My replacement

A year into my job out of grad school I proposed the idea for the creation of my group. It was a new idea for research and medical device development that has proved to be very successful for the company and for patients. We started off in leftover lab space with a dedicated, smart, but inexperienced team (I was the oldest...and only a year out of grad school...). We slowly developed into the best group in the company and a little over a year ago started working in a custom-built lab that we designed down to the border on the windows. It has all the equipment I wanted, with the exact layout I thought would be most condusive to doing great research. I love it. And I love my team.  It's incredibly fun; a start-up feel with big company name and dollars.  And the concept has worked out so well that a year ago I was made the international representative for this kind of group.  Every division across the world now has a group similar to mine.

When I accepted my academic job I started to talk to management about cultivating my right hand person to take my position. They've been with the group since the beginning and is only second to me in patents/year in the company. Leadership agreed this was the best move. 

But today I was given some troubling news. Leadership has found someone they want to join my group and shadow me to pick up everything they can in the one+ year before I leave. This person has a very good track record as a leader in other biomedical companies, but doesn't know much about applications.  Mr. MBA, as I've been calling him. Also, we've all talked with this person and our personalities don't match at all. Our group dynamic is one of the most important things about our team, and I'm pissed that leadership wants to mess with this dynamic.  He tells very different types of jokes, and comes in thinking he knows everything.  He worked in the old-world way of biomedical development, and very different from how my group does R&D; focused on money not lives.  And we can all tell that he's here to move up the ladder.  I would have never left my group if not for academia.  Even if they offered me the CEO position.  I love my group too much, and he's definitely here to leave.  Honestly, I think leadership put him here to quickly get experience in leading the best team in the company before moving up the ladder with that 'experience'.  There's no way this is going to stop me from leaving, but I'm suddenly fearing that the group will go downhill when I leave. And my group has been responsible for the vast majority of the company's recent success. I've got nothing to lose so I'll DEFINITELY be voicing my opinion.  My #2 isn't upset they're getting pushed back, and they definitely won't leave because the group is too important to them, too.  The rest of the team is sticking around, too.  But they definitely aren't happy about this.

I already hated business-types. I'm about to hate them more. 

My beef with patents

In a lot of biomedical companies, you are judged by the number of patents you hold. So we seek out every type of patent we can. I've been asked to file three patents today that I know will never be worked on by my company because we already have a ton of products in our pipeline. We're taking up the patent in order to prevent our competition from working on it. Or they can work on it, and we'll license the patent to them. But all we're doing is making a couple crappy sketches and filing. No actual R&D work. However, if you file lots of patents you get pats on the back, promotions, and $2000 per patent.

Let's say this product could have saved 100,000 lives. Now it won't, because no one can work on it, and we're not planning on developing it. This is contrary to journal publishing. We can steal, build-upon, and refocus from one another, but ultimately, nothing useful happens with the data...just like with some of these patents (by the way, my legal department says this isn't patent trolling, even though I think it is). So which is worse?

I'd say patents for a few reasons. First, in publications, nothing's happening with it (the time spent on my medical device patents will save more lives in a year than all my publications combined for the rest of the timespan of humankind), but at least you're letting anyone use it, including a company if they want to. A patent is locking up the idea. Second, patents don't contribute anything. They only take away. Patents are often written as broad as possible and very little engineering and science go into them. So no one can learn too much from them. This is on contrast to most manuscripts, where they are filled with all sorts of intellectual awesomeness that other researchers can build on. In addition, most of the claims are substantiated by data.  So someone else could potentially take the broad idea to market and save lives, but they can't without paying crazy license fees for a patent the issued company isn't using.  Patents have data, but it's not as scrutinized as most academic papers.  The change that the USPTO has made where you don't have to prove due-diligence and the patent is awarded to first-to-file is only going to make things worse (I can explain more on the patent cycle and medical device IP if any of you want to read a post on it).

Ultimately, I despise locking up an idea that could save lives if we don't intend on utilizing it. It's a defensive move that only helps shareholders. We could use these defensive patents as offensive weapons against the competition and the diseases. But ultimately, they sit back with their pitch and arrows just preventing anyone else from reaching good. 

Growth versus growth

I was in a meeting where the CEO was giving a talk about my particular division's growth relative to the rest of the company. When the CEO comes in, it's a big deal. He wears his $50,000 suit and leads one of the largest medical device companies in the world, and he's a ruthless businessman. He showed a plot like the one I have here (the left one), and a junior engineer from a different internal group than mine asked, "How many saved lives is that?".  He had no clue. Luckily, the president of my division knew that approximate figure. The CEO looked peeved that he was asked that.

I'd say ~90% of the people in my field I've talked to, and 100% of those in my group, got into this business to help people. The CEO was definitely in the 10%.  I have given presentations talking about growth and potential markets and I never once have put a dollar figure in because I only care about the people.  That's the only thing I talk about when interviewing people because it's the most important thing.  The only dollar figure I care about at all is the cost of my devices. If the device isn't cheap enough, even given 99% efficacy, no one will be able to afford it to cure their ailments. 

I understand that someone has to talk numbers, because without my $millions/year operating budget I wouldn't be saving ANY lives (well....maybe a few). But we should be happy that we're beating out our competition for lives saved, not that we made more money, but because we know our products are superior and our growth means even more patients saved by our products.  I understand money will also be a part of my academic future (I'm only kind of naive), but there's still the greater good...right?

How to turn down an offer?

Those that have been keeping up-to-date with me know I've already turned down two offers during my leave of absence from the blog. This is an(other) old post I wrote.  Though this one was written before my hiatus, I didn't get the chance to post it then. I'm still curious about your thoughts, blogosphere, since I'd like to compare how I actually handled it versus how you all would've.  I'll edit the post later for how I handled it.

------------------------------------

There's an oral offer on the table (or in the air....or whatever an oral offer is). I thought I could handle the negative things about the city and department, but after the visit I don't think I can. I really don't see my research flourishing there.  This school has gone out of their way to recruit me, and they have been trying extra hard to take advantage of my industrial contacts and medical device experience.

I want an academic position very bad, but not there.  If I'm honest, they might feel I'm spurning them because I think I'm better than them.  A little part of me might actually be thinking that, but part of my desire to enter academia is to do my own crazy research, and this university won't allow that to happen (at least, I think that).  I think I'm just going to tell them that I feel I'm a great fit, but they don't have all the facilities I think I need to do my research, and the ramp-up would be too long, blah blah.  I don't know.  Grrrrr....I'm so angry at myself for leading them on this far...

------------------------------------

How I handled it:

I was very honest. I said that they don't have the facilities I need, and I didn't realize how much I did not match with the town until I actually visited. I was obviously very thankful, and threw in some stuff about future potential collaborations. The search chair said I could negotiate for some of the equipment I wanted and I was brutally honest saying that I don't think they could. But even if they could, the city just wasn't for me. I offered them luck on filling the position and even offered to reimburse the department for the travels. But they let me go and haven't heard from them since other than noticing they have a new faculty member on their website. 

R1 versus R2

I hadn't really heard anything about R1 versus R2 designations until I started to look for faculty positions. I picked my undergrad and grad schools because they were cheap and I saw cool research coming out of them. So when I started looking for faculty posts my advisor asked me what I wanted in a faculty job and I said I wanted to do cool research, be my own boss (mostly), have more freedoms in my hours, be on the hunt for the greater good, and mentor students...not necessarily in that order. He said to look at R1 schools first. So I looked exclusively at R1s with a couple R2s sprinkled in where I thought I'd make a good fit. I didn't really question this since I thought R1 schools would give me the best chance at grant success, and ultimately, my success as a researcher.

As I was interviewing I found myself liking the R1 schools for no good reason. I think I started to bias myself. So I did the logical thing and started researching what R1 means. I'm sure most of you know this, but the first thing I learned is that no one is supposed to use R1 anymore. Carnegie has new names for the same thing. I'm going to stick with R1 because I'm typing this on my phone and R1 is faster. 

I thought R1 was more specific to the department, but it turns out it's university-wide. So let's say you have some heavy-hitter departments trying I  that bring in crazy NASA or DoD funding, or maybe you have a fantastic medical school that bring craptons of funding, or maybe you have a ton of PhD programs but don't produce good students or do worthwhile research, these few good departments can be the sole reason your university is R1?  I'm not sure though.  If this is the case, the crappy departments in the university could be able to recruit better candidates because the other departments are pushing the whole school into R1 status. 

What if you're the only multi-million dollar department in a university?  Your name will be dragged through the dirt because the other departments can't step it up. Now you won't be able to bring in the best candidates because of a number after 'R'?  I understand that each discipline knows which schools are the heavy-hitters, but the R1-2 designation is like a scarlet letter, keeping universities down, no?  It just seems like this to me, and I might be completely incorrect (in which case, please correct me blogosphere), but I was blown away by this revelation. It didn't stop me from concentrating on R1s because I thought they would provide me with the highest amount of research time, cool equipment, and great collaborations. Not to mention, I've been told by several researchers that the university name matters when applying for grants. But part of me, in the back of my mind, thinks that I can help bring an R2 up. Help build something new and better.  Am I misinterpreting?  If I am, I'm actually kind of glad.  People focus too frequently on titles: Dr-this, Fellow-that, VP-this, Prof-that...my business card has my name, department, company, address, and phone number.  Honestly, this blog is the only thing that is related to me having three letters.  I regularly tell people not to call me 'doctor'.  I really have to wonder if these titles and designations weren't around if I would have accepted a job with an R1.  Maybe my hidden bias creeped in, and that's why I selected the university I selected.

Update on "Throwing in the towel" and me...and one more

This is something I wrote during my hiatus. It's obviously a little out-of-date, but I wrote it, so I'm going to post it!  No typed word goes to waste...I'm going green up in here!  I wrote this immediately after going offline.

------------------------------------

I haven't been writing much on my job searching unless something different happens for a couple reasons. Mainly, a lot of it is the same: I have an interview, they do or do not call back, I go on-site, etc.  To the profs I've been talking with: you think you're unique but my experiences are all the same with some of you being funny and interesting and welcoming, and some of you being high-horse douches. Nothing special to write about. I've got a couple on-sites under the belt and people contacting me afterwards. So this faculty-thing might happen. However, I'm not a fan of any of these cities or schools thus-far after the on-site. Right now, I'm strongly considering turning down offers to hold out for a potentially better offer next year. It's a gamble, but I think it'll pay off. That's the update on my search. Nothing exciting.

Update on my friend from before who's giving up: she still hasn't gotten any serious interest. I know she'd be a better teacher than most profs I've had are.  And her research is awesome. It's such a shame. However, in the past month since I gave her my recommendation, my company has given her an offer. More than double the salary she would've gotten on academia, but she'll be in another group in my company. So I won't be able to work with her :( . But she'll be here :) .  She's seemed extra stressed and depressed about this whole thing since she knows she's qualified, it's just that departments don't want her for some reason. It's like she got a consolation prize worth more money than the grand prize. It's a shame she won't be training our next scientists, but she'll at least be creating devices that will keep them alive longer. 

I have a different friend who's been at a post-doc at a highly regarded school for four years. Same post-doc. For four stinking years. He's been academic focused since a child and applies every year. The first year he got no bites, then each year after he gets between 2-4 on-sites with no offer. He only applies to top-notch schools. Not just R1, but cream-of-the-crop R1s.  He clearly wants it more than my other friend since he's willing to try year-after-year with little luck. I jokingly said that he could go to industry (although I don't consider him as talented as the other friend: boring research, okay teaching record, plus he's a white male. His advisors are adored though, which I think he's banking on), and he very sternly said no. He wants to teach and do research. I really don't think I have the energy to do what he has gone through the last few years. Consistently getting turned down. Making very little cash. I do envy that he gets to do crazy seemingly nonbeneficial research. And he gets to pick his hours and be surrounded by smart people all the time. He's feeling like it's not going to happen again this year, and he said if that happens he will consider going to a lower-level R1.  It's really crazy how badly he wants it. I like him a lot as a friend, but honestly I don't see him being a great prof like my friend that has given up. I really hope he finds the position he's looking for, I'm just blown away by the dedication. Maybe that's what it takes: berating search committees year after year until they say yes. I've got 2 more search cycles in me, we'll see if I have his type of dedication. 

Finding a new intern

Working with undergrads was some of my favorite experiences from grad school, so every time I get approval to hire an intern, I get pumped.

The problem with interviewing undergrads is that they're desperate for things to slap on their resumes, so they'll say anything: "I designed complicated circuits", "I can use machine shop equipment", "I know advanced biology/chemistry/physics", etc.  They often overestimate their abilities because they don't know any better and they think the skills they've learned are advanced.  Unfortunately, they're taught at a very basic level and aren't really taught the knowledge in detail before the application. 

So I ask a few basic questions in each interview. The questions vary based on what's going through my mind, but they usually encompass these questions depending on the type of position I'm trying to fill:

Why is the sky blue?

If I have a bath with saline residue, how would I clean it?

How do I make 0.1M of NaOH?

How does the heart beat?

How can I sterilize this equipment?

*Solve dy/dx=x for x
Heat conduction is a function of what?

What's Snell's law?

What do the kidneys do and what's the functional unit?

Name 5 components of a eukaryotic cell
What's mechanical stress?

**What's the unit of electrical current?

Really simple questions depending on the position. Today I interviewed a student who has a 4.0 from a top 20 university. She's finishing her MS I'm biomedical engineering after a BS in biomedical engineering and mechanical engineering. Her answer to * was "x"; her answer to ** was "watt".  What the heck?  Is this seriously what schools are pumping out?!?

I wanted to scream. Of course, I corrected her and explained it. It seemed like it was the first time she was seeing these answers. At first I thought she was nervous, but if she was, she masked it very well. She seemed quite confident in herself. I really hope she was just not in the proper state of mind today, because I'm probably not going to be interviewing too many people from her background or university. I hate to stereotype, but I don't have time for this crap.  I hire interns to have someone to mentor, but ultimately I have to get things done.  When someone is this far behind, by the time they are ready to actually contribute, their seven month internship is over.  I've been pretty lucky with interns where they can usually contribute within a couple months.  Interns of all races and sexes.  Unfortunately, this young woman is not going to cut it.  Schools, please do better.  I haven't started my academic post yet, but I'm really hoping I don't let kids pass by with this remedial knowledge.