A university president must act responsibly and consequentially
Prof. Ulrike Beisiegel recounts how her academic career, including her many advisory roles, prepared her to be the first female President of the University of Göttingen in Germany.
By Ulrike Beisiegel with Janet G. Hering
10 December 2024, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.14265055
Prof. Ulrike Beisiegel served from 2011-2019 as President of the University of Göttingen in Germany [1, 2]. Re-elected after her first six-year term, she retired during her second term. Prior to her presidency, Beisiegel had a distinguished career as a professor of biochemistry. She was the Director of the Institute of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at the Medical Faculty of the University of Hamburg from 2001-2010 and received recognitions including honorary doctorates at the University of Umeå (Sweden) and of Edinburgh (Great Britain). She also served as member of the scientific advisory board to the German Government (Wissenschaftsrat) from 2006-2011 as well as on many other advisory boards. Here she answers questions about her career experiences.
How did you become an academic leader in STEMM?
Throughout my career, I had leadership responsibilities, initially for my research group as an Assistant Professor in the Medical Clinic at the University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf and then as an Institute Director. I also served as the Dean of Research for the Medical Faculty for
four years. The visibility and respect that I earned through my advisory and service activities with several organizations, including the German Research Foundation (DFG), the Leibniz Association, and the Wissenschaftsrat, led to my recruitment by the search committee from the Board of the University of Göttingen. I was not only the first women but also the first external candidate to be appointed as President. During my presidency, I gained further important experience as a member of the senate of the Max Planck Society.
Which of your accomplishments as a leader are you most proud of?
As a leader of a scientific research group, I was particularly proud to have established a working environment that promoted independence and self-reliance among my junior colleagues. This allowed my research group to function effectively even when I experienced a serious health crisis. As President, I was proud to have been able to bridge the cultural gap between the administration and ‘science’ (which, in the German tradition, includes the humanities and social sciences as well as the natural sciences). I feel that this was an important contribution to improving the working environment and effectiveness of the university.
What has been the most enjoyable and/or rewarding aspect of being a leader?
It was a huge privilege for me to lead a comprehensive university and to interact with very intelligent people from a wide range of disciplines. I appreciated being able to engage with university staff at all levels, including the technical support staff who keep the university running on a day-to-day basis. I already mentioned bridging the cultural gap between the administration and ‘science’ – it was very gratifying to hear a leading administrator say that, through my leadership, he came to understand the ‘sciences’. Outside the university, I found it very rewarding to contribute to promoting good scientific practice and ethics through my work with the Ombudsman panel of the German Research Foundation.
What has been the most difficult, least enjoyable, or most challenging aspect?
As a university President, I had to make some difficult decisions. After the 2015 earthquake in Nepal, I had to decide whether some students should evacuate their field site by bus since the professor leading the group had perished in the disaster. With help from a Nepalese co-worker, we were able to improve the safety of the bus trip. It was nerve-wracking to wait for confirmation that the trip had been completed safely, but a great relief when the students could return home physically unharmed.
The position of President entails responsibility for the entire university. It is a challenge to act responsibly and consequentially, especially in situations that involve personnel decisions. As President, I was faced with two cases of sexual harassment by professors. I took action in both of these cases, removing the professors from their posts. Both professors appealed my decision and even now – six years later – one of these cases is still pending. The other case was resolved in favor of dismissal.
What advice would you give to other women (or to your younger self) considering a position in academic leadership?
It is critical that a prospective leader understands the system and organization in which she will be working [3]. What are the responsibilities and authority of the position and what are the relevant regulations? Where can the incoming leader look for help? This information can be easily gained through informal networks by male colleagues, especially for a leader moving up within his own institution. It is much more difficult for women. For someone coming in from the outside (as I did), it is important to keep asking questions and understand the existing networks quickly. I was lucky to be able to hire both excellent executive and personal assistants. Having effective and trustworthy individuals in these positions was crucial to my success.
What systemic changes do you think would be the most beneficial for more women to have successful academic careers in STEMM?
I firmly believe that academia altogether needs more transparency and a better understanding and appreciation of the management aspects of academic leadership. Some practices in academia, such as very short (e.g., 1-2 year) rotating terms of office for deans or department heads, are simply incompatible with effective leadership and management. At a minimum, onboarding for new leaders should include the information relevant to management functions. Ideally, incoming leaders would receive training specifically designed for academic leaders and offered ongoing support within their organizations.
I feel strongly that improving university governance, especially in Europe, will benefit academics in general, men as well as women, and also society at large.
What are some of your plans or goals for the future?
Supporting women in academics is very important to me – I do this through individual mentoring and through my service on the advisory board of the European Women Rectors Association, EWORA [4]. In my social responsibility, I am for example active in supporting refugees in Germany. And of course, I am also enjoying my retirement, especially traveling and visiting with friends.
Conclusion and questions for further thought
As an editor for the Epistimi blog series, I would just like to say what an honor it is to include an interview with Ulrike Beisiegel in this series. The representation of women in top academic positions in Europe is even lower than that in the U.S. [5] so it is especially important to include the European perspective. We encourage our readers to share their thoughts, including suggestions for other women leaders to interview by email (epistimiblog@gmail.com).
Here are some questions for readers to consider:
· Do you see advisory roles in the scientific community as helping to prepare you for academic leadership?
· What do you think are the key management aspects of leadership?
· If you have experiences in both U.S. and European universities, how do you perceive the differences and similarities between them?
References and notes:
[1] https://www.uni-goettingen.de/en/curriculum+vitae/201405.html
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulrike_Beisiegel
[3] This echoes several points made in our posts https://www.epistimi.org/blog/a-stemm-womans-guide-to-leadership-characteristics-and-management-skills, https://www.epistimi.org/blog/embarking-on-a-new-leadership-position, and https://www.epistimi.org/blog/preparing-to-lead-effectively-through-emerging-challenges