Beyond the Peak: What Keeps Women in Chromatography

Chromatography sits at the center of a fast-changing scientific landscape, yet the field still struggles to attract and retain the very talent it needs most. Over the past year and a half, LCGC International convened five roundtables with women across academia and industry to ask what’s holding careers back, and what’s helping them move forward.

Over the last decade the interest in chromatography in R&D and academia has increased, driven by new demands in cell and gene therapies as well as the developments in information-rich detection, multi-dimensional separations and ultrahigh-pressure liquid chromatography (UHPLC). Chromatography has transformed from a mature technique into an even more advanced, data-driven discipline with requirements in data science, artificial intelligence (AI), automation, and environmental considerations.

Unfortunately, the importance of chromatography is not reflected in the education of young students. They often encounter separation science too late or do not recognize this as a career path. However, the increased demands for chromatographic solutions require experts in chemistry, physics, data informatics, and hardware engineering. One of the solutions to avoid a shortage of dedicated talent is to encourage support more women to pursue a career in chromatography.

Over the past year and a half, LCGC International has organized several roundtables with women working in the chromatography field to identify potential career barriers and discuss possible solutions. The discussions with these passionate chromatographers offered valuable insights. 

How Panellists Entered the Field

Across the five discussions, most panellists described entering chromatography through indirect routes rather than deliberate career planning. Common entry points included a master's thesis project, a PhD in an adjacent area, or an early internship. Several noted that the specific technique — GC×GC, FFF, LC–MS/MS, SEC — was not something they had encountered as undergraduates, and that they only developed a strong interest once they had hands-on experience with it. A few panellists cited a specific teacher, supervisor, or mentor as the reason they pursued science at all.

Barriers Identified

Caregiving responsibilities were raised in nearly every discussion as a practical constraint on career progression. Specific issues mentioned included: the difficulty of leaving a lab mid-experiment, reduced ability to attend conferences or do extended travel, gaps in publication records during parental leave, and the cumulative effect of these on promotion applications. Panellists noted this falls more heavily on women than men in most of the countries represented, though several also said they had seen this beginning to shift. One panellist argued for extended paternity leave as a structural fix, framing it as beneficial to both parents rather than as a women's issue alone.

Underrepresentation in senior positions. One panellist cited figures suggesting that while chemistry undergraduate programs have approached or exceeded gender parity in some institutions, at professorial level the ratio is approximately 80/20 male-to-female, and that this has not shifted substantially over the 15 years she has been tracking it. She also cited RSC research showing systemic disadvantage for women as first or last authors on papers, and noted that where promotion criteria are pegged to average grant income, women are structurally disadvantaged because women on average receive or request less funding, even when grant success rates are comparable.

The "prove it again" dynamic. Several panellists described needing to demonstrate competence repeatedly in ways they felt male colleagues did not. One described this as the "prove it again bias" by name. Specific examples given included: comments that expressed surprise at a woman's technical knowledge, having contributions minimized after both success and failure, and feeling that credibility had to be rebuilt each time they entered a new environment.

Isolation at conferences, particularly for early-career researchers attending alone without an established group affiliation, was raised by panellists in several discussions. One participant described attending chromatography conferences alone during her postdoc after coming from an engineering background, and feeling excluded from existing networks.

The Key to a Successful and Fulfilling Career

Mentorship was mentioned in all five discussions. Panellists described mentors providing structured career guidance (including explicit checklists of steps to take), encouraging them to present at conferences early, supporting them through career transitions, and providing confidence at critical decision points. Several made a clear distinction between mentors, who offer advice, and sponsors, who actively advocate—nominating people for awards, recommending them for projects, and raising their name in conversations they are not part of, with one panellist describing sponsors as "the person who speaks about you in rooms you're not even in."

The Power of Networking

Conferences and presenting early. Multiple panellists credited being sent to conferences by their supervisors—even when they felt unprepared—as formative in building confidence and visibility. One panellist said she was enrolled in a LinkedIn workshop after her PhD, made a contact through that platform, and years later that person was the first interviewer she met on a long interview day.

Peer networks at the same career stage. One panellist drew on her own postdoctoral research on networking and noted that early-career researchers tend to focus on connecting upward in hierarchy. She argued that connections formed with peers at PhD or postdoc level are also highly valuable because those people will themselves have labs, senior roles, and networks in 10 to 20 years.

Social media. LinkedIn was mentioned across all discussions as a practical networking tool, particularly for people who find conference networking difficult. One panellist said that engaging on Twitter during her earlier career had been genuinely career-changing for her in terms of building connections she would not otherwise have made.

Skills transfer across fields. Several panellists who had changed fields after their PhD—from 3D printing to gas analysis, from synthesis to breath analysis, from forensics to non-targeted separations—reflected that the core skills (experimental design, communication, data analysis) transferred, and that they had not in practice "started over." One framed it explicitly: "Don't let your background define you—let your skills define you.

Lab Culture and Structural Changes

Panellists across the discussions pointed to the following as having made a concrete difference:

• Flexible working, including remote work options and part-time progression paths, was raised as important for retaining women through family-forming years. One panellist noted that some women are moving into marketing or sales roles within instrument companies specifically to gain flexibility, and that this represents a loss of skilled scientists from the analytical side.
• Clarity in expectations— from supervisors, PIs, and institutions — was raised in the March discussion as a structural issue, with a particular gendered edge. One panellist, who is also a graduate program director, said ambiguity in expectations creates errors and erodes confidence—echoing the "prove it again" dynamic panellists described elsewhere: women whose competence is already being second-guessed are often more reluctant to risk exposing uncertainty by asking for clarification.
• Lab safety during pregnancy. One panellist raised this as an underacknowledged area, describing how her role had to change during both pregnancies, and saying it was important for women to know that in many countries this is a legal obligation.

Taken together, these discussions suggest that women’s progress in chromatography is shaped not only by individual skill and persistence, but by the structures around them—including mentorship, sponsorship, workplace flexibility, and access to professional networks. While the panellists’ experiences show that there is no single route into the field, they also make clear that retention and advancement depend on creating environments in which women can build sustainable, visible, and well-supported careers.

Seeing other women as role models and living proof that a career in chromatography is possible, and is fulfilling as well as exciting, encourages younger women to pursue their interests.

Across all five discussions, two threads keep resurfacing: mentorship and networking, whether built at a conference or through a LinkedIn message. Encouragement and example matter because retention suffers when women in chromatography don’t see visible mentors modeling what success—and a sustainable career—actually looks like. LCGC plans to continue to help raise the visibility of women already doing this work, and draw attention to the research and applications that make the field worth staying in. That momentum carries directly into Peaks & Pioneers: Women in Chromatography, a new video interview series launching this September, which will spotlight individual women’s careers and research and explore what drew them to the science in the first place. Stay tuned to hear more about the upcoming series!

Click the links below to watch the discussions in full:

March 2025

June 2025

September 2025

December 2025

March 2026