Chapter 08: Reflections on Career, Mentoring and Leadership
Files
Description
Dr. Spitz notes that she would like to be able to spend more time with her grandchildren, an observation that leads her to share that mentoring has been both the most challenging and rewarding dimension of her career.
Dr. Spitz explains that she had no real mentors, which made her realize how important this is. She talks about the ways in which she has mentored others and distinguishes scientific mentors from career mentors. She also explains that she didn’t really plan her career but was in the “right place at the right time.”
She next talks about her leadership style and explains that to be a lea
ders, one must have reached a career pinnacle and leave competition behind. She talks about participating in leadership training and offers advice to young leaders.
Identifier
SpitzM_02_20161101_C08
Publication Date
11-1-2016
Publisher
The Historical Resources Center, Research Medical Library, The University of Texas Cancer Center
City
Houston, Texas
Interview Session
Margaret Spitz, MD, Oral History Interview, November 01, 2016
Keywords
View on Career and Accomplishments; Personal Background; Definitions, Explanations, Translations; Leadership; On Leadership; Mentoring; On Mentoring
Topics Covered
The Interview Subject's Story - View on Career and Accomplishments; Personal Background; Definitions, Explanations, Translations; Leadership; On Leadership; Mentoring; On Mentoring
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
Disciplines
History of Science, Technology, and Medicine | Oncology | Oral History
Transcript
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Today is November 1st, 2016. And today I’m at the Baylor College of Medicine for my second session with Dr. Margaret Spitz. So thank you very much. And we found a quieter room today.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Yes, we sure did.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
No, none of the Texas Medical Center construction in the background.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, and November the 1st, is actually an interesting day, because it’s my eldest, my oldest grandchild’s birthday. And he turned 17.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Wow.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
So it makes me realize how time is marching on and how important it is to carpe diem and take advantage of every day.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Is there something that you would like to plan to seize today, or in the near future?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, I think I would like to spend more time with my grandchildren, I think, and try and influence them the way I’ve tried to influence junior faculty—(cellphone rings)
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Well, that’s quite a lovely ringtone.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Sorry about that. (laughter)
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
That’s all right.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
The way I was able to influence, or try and mentor young faculty, I would absolutely love to be able to do the same and more with my grandchildren.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Tell me a bit about the whole mentoring piece. I was actually—that was one of the things on my list to ask you about later, because education is obviously really key, and you’re doing a lot of mentoring.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Yes. Well, I think that was, to me, the most challenging, the most difficult, but the most rewarding part of my career. And as department chair, I spent more time helping the junior faculty than probably any other component, perhaps with the exception of dealing with some difficult administrative issues. It was certainly the part that I realized, or I believe was critical to a successful department chair.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Now what were some of the issues that would arise that you found that you needed to bring a mentoring hand to?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, for example, in grant submission. I would always help defining the specific aims of a project, because I always told the young faculty that the reviewer had decided by the end of the first page of the grant, reading the specific aims and the significance, whether he or she was going to fund that project. And that was—that more time should be spent on that than on anything else. I also told them I had the philosophy of KISS—Keep It Simple, Stupid. And I always said that reviewers never said there were not enough specific aims. The criticism always was they had too many specific aims, and this project is over-ambitious. So those were the types of—and as I spent a lot of time helping them with specific aims of a project, less so with background, significance, preliminary data. But certainly I stressed the importance of the first page of any grant application. So that was one way. I helped with manuscript writing, with deciding who should be co-authoring the manuscript. I always taught them that inclusion was so much better than exclusion. You know, try and be as inclusive as possible. Rather err on the side of inclusion than exclusion.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Why did you feel that was so important?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Because, so this is the era of team science. And we have to recognize everybody’s contribution to a project, even if it was only by giving samples or data, or even advice. But I, myself, never really cared. I didn’t want to be on any of their papers, unless I felt I had materially contributed to the science of the project. So very often I wasn’t even featured on the paper. And that never bothered me at all. I always felt the success of the junior faculty was a reflection on my own success as a chair. So I felt that it was a win-win situation in all aspects.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Now if I’m remembering correctly, you didn’t have an awful lot of mentors in—
Margaret Spitz, MD:
No, I had very few, if any. And that was why I realized how important it was to have mentors. So I always say, “Do as I say, but not do as I did.”
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
How do you think things would have been different if you had a mentor? What kind of mentor would you have found helpful?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, for example, I never knew how important it was to write grants and to be funded. Nobody told me how to write a grant, or how grants were reviewed. This was something I learned by trial and error. And perhaps when I went onto a study section was the first time I realized how important it was to be a fair and accurate reviewer, because one could destroy people’s careers. In the very first days of study section, we used to get paper copies. And when we were finished with a grant, we used to throw them into big cardboard boxes. And I used to think we’re throwing people’s careers into the boxes.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Wow. That’s a very sad image.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
And in those days, it was much easier to get funding, the percentile was much higher. Now it’s really tough, especially for young people. And I feel very sorry for people struggling to get funding.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
What kind of mentor would have been helpful to you, do you think? What are some other key issues?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, I think scientific mentors and perhaps career mentors as well. Both types of mentors are helpful.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
What’s the difference?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, a scientific mentor is somebody who will give you advice in terms of the science of your program. You know, help you with defining the aims, what preliminary data are important, what the translational potential of the grant is, what the next steps should be, and so on. A career mentor does not need to have technological expertise in your particular area of research; rather, they need to teach you how to mentor, how to become involved in team science, how to volunteer to serve on study sections, and how to become involved in committee meetings, programs, and so on. And they don’t—of course, the two can be combined, and that’s fantastic. But it’s not always necessary. On the other hand, mentors must have the recognition, the national and international recognition, so that they can nominate you for awards. They can recommend you for study sections. They can suggest that you give a talk in a scientific national meeting, and so on. So they can play critical roles in helping junior faculty move forward in their careers.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
When did you begin to think about your own professional path as a career, that you were making active choices in?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, you know, it just happened without—that’s not the answer I should give, but that is the truth. It just happened. As I said before, I was lucky to be in the right place at the right time. But as I tell the young people, it’s not enough to be in the right place at the right time. You have to recognize that you’re in the right place at the right time. Otherwise, it’s neither the right place nor the right time. So I was just lucky. And I jumped on opportunities that were offered. I don’t think it would happen again so easily. I think I was just lucky. Very lucky.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
It’s a different time now.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
It’s a different time now.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Very different environment, too.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Absolutely, yes.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Now, I wanted to ask you too about leadership issues, you know, because obviously you’ve had some really key roles in shaping departments, programs. How do you feel—maybe I should ask you what kind of leader do you feel you are? What are your real strengths?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, I try to be a democratic leader, in other words, to involve the faculty in decision making. It didn’t always work, but when it did, it was great. And when it didn’t work, I felt you had to be a benign despot, with an emphasis on benign. So that was number one. Number two, I think to be successful as a leader, you have to feel that you’ve achieved everything you want for yourself. And now, all the achievements must go to the department and to the faculty. And I always noted that department chairs who hadn’t yet reached their peak in their scientific career were often not good department chairs, because they still were fighting for their own careers, and they didn’t have the time and the broad perspective to help fight for their junior faculty’s careers.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
That’s a theme I’ve heard repeated in these interviews.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Oh, really?
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Yes. It’s very interesting. Over and over, people say—
Margaret Spitz, MD:
And I’ve often, you know, and I could see sometimes when people were selected to become department chairs, I could tell this one is ready, this one’s not ready. And I was very sad to say I was often correct.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Interesting. Now in terms of your developing yourself as a leader, how do you feel that happened? And what were the challenges for you along the way? And we can go into—
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, I had no training as a leader at all. And I never thought of myself as leader. At one stage, I was sent by MD Anderson to an executive leadership program at Rice. And we met every Friday afternoon. And I loved those programs. They used the Harvard Business School model, and we often worked in teams. And I knew immediately whose team I wanted to be on, because there were certain people who were just innately good leaders and did well. And it was a great experience, and I did learn a lot from that experience.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
What were your big takeaways from that? What did you learn about yourself? What did you learn about how to act?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, I learned that you had to look at the whole picture, you had to consider the circumstances. But in the end, the buck stops with you, and you have to make the decision. And you have to be proactive. And you have to address problems before they become pervasive.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
What were some of the biggest challenges you felt you had to confront in your leadership roles?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
Well, I was representing epidemiology, which was not a top tier discipline early on. So I always—I felt that I was considered a second class citizen in the beginning, but then when the SPORE programs came on, it was required that each SPORE program had a population science project. And very often they wanted an epidemiology project. So all of a sudden, we were in tremendous demand. And all of a sudden, we became part of the scene, the MD Anderson scene. And that was very gratifying. And at one stage, I think we had projects in seven or eight spores.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
Oh my gosh. That’s huge.
Margaret Spitz, MD:
So it was great for the department.
T. A. Rosolowski, PhD:
What advice would you give? What advice do you give as you’re mentoring for younger people coming up, and trying to think about leadership roles?
Margaret Spitz, MD:
That’s an interesting question. I think they have to show innately that they are destined for a leadership role. Some people will never have a leadership role. And that’s okay, too. There are many people whose science is outstanding, but who have very poor administrative skills. And they shouldn’t try—they should try to focus on this science, and be a scientific leader in their team, and not worry about administrative roles. So I think it depends on the person and their own successes and failures. So I don’t think you can give overall advice. Each person is unique, and has unique skills and attributes, and failures and difficulties and challenges.
Recommended Citation
Spitz, Margaret R. MD and Rosolowksi, Tacey A. PhD, "Chapter 08: Reflections on Career, Mentoring and Leadership" (2016). Interview Chapters. 1592.
https://openworks.mdanderson.org/mchv_interviewchapters/1592
Conditions Governing Access
Open
