In some cases, transforming ideas that have been percolating in my mind for awhile into something tangible like a new course offering has been akin to the buildup of months spent generating tools, collecting reagents, and troubleshooting protocols and then the reward that follows with being able to commence the actual experiment and collect real data. A great illustration of this is our fall course From Scientist to CSO: A Business & Industry Primer, providing leadership and management skills training. Since before even joining the Academy, I’ve felt that business and other “soft” skills are important for scientists to learn; therefore, one of my aims has been to assemble a program that would provide the benefits of a typical pocket or mini-MBA. Now, combining this new course with our 12 week spring course From Idea to IPO, I’m hoping to have achieved my goal or come close. Needless to say, having this vision finally brought to fruition has been exhilarating.

In other ways, the rushes experienced in scientific research have been replaced with positive feedback from my audience and stakeholders. When I see that registration and attendance is high for the events I’ve strategically selected, it’s like getting a positive result from an experiment supporting my hypothesis or model. When students and postdocs thank me after an event it’s like scientists complimenting a poster or talk I’ve presented. And when the academic leadership from our partner institutions is pleased with my programs and work, it’s like garnering the approval of my dissertation committee. Instant gratification is a wonderful thing- and interestingly, it comes more often than it did in the lab.

Then there’s the fulfillment that comes from working on something that you really believe in. Just as I used to be passionate about research that could someday help unravel the mysteries of disease, so too am I passionate about improving the training and development of scientists. Many modifications could be made in our graduate curriculum to better support the array of possible careers in science and align with the realities of where science PhDs are ending up (see a recent paper on this here). It’s great to be in a position where I’m not only advocating for these changes but also filling in some of these gaps.

So, yes, I’ve been successful at replicating some of the anticipation, excitement, and fulfillment of being in the lab. And I don’t even have to spend hours in the cold room. Ahh....

Despite this uncertainty, you do have control over your own professional development: the knowledge and skills acquired for career advancement and personal development. To get you started, I’ve updated the Career Planning page to introduce you to the main steps in managing your professional development: self-assessment, career exploration, career preparation, and the job search. Investing time in this process will help you to make the most of your time in graduate school and a postdoc and will serve you throughout your professional scientific career- no matter what you end up being with a PhD.

 Click here to get started now with career planning.

1. Blog about science or maintain your research group’s web page. For inspiration, check out ScienceBlogs (a community housing over 80 science bloggers), The Incubator (a blog started by scientists and postdocs at the Rockefeller University covering science and life as a scientist); and these website finalists in the Scientist’s Labby awards.


2. Participate in, run, or help promote local science cafes. A great example of a student-led initiative is Science in the News (SITN) at Harvard Medical School. Find cafes in your area at ScienceCafes.org; here in NYC, there are a handful of public outreach activities:
   
   • Café Science of Columbia U at PicNic Market & Café
   • SciCafe at the American Museum of Natural History
   • Science & the City at the New York Academy of Sciences
   • Secret Science Club of Brooklyn
   • Serving Science- The CUNY Science Cafe
3. Offer to write an article for your institution’s magazine, newsletter or website. I learned recently that the PR office at New York Medical College permits up to 2 students or postdocs to submit a column per issue of their semi-annual magazine. Why not inquire with your own office of external relations to see if they’re open to a similar arrangement?


4. Create fun and instructional videos to post on YouTube or Vimeo. Watch the video finalists in the Scientist’s annual Labby awards to see how it’s done.


5. Get involved in science policy by offering to meet directly with officials, volunteering for advocacy organizations that engage policymakers, or apply for the various policy fellowships through AAAS and other professional societies (see the Science Policy page on this blog for a list of fellowships).


6. Write a letter to the editor or op-ed piece in response to an article or news item.


7. Respond to journalist’s requests for interviews. Many are turned down for fear of backlash or being misconstrued- the key to a successful interview is preparation.


8. Learn to be a better communicator. Take advantage of existing classes or workshops or request that your program or department provide science communication training. For instance, Stony Brook University’s Center for Communicating Science offers coursework on distilling your message, writing to be understood, speaking to the media, and improvisation.


9. Practice speaking in front of audiences and try to elicit feedback from professors and your peers. In my own graduate program we had a student-only “Data Club” with weekly presentations from PhDs in their second year and above (and, more importantly, free dinner). I gained valuable experience by presenting at Data Club, departmental seminars, and lab meetings, and through poster presentations at conferences. Teaching was a big help, too, as undergrads don’t hesitate to tell you exactly what they think of your communication skills.


10. And finally, there is always the option to pursue a full-time career in science communications, outreach, and policy. For additional resources on this, visit the Communicating Science, Science Policy, and Education pages on this blog.

Increasing scientific literacy among the public is an important but often overlooked responsibility of scientists. Yet, as the above list shows, there are a number of outlets for communicating science that are amenable to a range of schedules and interests. So start by asking yourself how you want to get involved and how much time you have to invest and then get to talking.

Admittedly, though, that day did little to turn me on to politics. I was frustrated by our representatives’ limited understanding of science as well as narrow interest in only the research with direct implications for health and disease, particularly in areas that affected them personally. Case in point, one staff member asked if any of us studied lipids because a relative of the senator had a lipid metabolism disorder and would be particularly interested in supporting that. I did, in fact, study lipids but had no clue how to respond appropriately since my research didn't have immediate clinical relevance. (Plus I know I'm not the only one to roll my eyes at having to link everything back to a horrific disease for people to take interest). By the end of the visit, I just wanted to go back to talking science with other scientists.

Flash forward to a couple of weeks ago when I attended a program sponsored by Stony Brook University’s Center for Communicating Science (CCS). This new institute is dedicated to teaching scientists how to effectively describe their work- not only to other scientists but also to the people who fund their research, policymakers, and the general public. I was there along with faculty and administrators from colleges and universities around the world to learn about the CCS’s curriculum and why this training is critical for our graduate students and postdocs.

Going through this week of training prompted me to recall my prior experience on Capital Hill and reflect on how it could’ve been improved had I been exposed to the kinds of courses the CCS offers.

One problem going into my visit to Washington, DC is that I wasn’t prepared to talk science with a lay audience. I didn’t know where to begin and how much detail to give to anyone outside my field. What’s more, I was hesitant to “dumb down” my research or make it personal. Had I received practical instruction on how to distill and tailor a message to different audiences, skills the CCS teaches, I might not have felt like I was speaking a different language and avoided becoming frustrated or impatient. And as I also learned, being simple and clear, using analogies, and humanizing a story isn’t dumbing down or detracting from the seriousness of the topic, it’s being a good communicator. If the listener doesn’t understand or care to understand because of an an unwillingness to lose the jargon or inability to explan its relevance- it’s my fault not theirs.

Another issue brought to light by my Capitol Hill visit is that while I recognized the importance of working with policymakers and educating the public, at the time I reasoned it didn’t have to be MY responsibility. After all, I wasn’t planning on going into science policy or journalism. But Alan Alda, who gave the keynote at the CCS, argues that, “communication is not something extra you add to science, it is of the essence of science.” Cornelia Dean, science writer and former editor at the New York Times, elaborates on this point in her book Am I Making Myself Clear: A Scientist’s Guide to Talking to the Public. She writes:

“We need to adopt a broader view of what it means for researchers to fulfill their obligations to society. It is not enough for them to make findings and report them in the scholarly literature. As citizens in a democracy, they must engage, and not just when their funding is at stake.”

Unfortunately, too many scientists think like I used to, “I’m a researcher not a writer or politician.” I believe this mentality arises because engaging the public isn’t rewarded or encouraged in a scientific career. If we instilled the importance of communication early and provided the tools for doing it effectively, we might see a shift in this way of thinking. And for those still reluctant to engage non-scientists, Carl Safina, author, scientist, and one of the CCS instructors, issued the following statement:

“If you choose not to communicate what you do, your work will be increasingly irrelevant. Even worse, you will condemn the rest of us to receive information from sources who  may be ignorant or who choose to distort and misinform for their own gain.”

Needless to say, by the end of CCS’s program, I was convinced to include science communication training in future Science Alliance programming. Now if only I could go back and explain why my doctoral research on lipids was important despite not curing any lipid disorders...

Stay tuned, the next blog post will present practical ways you can start to communicate with the public.

Embarking on this kind of endeavor didn’t occur to me when I was in graduate school. My research on phospholipid signaling didn’t pertain to global health or sustainability and so it wasn’t immediately clear how I could contribute to solving developing world problems in a way that utilized my training. But as the example above shows, we don’t have to be limited to the subject matter we studied or be tied to the lab bench to make a difference.

If you’re looking for inspiration on ways to get involved, a few things come to mind:

1. Check out Idealist.org - a fabulous resource to search for volunteer and work opportunities here and abroad. It’s also a clearinghouse for nonprofit organizations (e.g. here’s their page on the New York Academy of Sciences, which contains a short description and our latest job ads).
2. Join Scientists Without Borders - an online community dedicated to solving global challenges through science- and technology-based solutions. They are seeking scientists like you to lend your knowledge and problem-solving skills to challenges posted by individuals and organization from around the world. (e.g see these potential solutions for purifying water in response to a poster from Uganda).
3. Consider a postdoc or fellowship in international development. For instance, the D-Lab at MIT occasionally has postdoc, volunteer, and full-time positions and Columbia’s Earth Institute has an official Postdoctoral Fellows Program.

To help explore these various avenues Science Alliance is collaborating with Scientists Without Borders to co-sponsor Innovating on a Shoestring: Medical Technologies for the Developing World being held June 30 at the Academy and broadcast live via the web. If you can’t make the event, it will also be archived on the Science Alliance page as an eBriefing. This workshop will provide a case study of developing world innovations being carried out at MIT’s D-Lab as well as practical resources to help you get started in initiatives outside of the lab. What’s more, the presenter will speak about transitioning from a PhD into this field and starting her own nonprofit.

It’s nice to know that it’s never too late to try and change the world.

One specific challenge is sifting through the seemingly endless possibilities for science PhDs seeking to work in business, government, and non-profit sectors. Reading job descriptions is a good place to start, but won’t give a complete picture on whether or not a particular career path is a good fit. The best thing is to talk to people in these fields by conducting “informational interviews.” These conversations will provide a better sense of whether the job meets your skills, values, and interests and is one you indeed want to pursue.

Before landing your desired job, though, it’s critical to master one of the basics for getting your foot in the door: crafting your CV and/or resume. Most of you are familiar with the traditional academic CV; however, for non-academic jobs 1-2 page resumes or CV-resume hybrids are preferred. You don’t want to be overlooked for a position because relevant skills and experiences aren’t effectively communicated or because the document wasn’t in the appropriate format. You need to know which one to use and how to tailor it to the job to which you’re applying.

To illuminate these initial steps for scientific job seekers, Dr. Laura Stark Malisheski, a neuroscientist-turned-career counselor for graduate students at Harvard University, will present the in-depth workshop The Non-academic Search: Target the Job, Tailor the Approach. She will cover how to craft your best CV or resume and network your way into a job through informational interviewing. The event will take place Thursday, May 12 at the Academy and will also be accessible by webinar.

The tools you pick up from this workshop can be applied to the subsequent event on Saturday, May 21 Careers in Bioinformatics: From the Lab to the Clinic and Beyond at the NYU-Poly Bern Dibner Library of Science and Technology in Brooklyn. You will be armed with the right kinds of questions to ask the panelists and approaches to make your application competitive for a career in this field.

Until next time, happy (job) target practice!

Last month Mike Blank, member of the law faculty at Georgetown University Law Center, led the workshop Bargaining for Success: Mastering the Science of Negotiations at the Academy for our Science Alliance members. He provided a systematic framework to turn negotiations, often referred to as an art, into a science. Turns out, the same can be done for approaching a conversation where, like in the above examples, the topic is stressful or your relationship with the other person is tenuous. You have the opportunity to learn how when Mike returns to the Academy May 9^th to teach Interpersonal Skills: The Keys to Effective Communication and Managing Difficult Conversations.

It’s inevitable you will endure difficult conversations throughout your life in both personal and professional settings. Better to be prepared and ensure a better outcome, like salvaging relationships with your lab mates, getting the authorship you deserve, and obtaining the support of your PI in your nonacademic career pursuits.

To address this omission, the National Postdoctoral Association (NPA) has compiled a list of core competencies across six areas that postdocs, and other scientists, should strive to obtain throughout their training. Three areas are specific to science but the remaining three involve acquiring general “transferable skills” that can be applied to careers outside research: communication skills, professionalism, and leadership and management.

How can you cultivate these skills as a graduate student or postdoc?

Take advantage of career and professional development programming offered by your institution and professional scientific associations. As an example of the latter, Science Alliance, a program of the New York Academy of Sciences, provides courses, workshops, and seminars covering a wide range of skill sets, like the art of networking and art of speaking science, negotiation strategies and leadership and personal success through self-awareness and emotional intelligence. Similar types of resources are available on your campus through career service centers and postdoctoral affairs offices with many providing one-on-one advising, as well.

In addition to formal training approaches, another way to develop the recommended core competencies, or any other skill you feel you are lacking, is to learn by doing. Need to improve your public speaking skills? Teach, volunteer to give extra departmental seminars, or join your local Toastmasters. Don’t have any leadership or management experience? Become the lab’s radiation safety officer, supervise a junior student, or head up a project for a school or community group. These are just a few examples- the main point is to be proactive and seek out opportunities that will expand your repertoire of functional skills.

No matter how rigorous the program, the journey towards becoming a scientist will not equip you with all the skills needed for future career success. Therefore, be sure to carve out time to develop your personal and professional self outside the lab. Not only will it make you a well-rounded individual prepared for a multitude of careers, these positive “distractions” may even help the 10,000 hours of pipetting and PubMeding go by faster.

How postdocs are really hired: According to the article, “seasoned investigators scout for talent at scientific meetings, summer training courses, and when giving seminars at other universities.” They also rely heavily on referrals from colleagues and many will focus on your publications and any interesting techniques you could bring to the lab. Note: letters of recommendation add very little to your application. Fitting in with the lab culture and work style was stressed so meeting current lab members will be a crucial part of the interview.

The PI’s approach to training postdocs: The PIs interviewed view the postdoc as the stage for developing your independence as a researcher and, as one PI put it, an opportunity to “test [your] own scientific wings.” As such, they encourage their postdocs to devise their own ideas and experiments, with one even favoring a “sink or swim” approach. Although expected to be self-motivated, this does not necessarily mean you will never see your advisor; one PI meets weekly with each of his postdocs and another holds weekly lab meetings where everyone presents.

What are they training you for: Preparing postdocs to run their own labs is at the top of the list for most PIs with an emphasis on cultivating mentoring skills. “Good mentors find ways to train their postdocs to excel at mentoring when they launch their own labs,” the article states. Others recognize that not everyone will follow in their own shoes and are open to their postdocs following nontraditional paths.

Overall, the article compares the postdocal experience to navigating a river and its “churning rapids with only a paddle and a helmet for protection.” Sounds about right.

Contradictory to historical findings, a recent article in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences finds no evidence of sex discrimination in the manuscript reviewing, interviewing, and hiring processes of the past 20 years. The authors Ceci and Williams argue that the gender imbalance still seen today is instead primarily attributable to fertility and lifestyle choices that impact women's careers more than men's, such as having a family, opting for better work-life balance, and taking care of elderly parents.

Rather than focus on “outdated” modes of discrimination, the authors state that “addressing today’s causes of underrepresentation requires focusing on education and policy changes that will make institutions responsive to differing biological realities of the sexes.” Suggested interventions include stopping the tenure clock, offering part-time tenure-track jobs that segue into full-time positions, and onsite childcare.

Targeting the real-world biological/lifestyle differences seems like a practical and long overdue approach that could have a huge impact on women’s careers. Ceci and Williams assert that the “linear career path of the modal male scientist of the past may not be the only route to success, and departments and universities should be encouraged and funded to experiment with alternate lifecourse options.” To this, I say “here, here!”