are larger can negatively impact academic career opportunities.
The recent Paris Olympics showcased that success often relies on teamwork to win medals.
Although teamwork has proven effective in athletics, a new study indicates that it may not always be beneficial—especially for emerging scientists seeking academic employment.
“Our research shows that larger team sizes in a field decrease the chances of having a successful academic career,” stated Donna Ginther, the Roy A. Roberts Distinguished Professor of Economics at the University of Kansas.
In her paper titled “The rise of teamwork and career prospects in academic science,” Ginther highlights that individuals graduating with their doctorate in fields with larger average teams face diminished career opportunities. The findings suggest that the academic science community has yet to modify its reward system, which mainly favors individual achievements, in light of the rise of team-based research. This study is published in Nature Biotechnology.
“We’ve observed a shift in the number of authors on papers within our field,” Ginther explained. “Back when I graduated, economics had many single-author papers. Nowadays, papers frequently have three to five authors, effectively doubling the average. This trend is especially pronounced in scientific fields. Following the doubling of the National Institutes of Health budget, there was an increase of about one additional author per paper.”
The research, co-authored by Mabel Andalón, Catherine de Fontenay, and Kwanghui Lim from the University of Melbourne, utilized career outcome data from the Survey of Doctorate Recipients and publication statistics from ISI Web of Science. It also included a regression analysis on individual career outcomes to account for changes in the profiles of new scientists, such as the prestige of their doctoral institutions.
“We inquired whether larger average team sizes impact anything and, if so, how that affects careers,” Ginther elaborated.
“Our co-authors, Catherine de Fontenay and Kwanghui Lim, created a theoretical model showing that in large teams, it becomes difficult to identify individual contributions to a paper. This creates uncertainty about one’s scientific prowess. However, when there are only two authors, individual contributions are clear, enhancing the recognition of each person’s work.”
This confusion leads to challenges in attributing credit, which can affect job prospects and the likelihood of securing research funding.
“All the trends we’re observing—like the time it takes to transition from earning your PhD to landing your first academic position, or securing an R01 grant—can be attributed to the increase in team sizes,” she noted.
Ginther recently spent six months in Australia for a sabbatical, forming research collaborations with her University of Melbourne colleagues.
“I’ve conducted extensive research on early career scientists,” she shared. “For this paper, I particularly appreciated the model we used and the logic behind our findings. The academic landscape is vast and intricate, where teamwork plays a crucial role. Being a solitary thinker is not feasible; navigating teamwork is essential.”
Now celebrating her 22nd year at KU, Ginther specializes in labor economics and directs the Institute for Policy & Social Research, a collaborative center for faculty and students engaged in funded social and behavioral science research.
Ginther believes her findings might extend to other fields beyond academia.
“I’m very interested in exploring the military, where teamwork is foundational. How do team size and composition influence career paths?” she posed.
Ultimately, Ginther underscores that the main insight from this research is the relationship between funding and team size.
“If we can encourage the formation of smaller groups of scientists, this could prompt policy changes supported by our findings,” she argued. “Smaller teams may yield better results in both scientific discovery and career advancement compared to larger, more dispersed teams.”
