Dr. Lisa Cook
From testifying on Capitol Hill to writing an opinion piece on the pages of the New York Times, Dr. Lisa Cook has helped bring new attention and research focus to racial and gender inequalities in economic and academic opportunities and outcomes. Now, she is using IRIS data to continue her research by looking at how such inequalities are manifested in the “innovation economy,” through the interactions of patent awards, wealth creation, and research training.
Cook, an Associate Professor of Economics and International Relations at Michigan State University with an appointment at the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research, was a recipient of an IRIS researcher award in 2018 for her project “The Idea Gap in Pink and Black.” This research is using IRIS data to explain the mechanisms underlying the differences in applying for, obtaining and commercializing patents experienced by African Americans and women.
In this question-and-answer session with IRIS, Cook talks about her approach to her research, the potential of IRIS data and products, and her attempts to isolate the causes of racial and gender disparities.
Q: Please describe your current research.
A: What factors effect invention and innovation, that’s the overarching question. Now, I’m looking at racial and gender disparities in invention and innovation at every stage of innovation. [The first stage is] training and basic education in STEM, and the second would be the actual practice of invention, like working in a lab, coming up with a patent. And then the third would be commercialization, and IPOs for example. So at every stage what we see is that there are gaps, and they just grow at each juncture. And I think it’s interesting, and I want to get to the bottom of it using UMETRICS data. I want to figure out where these disparities come in, especially starting with education and training. …
One theory is that women receive less funding at the educational stage, which carries over into the invention stage … they aren’t in those funding networks and they have lower productivity with respect to patenting in the middle. And then that has implications for the end, or they may never get to the end because they may never have had a patent.
So, I’m looking at that. I’m looking at the same for African Americans. … But I’m also now looking at something a bit broader. I’m looking at inequality, because we know STEM economy incomes or innovation economy incomes are much higher, two to three times higher than the average salary in the United States.
You have this disparity that happens in the beginning and then it becomes larger in the middle if you’re talking about income. But then if you move to the third stage, we start talking about wealth and wealth inequality. Ten of the most valuable companies by market capitalization are tech firms, and seven of the ten richest people are related to tech… Women are largely absent. There’s a direct relationship between all three stages. So I’m writing about the inequality that arises from a lack of participation in every stage.
Q: How will working with the IRIS UMETRICS data help you answer these questions?
I can look at graduate students, and even undergraduates who participate on research teams on awards, and I can follow them to further awards, and I can follow them to other outcomes… But if I can just trace out who was working on what research team, and what the trajectory was over time, that’s the helpful first stage. And then ultimately we should have them matched to patents and that should be telling.
Q: What might some of the applications of this research be in order to increase participation of women and African Americans in STEM education and the technology workforce?
A: It might be thinking more broadly about how professors assemble labs, making a workplace or lab culture that’s friendlier to people, for example, who have disproportionate childcare obligations.
One of the most telling things that I heard at large Silicon Valley tech firms in my visits there was asking people about women on their patent and design teams… What they said was they noticed that women were penalized because they weren’t there 24/7… And they may be working on a project, but her voice isn’t there [after normal working hours], so she isn’t considered a contributor even though between 9 and 5 she’s contributing… So I think there are some interventions that have nothing to do with resources, just having people be more thoughtful about work time, the way they work.
[This interview was conducted and edited by Dan Meisler, IRIS Communications and Marketing Coordinator.]