Abstract
Abstract. Honours and awards bestowed by professional societies recognize and reward members who have advanced the goals and values of that society. All too often, however, awards reflect a small network of people who know about the awards and participate in the process. This network works wonderfully for the people lucky enough to be in it, but typically neglects the full range and breadth of scholarship and service within the society. We represent a combined 15+ years' experience on the honours' committee for a large professional society (the American Geophysical Union) and here offer strategies to increase the representation of honourees. Women represented less than 20 % of awardees when we first became committee members in 2008; women represented 50 % of awardees in 2019. There is still much to do to ensure that members from other typically under-represented groups (non-US members, members from under-represented races/ethnicities) are truly represented and honoured for outstanding science and service. We recommend forming canvassing committees that will scour the literature, conferences, and membership lists for appropriate and otherwise overlooked nominees; providing implicit bias training to selection committees; and ensuring selection committees focus on the criteria for the award rather than non-pertinent, often personal, information, as well as additional strategies that allow us to recognize our worthy colleagues.
Highlights
Honours Programs struggle to ensure that awardees look like their membership (e.g., Ball, 2014; Van Miegroet, 2016; AWIS, 2011; Holmes et al, 2011; Lincoln et al, 2012)
Data from the American Geophysical Union (AGU) from the last ten years reveal the under-representation of women and non-US members among awardees as well as of US inhabitants from under-represented groups (African American, LatinX, Native American, LGBTQ+)
Mid- and Late-Stage Career stages are defined by AGU based on “years since PhD” and not on absolute ages, such as “35– 45 years old”, because not all people follow the same career trajectory, and may receive a PhD later than the US median for Earth, Atmospheric and Ocean Sciences, which is (NSF, 2019)
Summary
Advertising ensures that as many members of the scientific community as possible will learn about the program and consider participating. The wording of the ad (are gender-specific nouns and adjectives used?) as well as any photos (who is represented as worthy of an award?) may expand or reduce the potential pools of nominators and nominees. The very name of the award may invite inclusion or promote exclusion. The relevance of an award, and the person for whom it is named, varies with time as our field evolves. We have heard younger scientists ask, “who is that?”, referring to an award named for a scientist whose work was highly relevant decades ago
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
