So You Want to Be a… Publishing Editor

By Sally Burn, PhD

Scizzle’s post-PhD career series is back this week with an interview with Cathy Sorbara about her career as a Publishing Editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry. Dr Sorbara also acts as a consultant for the Cheeky Scientist Association (check out their great PhD industry transition articles here) and can be contacted via her LinkedIn page.

 

Hi Cathy! So, what exactly does a publishing editor do?

As a publishing editor, I assess submitted articles and guide them through the peer review process including reviewer selection, review evaluation and making the final decision to accept, reject or transfer the manuscript with our portfolio.  I also carry out production of accepted manuscripts including editing, proof reading and issue make up.  Other responsibilities include coordinating themed issues, commissioning cover art work and acting as a point of contact for associate editors (an international team of experts in various chemical sciences who handle submissions for various journals).

 

How did you get to where you are now?

I am Canadian and received my undergraduate degree at the University of Western Ontario in Medical Science and my Master of Science at the University of Ottawa.  I then moved to Munich, Germany where I did my PhD in Medical Life Science and Technology.  At that point I decided I was better suited for a communication-based role and wanted to move away from bench research.  I move to Cambridge, UK and came across this opening and thought it would be a great opportunity for me to further develop these communication skills.

 

What are the key skills needed for this job, and did you develop any of them during your PhD?

PhDs gain a wealth of transferable skills that I feel they often underestimate.  I too suffered from imposter syndrome through graduate school and left feeling I had little skills to offer beyond my technical expertise.  I soon realized however, that I had developed effective communication skills, time and project management, ability to work independently as well as in a collaborative environment, to name a few.  All of these skills were beneficial in my current role.

 

What would be your advice to a PhD wanting a job similar to yours?

A job advertisement is a wish list.  Even if your skills do not match 100% the job description, do not let that intimate you.  If you are interested in a job in editing or other communication-based roles, reach out to employees in the company and have a chat with them.  See if the company and the role is something that would be of interest to you and learn how to translate your skills into professional business experience.

 

What are the top three things on your To Do list right now?

Assess the latest manuscripts that have been submitted to the journal, check up on previous manuscripts that are under peer review (can a decision be made, do I need to invite more reviewers, etc.) and tackle the production to-do list to ensure everything is completed as quickly/accurately as possible to maintain low times to publication.

 

What are your favorite – and least favorite – parts of the job?

As I assess each manuscript that is submitted to the journal, it gives me the opportunity to read a lot of fascinating science and stay up-to-date with the latest breakthroughs in the field.  As a science nerd, this is a dream come true.  Sometimes we have to make decisions on manuscripts that are difficult and not well-received by authors.  It is never easy to tell someone who has worked for years on a manuscript that it has been rejected.  I definitely empathize with them as I have been on the receiving end of these rejection emails before. I am sure this has made me an enemy of some but I hope they understand that this is all part of the peer-review process which we strive to maintain as fair and unbiased as possible.

 

Is there anything you miss about academia?

I do miss bench work from time-to-time.  There was a sense of pride and honor associated with doing research, especially disease-related as I had done.  Now, however, I have time to pursue other passions and have more time for travelling and spending time with family. My life is not defined by the number of hours I am chained to the bench and this was important to me.

 

How do you see your field developing over the next ten years?

As many academics are aware, publish or perish is a theme to their success and accordingly the peer review/publication process has received a lot of flak about how it contributes to the plight of academic research labs.  I think we will see a lot of changes in the future as publishing houses adapt and deal with this growing concern of how research should be disseminated, evaluated and rewarded.  Already we see more journals becoming open access, changing their peer review process (double or triple blinded) or allowing for raw data to be published.  There is also the argument of why negative data or repeated experiments should not be equally as rewarded.  It will be fascinating to see how things evolve.

 

What kind of positions does someone in your position move on to?

Publishing editors can move into managerial roles or higher executive roles where they deal more with commissioning of articles, competitor intelligence, attending conferences and the overall management of the journal and its goals.  Many people who move out of publishing move on to other communication based roles such as medical writing, policy, marketing and more.  It is a good stepping stone for many other roles.

 

And finally, the big question: In the event of a zombie apocalypse, what skills would a publishing editor bring to the table?

A publishing editor would draft a well-written article to the zombies, detailed how we can work together to live in harmony.  Of course this article would be reviewed by experts in the field of zombie apocalypses before it was sent.

 

So You Want to Be a… Technical Copywriter

By Sally Burn, PhD

In this week’s edition of Scizzle’s post-PhD career series we talk to Colm O’Regan about being a freelance Technical Copywriter. Colm trained in the physical sciences – which makes a welcome change from our usual biology-centric focus – and came to our attention when he commented on one of our previous interviews on LinkedIn. We were so intrigued by his job title that we just had to get the lowdown on his career! If you also happen to have an interesting post-PhD job, please reach out to us – we’d love to hear from you. Just connect with Sally Burn via her LinkedIn. Colm can also be contacted via his LinkedIn or by email.

 

Hi Colm, so what does a Technical Copywriter do?

I write marketing communications and content for scientific companies. This means any material a science company uses to promote its products. These range from white papers, technical/scientific articles, landing pages, advertisements, application notes and case studies. Many science companies put out a wide range of marketing collateral and this stuff needs to be written. They’ll do a lot of it internally, but often they’ll outsource it to a writer like me to take some of the pressure off. Specific responsibilities include: marketing my services, making contact with potential buyers (typically marketing managers), talking to these buyers on the phone to ascertain their needs, making an offer, writing proposals, doing the actual writing, following up constantly, bookkeeping etc.

 

How did you get to where you are now?

I enjoyed science in school, particularly chemistry and physics. Chemistry was always my favorite subject so I continued studying that in university in Ireland. I couldn’t imagine doing anything else. After my degree, I didn’t want to get a job in a chemical plant or a pharmaceutical company, which seemed to be the typical route most of my classmates were following. By the time I finished my third year, I had developed a strong interest in nanotechnology and materials science. So when I was offered a PhD in materials science at the same university, I jumped at the chance. After that, I went on to do a postdoc at the National University of Singapore. The research was focused on using electron microscopy to study dendrite growth in battery systems. However, by the end of this, I realized that working for someone else was not something I wanted to spend my life doing. Even if it was in academia which, admittedly, can be quite cushy. I had always enjoyed writing so after spending many months trying to figure out what I wanted to do, I found that marketing writing for science companies seemed to be the best choice.

 

What are the key skills or experience needed for this job?

You don’t need much in the way of experience from a skills point of view, as most of it you can learn on the job. That said, any relevant background you have will be helpful. For example, if you’re targeting a specific industry such as biotechnology, a degree, masters or PhD in biotech will be a huge advantage. It will set you apart from other writers targeting biotech companies. You know the technology, the field, and the industry, and will probably have hands on experience with many of the scientific instruments you’ll be writing about. Companies value this and you’ll be able to command higher fees. The main skill I got from my PhD and postdoc was the ability to research effectively (I mean look up papers, documents, articles etc. pertaining to my field) and keep persevering when things get tough. Anybody doing a PhD project knows that it’s three and a half years of crap followed by six months of good things happening. When you’re in your second year, your 150th experiment in a row has failed and you can’t see the light at the end of the tunnel, it can be disheartening. That perseverance and ability to tough it out is critical when going out on your own.

 

What would be your advice to a PhD wanting a job similar to yours?

Anybody wanting to do this job (or start a freelancing business in general) should know that it’ll probably take twice as long, cost twice as much and be twice as difficult as you initially anticipated. I know this isn’t exactly encouraging, but if you come into this knowing what to expect, then you’re already ahead of the game. I definitely thought it was going to be easier than it is. So the first thing someone needs to do is market themselves and their services like crazy. Estimate how much marketing you need to do, double it… and then go do that. I didn’t do enough marketing in my first year (and the marketing I did was the wrong kind). Ultimately, the people who are successful think of themselves as marketers of the services they provide (in my case, marketing communications writing for scientific companies), rather than doers of that particular service.

 

What are the top three things on your To Do list right now?

Usually, my to-do-list involves marketing. Right now, the list includes launching a direct mail effort (sending letters through the mail to promote my services), finishing writing a proposal for a project, and following up on a previous project that I finished recently (I do this a lot)

 

What are your favorite – and least favorite – parts of the job?

Least favorite part right now is the inconsistent paycheck. Some months you have work, others you don’t. Invariably, this comes down to consistent marketing. When you let up on the marketing, your income takes a hit. My favorite part is working to my own schedule, and not a schedule set by someone else.

 

Is there anything you miss about academia?  What was the most challenging aspect of moving from academia to your current job?”

One of the things I enjoyed most about academia is the relaxed working atmosphere. Specifically, it’s not a typical nine to five job, so there’s nobody checking up on work hours. As long as you do the work, it’s fine. So that was a big plus. I was also lucky to work in a fun lab with a lot of great people. Now, I work on my own so I sometimes miss the interactions of working in a research group. The most challenging aspect of moving into freelance work is being your own boss. You’re responsible for every single aspect of the business. From marketing, selling, doing the work, bookkeeping, to running the business. If you slip up on anything (marketing in particular), the business as a whole takes a hit. It takes some getting used to. You definitely need to develop good habits (getting up early, not wasting an hour scanning your Facebook feed), improve your productivity and have the discipline to work and market the business when you need to. Which is most of the time.

 

How do you see your field developing over the next ten years?

In terms of marketing writing for scientific firms, I guess It really is a buyer’s market due to the sheer number of people going out on their own and starting businesses. Over the last decade, copywriting has been actively promoted as a business opportunity by several organizations. This has prompted more and more people to start freelance copywriting. Though admittedly, you don’t see many science graduates and researchers doing this, but that could change over the next decade. Copywriting in general is sure to become more and more popular, so narrowing down your specialty and focusing on a particular industry will be even more important than it is today.

 

And finally: In the event of a zombie apocalypse, what skills would a technical copywriter bring to the table?

Well, if the remaining living scientists ever discovered a cure for people turning into zombies, a technical copywriter would be the one helping to promote it!

 

So You Want to Be a… Freelance Medical Writer

By Elizabeth Ohneck, PhD

In the first post of our So You Want to Be a… series we talked to Elizabeth Ohneck about her career as a medical writer. This week Elizabeth interviewed Ginny Vachon who runs her own medical writing company, Principal Medvantage, to find out what it takes to go it alone and become a freelance medical writer.

 

What does a freelance medical/science writer do?

Medical writers can do many different types of writing, but in general, medical writing is centered on taking information and making it accessible and informative for the correct audience. For example, taking raw data and writing a manuscript for other physicians is really different than summarizing recent findings for the general public. Freelance medical writers are contractors, and can be called in by pharmaceutical companies, communications agencies, medical associations, or other groups to help with specific projects that can’t be handled ‘in house,’ for whatever reason. There’s a ton of variety and opportunity to learn about different diseases. Some freelancers specialize, and write mostly about certain medical areas, or for certain audiences.

 

How did you get where you are now?

I have a BA in Biology from Agnes Scott College and my PhD is from Emory University. As I was nearing the end of my PhD I realized I had no clue what I wanted to do next. I totally froze because I knew I had choices, but I didn’t know how to make the next step. I realized that before I could pick a direction, I needed to learn about all of the different things I could do and how the people who were doing those things spent their days. So, I joined Women in Bio Atlanta and started going to events held by Emory and by WIB. I went to a WIB event on women in business and I heard Emma Nichols, who owns Nascent Medical Communications (formerly Hitt Medical Writing), talk about her experiences as a freelance medical writer and entrepreneur. I spoke with her after the event, and ended up doing a number of projects for her. After getting some experience, I started my own company! She has a great podcast, medical writers speak, that is full of great information about both medical writing and the business side of freelancing. The American Medical Writer’s Association also has a great website, training course, and chapter meetings where you can meet other medical writers and take short courses.

 

What are the key skills needed to be successful at this job, and did you develop any of them during grad school?

I think that the most important thing is a willingness to tackle any subject and learn about it. I think that as a Ph.D. student, I learned that discomfort and anxiety are totally normal when learning something new, and usually happen right before you understand something! I also had my daughter during my third year of graduate school, and developing the level of organization that I needed to ‘do it all’ has been awesome.
Medical writing is really great in that you can get a little bit of experience as a contractor before you graduate. Even if you end up not being wild about medical writing, you have a new skill to set you apart. Who on earth doesn’t want to hire someone who is skilled in communicating complex ideas?

 

What would be your advice to a PhD wanting a similar job as yours?

I would say to listen to the Medical Writers Speak podcast, go to the AMWA website, and start developing samples, writing for a blog or university paper are great starts (the manuscript you wrote with your PI isn’t the best sample) I think a lot of people who are trying to break into medical writing have a hard time with the transition from being a scientist or physician who can write to being a writer who understands science. I think that it’s important to recognize that while obtaining an MD or PhD is really hard, it is only a piece of the puzzle. The thought of sharpening your writing skills should be an exciting one! I know I heard this said at a lot of ‘alternate career events,’ but what you do next should not be a ‘back-up plan,’ it should be an exciting new set of goals! Also, after doing a ton of lab work, I really had a hard time sitting all day. Now I have to be a lot more deliberate about exercise and working with my hands in other ways.

 

What are the top three things on your To Do list right now?

A typical day usually starts with assessing deadlines. I usually have a few projects going on at once, so organization is really important. Today I have to check in with a client who owes me a transcript of an interview, look over a manuscript I finished two days ago with ‘fresh eyes’ before sending it off, and do some bookkeeping (scanning receipts from a recent work trip out of town).

 

What are your favorite parts of the job? What are your least favorite or most challenging parts?

My favorite part is that I get to solve problems for clients. Usually I get called in when people are stretched thin. It’s nice to be able to help companies when they are growing. My least favorite thing is the sitting. I have a standing desk now, which helps, but I miss the constant motion of lab work.

 

Is there anything you miss about academia? What was the biggest adjustment in moving from the bench to your current position?

Yes, of course! I miss being an ‘expert’ in a scientific area. As a writer, I learn just enough about a subject to write well about it. I have totally lost money on jobs before because I get sucked into a topic and next thing I know I am well-versed in how a specific trial recorded adverse events, but it doesn’t matter because that wasn’t what I was supposed to be doing. Especially as a freelancer, it’s all about doing what needs to be done to complete a project. I miss the freedom of diving into a single sentence in a paper to figure out the nature of a problem. The hardest part about making the mental switch was understanding that my role is to produce clear and meaningful content, not to assist in guiding the direction of research or marketing, or whatever the problem is I am writing about. Again, the switch from being a scientist to a writer.

 

How do you see your field developing over the next ten years?

I think that the ways in which medical writers develop content over the next few years will change to include more interactive platforms. I expect that soon doctors and patients will be unsatisfied with brochures, which will not only seem old-fashioned, but be insufficient for the increasingly complex decision-making that accompanies personalized medicine. Probably medical writing will soon include more content for apps. I don’t know that the clinicians of tomorrow will put up with PowerPoint-based CME, or posters will remain paper-based and non-interactive. It is hard to predict how communication will change in ten years time, but I think the most flexible and willing to learn medical writers will be the most successful.

 

What kind of positions to people in your position move on to?

One of the coolest things about freelance medical writing is that it can serve as a grand tour of many different types of biomedical businesses. You get to work with many types of companies (big, small, growing, pharma, CROs, communications firms, medical associations – you name it). You also get to work with the people in a company and see what they are like and see many different styles of working (fast, slow, organized, totally insane – you name it!). You can really observe and learn about what suits you. Many companies who need freelancers also need an on-staff medical writer, or someone smart in medical affairs, or marketing, or communications. Showing up and being organized and pleasant can prompt a job offer.

 

And finally: In the event of a zombie apocalypse, what skills would a freelance medical writer bring to the table?

I could be sure that every conceivable population of clinicians is well aware of how to identify, appropriately treat, and report zombie-related medical events. In addition, all potential patient populations will be well aware of how to seek out specialists, should they experience symptoms. Because I’m a freelancer, I am available to handle any writing needs that crop up as various new anti-zombie therapies emerge.

So You Want to Be in… Scientific Public Relations

By Sally Burn, PhD

Scizzle was recently fortunate enough to chat with the infectiously upbeat, super accomplished Cherise Bernard, PhD. Cherise is Senior Manager for Elsevier’s U.S. Engagement Program, as part of their Global Academic Relations team. She acts as a conduit between the publisher and academic institutions and performs scientific public relations duties (in addition to being a “technology midwife”… more on that later). We got the lowdown on the publishing world, what her job entails, and how you too can move into this exciting sphere of work.

 

Hi Cherise! So, what does someone in Scientific Public Relations do?

Basically, my responsibilities align around being a thought leader. When I say a thought leader, one of the primary responsibilities that I have is to build relationships, programs, and initiatives with different US universities. One topic that my company is very passionate about right now is precision medicine. We identify universities in the country that are also passionate about precision medicine and we network with them to understand their challenges. When I say I need to be a thought leader, I need to be having very up-to-date conversations about precision medicine to recognize what the field is lacking and what steps need to be made to propel the field forward. The execution aspect of my job is to make sure that I build relevant programs in order to do those things. For example, let’s say Stanford University is known for its work in precision medicine. What I would do is to go meet with, let’s say the vice president of research at Stanford and then build some program around precision medicine where Elsevier and Stanford are both contributing data or resources, jointly resulting in a better understanding of precision medicine at Stanford and as a whole.

 

What kind of data do you contribute, specifically?

Elsevier is a scientific information solutions company. We publish over 2,500 scientific journals, both online and in print. Not only that, we also provide other digital web-based solutions for the scientific community such as Scopus, Mendeley, and Science Direct. Scientists all over the world use these resources in order to disseminate their research. For example, using our SciVal platform, universities can actually create custom reports indicating what their top research areas are.  How would that be helpful for an institution? This can assist them in making targeted investment decisions for areas that they dominate in. My job is not black and white; there are no two days that are the same. It differs with every single engagement that I’m involved in. But it’s always going to be a mutual exchange of information to promote an extensive learning opportunity or to promote advancement in a particular field or initiative. This should be a really interesting blog post because, honestly, my job is not one that biomedical life scientists have traditionally considered and said, “I want to do that with my PhD.” It’s something that I just fell into. It allows me to use creativity every day. And so far it’s awesome.

 

How did you get this job? What is your background?

I always tell people I’m a recovering scientist because that’s exactly what I am. When I was younger, I knew that I wanted to go into research. That interest led me to major in chemistry as an undergrad. Then I pursued my PhD in Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, focused on cancer research. Then… I don’t know when there was a shift but somewhere during graduate school I realized that I wanted to see how the research applied more to the patient. I’m at the bench, I’m doing my research but – what happens to the research after it leaves the bench? What is the impact on society once the paper is published? Does it have an effect on the actual patient? It was then that I decided to do a little bit of research myself into the process of taking research findings and bringing it to market. I learned about the field of technology transfer (or scientific commercialization) and began to understand that this is how inventions are translated from the academic bench to industry, then to the bedside. So, with this knowledge, I decided to pursue a mini-MBA certification at Rutgers while in the thesis phase of my PhD program, just to get more of an understanding of what the business aspect of science looked like. Everything that a full MBA would cover, we touched on it in a span of twelve weeks. It was a very intensive program. But I was able to do that at night while still working in the lab during the day. It was extremely difficult but I felt like I needed to get some framework behind what I was interested in doing.

That mini-MBA helped me land an internship with the Rutgers Office of Business Development and Technology Transfer. The internship allowed me to not only learn about the intellectual property process, but also taught me how to evaluate, market, and license new technologies coming out of the university to commercial partners. The commercial partner used the licensed technology in coordination with their own technology portfolio while the university received licensing fees and profit shares from any resulting products. Prior to the internship, this whole concept was foreign to me. As a scientific researcher, no one talks about this really, unless you are in a lab that already has a relationship with a commercial company. I learned that there were technology transfer offices at the majority of universities, commercializing the research taking place at the bench. I was completely intrigued and I knew that I wanted to pursue it further.

My Rutgers internship allowed me to get a paid position at Rockefeller University’s technology transfer office, where I stayed for two years. From Rockefeller, I moved on to Mount Sinai Innovation Partners at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York. That’s where the creativity started for me. I was able to align my commercialization experience with my passion for education. The director at Mount Sinai Innovation Partners gave me the creative freedom to build a commercialization internship program. From that opportunity, I was also able to build other programs, educating the Mount Sinai community about entrepreneurship and scientific communication. Mount Sinai was the place where I learned that I could think like a scientist but I could also be creative. That whole concept was foreign to me because as a scientist you follow protocols. You read papers. You see what other people have done. The whole concept of creativity, of building things right from scratch not knowing what the process will be at all was something that I hadn’t experienced before and now I was. I started realizing that this is exactly what I wanted to do. That experience led me to my position now at Elsevier – so you can see the transition, right? I was able to build programs, initiatives, and learning opportunities at Mount Sinai and now I’m at Elsevier with the amazing opportunity to create on a national level with a portfolio universities and organizations!

 

Do you feel like the mini-MBA was essential for getting to where you are now?

This might seem like a strange answer, but in terms of the content, it was not essential. The content helped. I became familiarized with a lot of business terms. But it was essential in terms of me proving my commitment to learning about this field. I tell PhDs and postdocs this all the time: sometimes you need to make certain moves to push your career forward… and it’s not really so much about what you’re doing, but more about you proving your commitment to identifying your skill sets, learning your personality, understanding what you like, what you don’t like. Everything will not always work. Everything will not always be a home-run. Trust me, I did things that I’m not even discussing here that I was just like okay, no, I don’t want to do that. But I made a decision for myself to always follow my instincts. That’s another concept that I’m actually going to be trying to write a short book about – following your instincts as a scientist and not always staying “within that box” of the norm.

 

You’re outgoing with great communication skills. Would you say those are essential skills in your job?

Yes. Outgoing, being a great networker. But I wouldn’t just say “go network”. I would say do targeted networking. Find the people who you can actually have a great conversation with. Find the people who it’s strategic for you to talk to and it’s strategic for them to talk to you. To do that, you have to do your research. That’s another thing that my PhD taught me, which may be underutilized by other PhDs – you know how to do research. You know how to find stuff out. It doesn’t have to be about a protein. You can also find things out about people. If you make your networking more strategic and have more of a purpose, then follow your instincts, your networking will turn into relationships and that’s the crux of what I do right now – relationship building.

 

Do you think LinkedIn is important for somebody who wants to get into your industry?

Definitely. I think LinkedIn is just important for getting into any industry at this point. I think it’s a great way to initiate cold meetings. If you don’t know someone and have never met them but you would feel they would be beneficial to know, LinkedIn is a great way to introduce yourself. If you are able to then send them a little note, or do your research, find out their e-mail address, find out their phone number, do a cold call. These are the kinds of things that people really need to take initiative on nowadays – really just put yourself out there and don’t necessarily care about how you look all the time. Just put yourself out there.

 

In addition to taking the initiative and networking, do you have any other advice that you would give to someone who wants to get into your field?

The first thing I would advise is to understand who you are. I know it sounds a little bit cliché, but when you are going into a field that’s not very heavily populated, especially by scientists and by PhDs, you have to be extremely sure of yourself and confident (even though the confidence may not be an everyday occurrence!) Know what your interests and passions are. Know what your personality is like. If you don’t like to talk to people, this is probably not the best job for you! My second piece of advice is to read. Read what’s on the cutting edge (this is important for scientists who are interested in technology commercialization as well). What are the hot topics right now? Last year, President Obama did his State of the Union Address and he talked about advancing the fight against cancer. When I listen to that, I’m not just listening to it as Cherise in my living room. I’m also listening to it for work because when I meet with the NSF and the NIH, they are taking their cues and forming their priorities directly from The Office of the President. I need to be well versed so that if I have a meeting at NIH and the NSF, I know what I need to talk to them about. The only way to do that and to be confident in those types of conversations is to be really aware and be on the cutting edge of what’s going on in the country and even globally in terms of scientific research, technology, and data.

 

How do you remain on the cutting edge? Are there any sources of information that you particularly rely on?

I read reputable blogs by thought leaders in the fields that interest me.  I try to stay up to date on articles in Cell, Science, and Nature. They are pretty much always on the cutting edge. And of course, reading the journals that Elsevier produces. It’s also cool because I come from a commercialization background so I am still on top of those kinds of literature too. When you read about startups, they are usually a couple of years ahead of where the rest of the industry is currently. I also read venture capital blogs because their investment decisions contribute a great deal to the technology commercial landscape.

 

What are the top three things on your to-do list for today?

I have a portfolio of programs and initiatives that I’m working on. One of the things constantly on my to-do list would just be e-mailing and phone conversations with colleagues and partners to find out where we are on certain things and to ensure that the plans are moving forward. I spend a lot of time as well reading and understanding the strategic goals of the universities that I’m working with, identifying openings and gaps in their capabilities, and assessing if there’s an opportunity for us to partner with them. I need to constantly track updates and relevant public relations topics happening with our partners and distribute that information to my team. Another item on my to-do list is focused around more logistical efforts. If I have meetings next week on the West Coast, I need to be churning out the agendas for these meetings to everyone on the team. I’m on the thought leadership side but I’m also on the program management side.

 

What are your favorite and least favorite parts of the job?

I guess my favorite part would be the travel because obviously I get to see places that I’ve never seen. Another great thing about this position is that it’s a great work-life balance. I get into the office about 8:00 a.m. every day and I pretty much leave around 5:00, 5:30. Since we’re a global company, it’s also pretty feasible to work from home. My first day here I was given a work cell phone and laptop. So I take work everywhere I can work, especially since I have colleagues that are in Asia – sometimes I have to wake up for 7:00 a.m. calls with them because of the time difference. But I can just work from home if needed. That’s another really cool part that I really love. It’s the flexibility to do that. I also really enjoy the fact that my role is a brand new one, but that’s also my least favorite part! It’s my least favorite only because everything is from scratch. Sometimes that’s a little bit scary because I don’t know if I’m doing something in the right way. Nothing is set in stone and it’s just difficult to measure my success. But that’s also the really intriguing part of my job, too: that I don’t know. I have to figure everything out and that actually motivates me to get up and try new things every day. It’s my least favorite and most favorite part of what I do.

 

Do you miss academia at all?

No, I don’t. Honestly, I get a healthy dose of academia without actually being in it, so I feel like I get the best of both worlds. I still work with academia on a very regular basis so I can’t really miss it. But I’m far enough away from it that I’m not dealing with the politics of it. I have other politics now but it’s not academia politics, which is great. Obviously, there are other benefits to not working in academia like a higher pay range, bonuses… those types of things that academia historically does not offer.

 

How do you see your field developing over the next ten years?

The way that we disseminate research is changing rapidly because of technology, because of social media. I think that in order to make that change amenable to universities, you need some liaisons, the kind that know both the old way and the new way to be there to push that change forward, and I think that’s what I am. In all of the topics that I’m working on [at Elsevier], we are trying to change the face of them, be thought leaders in them because we are trying to go from what’s old to what’s new. I’m like a midwife to push technology forward! All aspects of science will change rapidly within the next ten years, including how we educate and train our professionals and disseminate our findings.  We’re going to have to switch from the bench mentality to what the bigger, more global impact will be. We’re going to have to start changing the way that we educate our scientists, the way that we produce scientists. We’re going to have to change the graduate curriculum to account for the surges in technology that’s currently happening. We’re going have to change the way that we educate medical students to account for artificial intelligence and digital health in medicine. All of these things won’t happen overnight. The field requires these champions that are right in the middle of it to say, “Come on. Let’s go. We know you don’t want to leave this old way but we’ve got to go. We’ve got to move forward.”

 

What kind of positions does someone like you move on to?

I haven’t started thinking about it yet but now that you’re asking me there are a lot of things I can do. I think that I can probably transition from here into leadership roles in academia. I think that vice presidents of research and deans, they really need forward thinking people. They need people who are inventive, creative, and willing to take some risks. That’s possibly something that I could do if I wanted to return to academia. I also see myself being a motivator and public speaker in terms of scientific education, making sure that US universities in particular stay on the cutting edge of educating our scientists. Maybe an education consultant – helping universities switch gears to move their curriculum forward. Then, in terms of publishing, what I’m doing right now has its own ladder as well, because right now I’m a senior manager but I could become a vice president in our Global Academic Relations team.

 

Final, most important question: In the event of a zombie apocalypse what skills would someone in scientific public relations bring to the table?

I would probably be the one trying to befriend the zombies and saying: listen, that zombie right there, he might be able to help us. I’d say I know you guys are afraid of the zombies, but I don’t think all of them are bad. We can’t talk to all of them, but let’s look for one of them that can give us some inside information. I will be the one in the zombie apocalypse to bring all the inside information to the table. You have to be like an advocate for at least one of them because that’s the only way we’ll know what their plan is. I’m all about building strategy and you have to be able to view people as a resource in order build strategy.

 


Cherise can be contacted by email at c.bernard@elsevier.com or via LinkedIn.

 

So You Want to Be an… Equity Research Associate

By Sally Burn, PhD

In this week’s edition of “So You Want to Be a…”, we turn to the financial side of science and find out about a career in biotechnology equity research from Raluca Pancratov. Raluca completed her PhD in pharmacology at NYU School of Medicine, before transferring her analytical skills to the fast-paced world of equity research. Read on to find out if this is the post-PhD career for you!

 

Hi Raluca! So, what exactly does an Equity Research Associate do?

An equity (stock) research associate analyst typically works for large Wall Street investment banks or boutique investment research firms. The associate’s role is to support the senior analyst’s stock recommendations (buy, sell, hold) for investor clients. These can include pension and mutual fund managers, as well as hedge fund managers. Research analysts forecast whether a stock will go up or down and by how much, based on the commercial outlook of the analyzed companies. For biopharma companies, stock performance is often linked to the success of drugs in the clinic and on the market. Given the complexities of the drug development process, advanced degree holders such as science PhDs and MDs are well-positioned to understand clinical data and predict the likelihood of clinical success. A good portion of the work is keeping up to date with the newsflow (scientific, clinical, regulatory, or commercial), which influences day-to-day (and sometimes minute-by-minute) stock value. Estimating the value of a stock entails analyses of financial statements and forecasting the company’s sales and expenses.

 

How did you get to where you are now?

I have always been fascinated by drug development and my PhD mentor cultivated a “bench-to-bedside” mentality in the lab. I also enjoyed working on a translational project. I learned about investment research at one of the many “What can you be with a PhD?” career fairs that I attended (organized by the great team at NYU School of Medicine), where alumni from my graduate program described this type of niche position within finance. I remember thinking “Ah, I could do that!” and proceeded to read as much as possible about the biopharma sector and enroll in finance classes at the NYU School of Continuing and Professional studies. In addition, I conducted numerous informational interviews with professionals in equity research and educated myself on financial modelling. I got my first job through alumni referral, and was fortunate to encounter terrific mentors that trained me how to think about strategy and market “sentiment” driving stocks up and down.

 

What are the key skills needed for this job, and did you develop any of them during your PhD?

First, equity research requires analytical abilities, which I honed during my PhD, designing and troubleshooting experiments. Second, the finished product of an equity analyst is a written note or report, distributed to investor clients. Therefore, written communication skills are of utmost importance. While I wrote papers, reports, proposals, and a thesis during my PhD, their style is very different from the succinct and to-the-point communications required for the equity analyst job, so I had to adapt my writing style. Lastly, I am grateful to my PhD advisor for extensive training on the ins and outs of PowerPoint and delivering presentations, which came in handy in equity research.

 

What would be your advice to a PhD wanting a job similar to yours?

For scientists interested in a career in finance, I would advise reading as much as possible about the current therapeutic landscape and the biopharma industry players, and keeping up to date with translational and medical newsflow. I remember my undergrad colleagues majoring in social sciences spending a lot of time taking classes on designing effective surveys. In retrospect, I wish I had taken some of those courses and I recommend STEM scientists focus on this type of research method. I also advise trying to learn as much as possible about finance and accounting, perhaps by taking advantage of local course offerings in these fields. Some universities have access to published equity research through the local library – I would strongly suggest reading as many reports as possible, in order to become familiar with the writing style and structure of the different investment communications.

 

What are three things you do on a typical day?

On a typical day, equity analysts wake up to news from the European markets and U.S. market press releases begin to trickle in at 7.00am ET, so they need to digest a large volume of information, assess impact to covered stocks, and evaluate if financial estimates will be adjusted. News of a drug succeeding in a Phase III clinical trial may translate into adjustments of the drug’s probability of success. Second, equity analysts spend a lot of time on the phone, pitching and discussing investment ideas to investor clients. Third, equity analysts also coordinate multiple diligence projects, pertaining to products/clinical trials of covered companies or to companies considered for future coverage.

 

What are your favorite – and least favorite – parts of the job?

I enjoy reading and analyzing novel drugs and therapeutic modalities, and learning about the forefront of medicine. There is a great feeling of satisfaction when a prediction or forecast is accurate, when value creating events such as successful drug development are in line with the analyst’s expectations. I also enjoy attending medical conferences in fields as varied as oncology or rare disorders, and getting to know where the field is headed and what the upcoming research directions are. My least favorite part is the constant “on call” feeling, as key news can be announced any minute (including late at night), and the work required to react to major announcements can derail a day’s schedule.

 

Is there anything you miss about academia? What was the most challenging aspect of moving from the bench to equity research?”

Sometimes, the answer to a molecular question can only be found by experimental means (e.g. which strategy is most effective, targeting PD-1, PD-L1, or both in cancer?) and I miss not having the means to answer it directly. I was told before I started that equity research is an effort-intensive job, and believed it would be comparable to lab research (especially paper resubmission season). However, the pace of work is more comparable to the feeling during preparation for an important lab meeting or department presentation. Except for that is the feeling every day on the job.

 

How do you see your field developing over the next ten years?

Biotech and pharma equity research remain niche areas within finance, and the need for freshly-minted PhDs fluctuates greatly. During the recent biotech boom (2012-2015), hundreds of new companies became public, prompting multiple financial institutions to hire more biotech analysts as coverage universes became too big for a single team to manage. However, with more and more analysts covering the same stocks, client revenue is gradually directed at the minority who conduct the highest quality and most differentiated analyses. Over the next ten years I predict a lingering need for specialized professionals to analyze drug data, thereby predicting stock moves. However, in the social media/digital era, many analysts may have to reinvent themselves and the methods they use to reach clients and deliver the results of their analyses.

 

What kind of jobs does someone in your position move on to?

The most straightforward transition is promotion from the associate to the analyst position. To employ an academic analogy, analysts are similar to PIs, deciding on which companies to cover and what the course of the franchise should be, while associates are similar to postdocs, executing most of the analytical work to support such recommendations. Alternatively, associates may go on to work for the so-called “buy side”, investment managers such as hedge funds, pension funds, or mutual funds. This type of due diligence work is highly similar to that done by research analysts working for the “sell side” (i.e. banks “selling” stocks and “buy side” investors “buying” them). In addition, the diligence, market research, and valuation skills are amenable to other positions in corporate/business development and strategy in biopharma, investor relations, and consulting.

 

And finally: In the event of a zombie apocalypse, what skills would an equity research analyst bring to the table?

Man, since we survive the pressure of having to do multiple things on a  deadline – immediately, we can rapidly seize a situation and make a recommendation: Sell! Buy! Erm, I mean Run! Take cover! We may only be correct 50% of the time, but you can be darn sure that our attention to detail (honed from those endless days of Excel modeling) is so great that we’ll avoid those zombies lurking in the shadows.

 

9 New Year Resolutions for Grad Students and Postdocs (and tools to help keep them)

By Gaia Vasiliver-Shamis, PhD

Let’s face it, reality is that our new year resolutions usually don’t last past January…while the world wide web is full with “science-backed” ways to keep your new year resolutions, it’s almost had the same number of articles explaining you why new year resolutions don’t stick. But let’s stay positive on New Year evening and use the latest behavioral research (from 4 days ago!) showing that if you want your resolutions to stick you should ask yourself a question rather than make a statement. For example, don’t say “I will exercise” but ask yourself: “Will I exercise? Yes or No?” – the answer should clearly be yes. So in this spirit here are 9 New Year questions every graduate student/ postdoc should have for a successful 2016!

Let’s start with scientific-related resolutions…. I mean questions.

 

  1. Will I finish my paper?

Publications are the token of productivity in the research realm so no matter what your next step may be, you should show that you have been productive. Some struggle because they think they need to get one more experiment done before they start writing…this one big experiment that will turn your work into a Nature paper. While this might be true, this is not the case for most of us. To finish your paper, you actually need to start it! Start with summarizing what you have thus far by creating a sketch of your figures. This will force you to think what is the story you are trying to tell in your paper; this will help you identify the “holes” or the missing experiments in your story. Once you identify those, discuss it with your mentor and make an action plan with some deadlines for the missing experiments and not less importantly for writing!

If you are a visual person or just love “to do” lists, I highly recommend you try Trello – it’s a great, free, tool to help you organize your plans and projects in one fun dashboard (and between us, there is something extremely satisfying by dragging an item to the “done” list).

 

  1. Will I present at a meeting?

I am sometime shocked to discover that some trainees barely attend scientific meetings. Attending conferences is a bundle of important opportunities. Beyond the obvious of learning about the latest research in your field; it’s an opportunity for you to present, get an award (travel award, best poster etc.) and not less importantly network. Yes, I know…networking…it’s so sleazy….so let me rephrase: you will meet new people. Depending on the conference and its size, you will get a chance to interact with top researchers, editors in journals you wish to publish in and scientists from industry and other young scientists like you!

Now, this is something you should plan for, especially if you need to apply for a travel grant so plan early. Nature has a list directory and the myriad of events can be overwhelming. If you’re new to the research business just ask your mentor and peers which conferences they usually go to and recommend.

 

  1. Will I apply for a grant?

Getting funded not only shows that your research is solid and promising, but it also speaks greatly to your written communication skills. It does not matter whether you want to stay in academia or not, having a grant you written get funded will look great on your CV/ resume. Take advantage of any grant tutorials or clubs you may have at your university/ institute and apply even for a small grant. Not sure where to find a grant you can apply to? Try this list from Science Careers.

 

Moving on to career-related resolutions, the arching question you should ask yourself is “will I make the time to take care of my own career?” and the answer should be “hell yeh!”. I’d also like to stress that the following questions hold true whether you are planning for an academic or non-academic career path.

 

  1. Will I attend an event from the Graduates/ Postdoc Affairs Office?

First, if you are not already aware of it existence – find out whether there is a postdoc office or graduates affairs office and what kind of events they offer and make sure you receive their emails.

Once you are in the loop of what’s going on in your institute be sure to attend their events. Whether it’s a CV seminar, career panel or what not – make the time to attend this. I know life happens and experiment go wrong but you should block this time on your calendar for YOU! Taking 2 hours a week to attend a workshop will not stall your research, seriously!

 

  1. Will I intentionally meet new people? (aka the networking more resolution)

I can’t stress this enough! While networking is a pretty dreaded concept for some people (and if you’re one of those people be sure to read “Networking for people who hate networking” by Devora Zack), try to approach it as meeting new interesting people and building relationships. Use LinkedIn and your existing network to identify other professionals you can talk with, reconnect with older or dormant connections or simply join your grad students/ postdocs association. My favorite posts about this topic were titled “Cold emails and hot coffee”. This four –part series in Science Careers shows how you can advance your career in a few hours a week and offers practical tips. Also, if you’d like to stay organize tracking who you talked with and what about, use MyIDP or Evernote.

 

  1. Will I keep my CV/ resume updated?

This is a good habit to form for your professional life in general. Always keep a “kitchen sink” CV/ resume where you add everything you’ve done. I know it’s easy to remember to add a published paper to your CV but you may forget being a member on a committee or writing a piece for the student newspaper or giving a talk so it’s a good practice to add those as soon as you’re done. Also, don’t forget to include any metrics (because sometimes these are easily forgotten).  I’d suggest having your “kitchen sink” CV/ resume as a Google doc so then it’s available for you anytime on any device so you’ll have no excuses (plus you’ll have a backup)!

 

  1. Will I create my career “wish list”?

If you are looking for opportunities beyond academia, you should have 2 lists one for 2-3 career paths of interest and one for companies you’d like to work for. If you’re interested in the academic path, you should have your list of universities/ institutions you are interested in. Once you completed your list, go to question/ resolution #5 and make sure your meet people working in careers you’re interested and/ or people working in the companies/ universities on your wish list.  Since networking is about building relationships – the earlier you start – the better!

 

  1. Will I learn something new?

If you were not into learning new things, you probably wouldn’t have taken the research path right? Whether it’s a new technique in the lab, learning R (which is super valuable on the job market these days) or just expanding your horizons – there are multiple ways for you to learn something new in 2016 and it doesn’t have to cost you a dime! The Muse had a couple of posts with links to FREE online courses in programming, finance, digital marketing and much more, here are the links for 45 courses and 43 Career-advancing courses, you can finish the listed courses in 10 weeks or less. Now who wants to start 2016 smarter?

 

  1. Will I gain a new skill (or develop an existing one)?

You have opportunities both inside and outside the lab to gain/ develop different skills such as leadership, teaching, organizing and more. You should proactively seek opportunities to gain the skill(s) you’re interested in having. Mentoring is a skill that can be easily be acquired when you’re in the lab, if your PI haven’t assigned you someone already, express your interest to her in mentoring an undergrad student or a grad student if you’re a postdoc already. For leadership and organizational skills join the student/ postdoc organization and be active. And if it’s you’re written communication skills you’re looking to strengthen – the Scizzle blog is always on the lookout for talented writers, so drop us an email if you’re interested.

I know, these are some very serious resolutions and it may seem overwhelming at first. A known way to set goals and achieve them is 1) to write them down and 2) have them be SMART goals (Specific, Measurable, Action-oriented, Realistic and Time-bound) and you can learn more about how to set them here. If this is not enough find an accountability buddy, it can be your friend, your spouse or the career person in your grad student/ postdoc affairs office.

Now I know some of you must be thinking “I don’t have time to do my research AND all of this!”. I’d urge you to put your own career and success and a top priority. Taking even a couple hours out of the 168 hrs you have in a week to advance yourself is very doable. Not convinced? Try  Toggl that allows you to track time based on tasks/ projects or use it to time your career-related activities or find out how much time you really spend on pointless browsing by using Rescue Time.

And if all this is too stressful for you, try this fun website called Pixel Thoughts, it will help put things in perspective and calm you down in 60 seconds. After all, mindfulness meditation is the like new non-GMO (though it’s actually a trend that is based in solid science).

I hope you find this post useful and I wish you a very happy and successful new year!

 

 

Uprooting my Research From the Bench and Planting it in an Office

By Heather D Marshall, PhD

My mind would often wander while dissecting mice, smashing spleens, and filtering cell suspensions from one tube to another.  Occasionally, I would set the centrifuge and grab a notebook to jot down an idea.  Over the course of more than a dozen years in a lab, I had notebooks full of pages with “young parents aren’t scared of measles” and “No GMO – I don’t want DNA in my food! (haha)” scratched about them. After many long days in the lab, I would often come home and write.  I wasn’t working on a grant proposal, nor a manuscript, protocol, or presentation—though there was a never-ending supply of that to do.  Instead, I would transcribe my notes and create pitches for my as of yet nonexistent, hypothetical science blog.

I enjoy communicating science with the public and have participated in science literacy outreach in my community.  I also designed and taught a course for non-science majors at Yale, dissecting science in the media ranging from Crichton’s Jurassic Park to Soderbergh’s Contagion.  And I’ve taken workshops on science communication with notable voices including Bob Bazell and Carl Zimmer.  As I reflect, the one thing preventing me from starting my blog back then was time.  As a postdoc with these various extra-curricular activities, I had very little of the so-called “free” kind.  Although I tried my hardest to find the holy grail of work-life balance, it was impossible for me to stop thinking about research—a paper that almost scooped my project, a fellowship needing revision, the next experiment to set up, data to analyze, or how my work fit into the grand scheme of life.  I quite literally didn’t have the mental bandwidth to deal with much else.  So time and again I would scribble notes about interesting story ideas that went seemingly nowhere.

After a number of years as a postdoc at Yale, I started applying for faculty positions.  It was the career I had always envisioned for myself, leading a lab of young scientists to investigate how immune cells respond to viral infections and immunizations.  I submitted what seemed like an endless number of applications, and although I had a couple interviews, no offers came in.  I had many friends and colleagues doing the same and getting similarly disappointing results.  At one point, I was shocked to discover that I personally knew every single applicant interviewing for one of those faculty positions (a friend nabbed that one—nice work B!).  Over the course of about a year, I was tired and stressed.  I needed a change.  I needed to do something that I enjoyed.  I needed to start my blog.  So I did.

That was the pivotal moment that changed the entire trajectory of my career.  It was evident from the start that I loved writing about science, and I wanted, nay—needed, to foster that professionally.  I stopped applying for faculty positions and started applying for science writing and editing jobs.  To get one wasn’t any easier.  I didn’t have a lot of experience as a writer and apparently failed grant proposals didn’t count.  I finally landed a medical writer position at DynaMed, a part of EBSCO Health at EBSCO Information Services.

DynaMed is a point-of-care medical reference for clinicians.  At DynaMed, we create a living database that is continuously being updated and adjusted to reflect the most current, useful, and rigorous evidence in medical research.  Like myself, the majority of medical writers at DynaMed have life science PhDs and backgrounds in research, which is excellent training for the objective appraisal and reporting of evidence in the medical literature.  My immunology expertise allowed me to immediately contribute to the infectious disease publishing group. In this role, I research pathogenic microbes, evaluate study design and rigor, and write about signs and symptoms, diagnostic assays, and treatment regimens for diseases caused by pathogens.  In collaboration with clinicians, we synergize my research analysis with their clinical perspective to craft this living, working database to be used by doctors in the clinic. For an inside peek at DynaMed, check out our Ebola virus disease page, which was made open-access during the 2014 outbreak.

Truly the best aspect of this career transition has been the ability to take a step back from the basic science to consider how all of research from mice to men comes together to help patients.  I recently researched a viral pathogen called BK virus.  Most of us have BK just hanging out, virtually asleep in our kidneys and bladder, not causing any problems at all.  However, if you’re unlucky enough to need a kidney transplant, you may well be wary of some tiny hitchhikers coming along with that life-saving gift.  One issue that arises is that the surgery can cause inflammation that awakens BK virus in the donor kidney.  Secondly, the very powerful drugs needed to suppress your immune system’s attack on your new kidney also make it possible for BK virus to make lots of viral babies.  Finally, all those viruses that have grown in the donor kidney may be able to hide from your immune cells, unless the donor just happened to be your identical twin.  Alas, in up to 10% of kidney transplant recipients, a perfect storm brews allowing BK virus reign over that new organ.   As I wrote about BK virus in DynaMed, it was evident that my background in immunology and virology coupled with my interests in science communication had perfectly merged to provide me the opportunity to actively contribute to the medical community as a writer at DynaMed.

As I look back on my trajectory though, I’m surprised by how close I was to becoming a PI (principal investigator) and I ponder how many others may be in a similar situation.  We’re all in the same boat when we start this journey.  We begin our research careers with lofty aspirations of curing cancer or discovering something that changes medicine.  In reality, the observations we make in the lab extend our knowledge in tiny increments and in all sorts of directions (sometimes even backwards).  But we put our heads down and continue to do it because we’re a curious bunch.  I’m still just as curious as I always was, and although my job no longer requires me to gown up to inject mice with viruses in a biosafety level 3 containment lab, it still affords me the ability to satisfy these curiosities from my cubicle.

Given the variety of nonacademic careers available to life science PhDs today, it’s bizarre to me that the training process continues to be an apprenticeship—grooming us for our own labs.  No doubt a major reason for this is that as students and postdocs, we look up to our mentors.  We want to have a similar impact on science, medicine, and life as they’ve had on us.  But the reality is that there are far too many PhDs and far too few academic jobs.  And yet, this needn’t be disheartening as there are so many ways for a scientist to contribute to society.  I challenge you all to think outside the proverbial academic box when considering your future careers in science and medicine.  As a postdoc, I was strategically aware of how my extracurricular activities in teaching and communication would contribute to aspects of being a PI.  However, it wasn’t until I started blogging that I realized that my particular combination of attributes and interests aligned more closely with a career outside of academic research.

Think about your strengths and weaknesses early and often.  Be open to new opportunities (like blogging!) that may alter your skill sets.  And don’t be afraid to trail blaze your own path by doing whatever inspires you.  For me—someone with a comprehension of the immune system, a thirst for knowledge, a motivation to communicate science, and a passion for writing—a Medical Writer position at DynaMed should have been an obvious choice much sooner.  And yet, it’s never too late to do what you love.

——————————————————————————————————————————————

Please feel free to contact me for any additional information on medical writing, DynaMed, or even my lowly Red Sox (there’s always next year!).  You can reach me at Cloudy Media Blog, hmarshall@ebsco.com or on Twitter @cloudymediablog.

Squeezed Science – Should We Switch to a Business Mindset?

 

By Jesica Levingston Mac leod, PhD

It is a common conversation topic among researchers, but it was not until the NPR article saw the light, and the dark side, that the public realized the problems that young scientists are facing when pursuing a successful career in Academia. As we raise awareness about these tribulations, my colleagues mentioned how a “postdoc”’s quality life depends on the quality of the lab, the institution, the project, the relationships with colleagues and the Principal investigator or PI (the boss), not forgetting that this is a very self driven career. So, if your hypothesis is very difficult to prove, or you have been hitting your head against the wall with all the negative results that took you years to get, you may eventually come to hating this path and leaving Academia. The same if you have been working in a non “hot field” where the funding sources do not consider interesting enough to support or your PI is not supportive, or you have a very wicked competence inside or outside the lab. All these negative situations can aggravate the perspective of the very little options one may have by pursuing a career in Academia. On the other hand, if you are obtaining excellent results, publishing in top tier journals, made hundreds of good connections and collaborators, have a “great boss” and literally love you job… well, probably you are also doomed…

One solution could be implementing the business approach to the scientific mindset: Why only having one PI per lab? At the end, two minds think more than 1. Perhaps collaborative research centers have a solution were 2 or more PIs can have access to more equipment, grants and professionals, and therefore use the best skills needed for the job, like a company where you have an executive committee and you distribute the stock between the employees, in order to make them be part of the enterprise.

Having a business mindset would mean to have a planed strategy about your career development. Having a backup career plan is one example of this: starting to apply for jobs before needed, or before it is too late. Begin with your preparation to be a leader, and make your PI know, and discuss a good starting point. Look for leadership opportunities in any situations, such as coordinating workshops or conferences.

Sign up to run workshops and career developing series!. Many postdocs can discover a great professional gain if these opportunities would be offer to them. Get training in other expertise to be competitive in, for example, the investing or consulting field. Taking classes about how to give a class is a great example of a course that could be offered to postdocs and graduate students, in order to train them to explain and transfer their empirical knowledge to the next generation.

A month ago, at the Mount Sinai Postdoc symposium, Dr. Bruce Alberts (yes, THE Alberts,  from “The Molecular Biology of the Cell” book) who spoke about “The Future of Biology: Keeping Science Healthy” and illustrated the dramatic changes in the age of the scientist successfully obtaining project grants from NIH. In contrast to 30 years ago, the average age of new investigators with PhD at initial RO1 was 36.8 year old, a large number of grants were awarded to scientist in their early 30s, but this tendency has been decreasing drastically, to the point where now, the mean age for receiving these prestigious grants is 42 years of age. Dr. Alberts, himself, made fun on the fact that he obtained his postdoc position, before been awarded with his PhD. (which actually his thesis was rejected the first time, delaying the whole process) and learned from his failures. He also pointed out that he got his professor position at a very young age, something that is almost impossible nowadays. He advocated for a change in this unfair situation, which cripples the young innovators from getting a start. Also, he encouraged researchers to get out of the lab and talk to the public about science and its importance. First, to attract/engage curious minds to the scientific field, and second to communicate “in simple language” what we do for 9 hours plus per day in the lab.

We must offer to all this new scientific minds the reality about the current situation of science, but we also need to fix it, so it is not going to turn into a snow ball and make disappear all the interest in pursuing a scientific career for the new generations. In a business mind-set we must recognize that the money is not only in the governmental funding, but also in private foundations and other organizations like angels or venture capitals. So go out there and try to pitch your science to investors.

Feeling overworked? You’re not alone.

 

 

Celine Cammarata

Regardless of beliefs or traditions, many of us would probably like to be at home with our families right now.  But cells need tending, data points need collecting, and science halts for no man – or at least so it seems.  I recently got to wondering, are the hours of a scientist as crazy as they feel?

In a nutshell yes, we do work a lot – but not that much more than other professions.

You’ve probably already seen this info graphic, showing that science is the most coffee-consuming profession, and it’s no surprise when you consider our hours.  A paper posted to arXiv in 2012 examined the times at which papers are downloaded from Springer to gain insight into when scientists are working.  The U.S., Germany, and mainland China top the list in paper downloading.  Based on this metric, scientists tend to work late into the night as well as on weekends.  Trends in specific time distribution vary by country, with American scientists favoring long evenings over working on weekends; Chinese scientists closing shop overnight, but taking little rest over the weekend; and German scientists splitting the difference.  Interestingly, American scientists seem to be particularly bad at taking a lunch break – while China and Germany showed appreciable dips in paper downloading around early afternoon, no such trend is seen in the U.S.

All those nights and weekends add up.  In 2005 the NSF reported that scientists and engineers working in education (which included those doing research and teaching at universities as well as K-12 teachers) work an average of 50.6 hours a week overall, or over 52 hours a week for those in biology or engineering.  Scientists seeking tenure work a bit more, averaging 52.51 hours per week overall. Interestingly, those with children tend to work only slightly fewer hours per week than their childless counterparts, although the effect of children on working hours is more pronounced for women than for men.  Finally, it’s worth noting these figures do not include graduate students.

However, this workload is not as uncommon as one might think.  According to a Telegraph article earlier this year, over 80% of white collar professionals now clock more than 40 hours a week, with 28% working 50 hours a week or more – up from 19% in 2011. Of course, this is for UK workers, whereas the above numbers refer to the United States.

Nonetheless, the increasing commonality of long working hours doesn’t indicate that there is no problem.  The authors of the arXiv paper conclude that “scientists today are spending much more time working than initially intended. They are deprioritizing their hobbies, leisure activities, and regular exercises, which negatively influenced their mental and physical health.”  What are your thoughts?  Leave a comment and join the discussion!

Taking the Reigns – Part I

Neeley Remmers

Today I’m going to talk about a topic that affects everyone – from graduate students to post-docs to mentors. Mentoring. Mentoring is a key component in developing new scientists, yet as scientists embark on the faculty career pathway, no one takes the time to really teach effective mentorship even though this will become a significant aspect of one’s career as they develop into a primary investigator. Instead, the common theme throughout scientific history has simply been to train young scientists into clones that resemble their mentors. However, in today’s scientific world, we now have more scientists than ever before thanks to the increase in funding and admittance into graduate programs seen in the earlier part of this millennium and unfortunately, simply training young scientists to become clones of their mentors is no longer an effective mentoring strategy as there are many different job opportunities available for scientists today aside from the standard academic route.

Fortunately, there are scientists out there who are studying effective mentoring strategies and are trying to put together resources to teach effective mentoring strategies, but until this becomes an integral part in training young scientists, we as students and post-docs all are going to have to take a more active role our mentorship. After all, our mentors are only human and unfortunately lack the skill to read our minds to find out what kind of help we need and what is the best way to help each of us. The number one tool that can make an immediate impact in improving your relationship with your mentor is effective communication. However, before we get into effective communication strategies, we need to take a step back to be sure we first understand our own personalities, goals, and the personality of our mentor.

A couple weeks ago, I wrote a blog describing the many careers available to scientists and utilizing the MyIDP tool created by Science Careers. First, I highly recommend you make use of this tool so you can begin to visualize the career path you want to make for yourself. Once you know what area of science you want to build your career, you need to do a little research to find out what you can do while still in graduate school or your first post-doc position that can set you up to get an introductory position in that field. Once you have a plan worked out, you then should convey your career goals with your mentor so they can help you attain your goals in any way they can because regardless of what you may currently believe, your mentor really wants you to succeed…even if they use “tough love” to show it.

Now that you have completed step one and defined a career path, now it’s time to learn about your personality traits and how this may affect your communication skills with others and your success in the workforce. A very good tool for this is to take the Myers-Briggs personality test. This is not a test you can simply do online by yourself, but you need to either contact a MBTI center or suggest to your GSA or post-doc society to hold a workshop by a MBTI professional to administer the test and explain each of the personality traits. I recently attended one and it was like a HUGE lightbulb went off in my head. I was able to easily recognize the traits that applied to me, my mentor, and my colleagues and learned skills to better communicate with people who had opposite traits as me. Before I go farther, let me briefly explain the personality traits central to the MBTI personality types. There are four personality pairs: extroversion and introversion, intuition and sensing, thinking and feeling, and judging and perceiving. First, it is essential that I state that these personality traits are considered to be preferences meaning at this stage in your life you might test to be an introvert, but as you grow over the next 5 years your preferences may change to make you more of an extrovert. Additionally, you might always remain an introvert in nature; however, you may develop the skills of an extrovert to help you in certain situations. The easiest to understand is the first pair – extroversion and introversion – describes how one derives their energy and interacts with the world. As you can imagine, extroverts love to socialize with others, prefer to be around other people, and derive their energy from social interactions whereas an introvert gets their energy from being left alone to think things through. The second pair – intuition and sensing – relates to how one takes in information. For example, a sensor will look at an abstract picture and focus on the details that they can see within the picture whereas someone who is intuitive will look for hidden meanings and tends to think in terms of seeing the bigger picture. The third pair – thinking and feeling – relates to how you make decisions. A thinker relies on the facts regardless of the specific situation whereas a feeler treats each situation differently. For example, in terms of mentorship, a thinking mentor will treat everyone the same way whereas a feeling mentor will look at each person in their lab individually and tailor their interactions to each individual’s personality. The last pair – judging and perceiving – relate to how you live your outer life. For example, when planning a vacation, a judger will make a detailed itinerary listing what you will do each day and leave no room for spontaneity whereas the only plans a perceiver will make is to book the plane tickets and accommodations in advance and determine what they want to do each day as the day comes. For more thorough definitions of each personality trait, please visit the Myers Briggs Foundation website at: http://www.myersbriggs.org/.

In the next post, I’ll discuss how knowing your personality traits can help you improve your mentorship.