I'm a horrible leader. But I'm an 'okay' researcher so I usually guide projects just how I would do it. I am really bad at inspiring, making business decisions, and handling group drama. Part of this is that I'm not very sensitive and pretty straight-forward. I hate beating around the bush. And I've never been great at business decisions. I'm all about what's best for the patient. The patient-first attitude has gotten me to where I am. And my research skills (or lack-thereof) combined with group members who are very confident in me and will follow me wherever has given the impression that I can handle a group.
My #2 and successor was asking me how to lead the team. She wanted one piece of advice. My advice was "be a great researcher, give the people tons of freedom, and hire the best people...even if you have to go through 100 candidates to find the right fit". Even though I've been climbing the corporate ladder I know I couldn't climb any further because what I consider my strengths (straight-forwardness, doing what's best for the patient, etc.) are pretty glaring weaknesses in corporate America.
I've realized that the more time I spend in this role the most business-like I become. I've been having to learn how to lead a business. I'm hoping I can take some of these fiscal decision-making skills to my academic post but I'm unsure.
Friday, August 1, 2014
Wednesday, July 30, 2014
Animal studies
This post has some details on using animals for research with some details that I'm certain animal lovers might not like. Please don't read further if you fall into this category. I don't like doing animal studies, but I've come to understand that some animal testing is necessary, though every possible precaution should be made to ensure animals are well taken care of. Plus, I won't experiment on monkeys or do anything psychological...or anything that causes pain. When a university or company gets in trouble for animal stuff, I immediately boycott their products. This includes not collaborating with some of the best physicians in the world...which I've had to do because of their treatment of animals. I've disabled comments just-in-case. That being said here's the post:
A friend came into town and we were having some pretty heavy discussions on the use of animals in research. We both came to agreement that animals could be used more efficiently, and fewer killed by researchers, but it got me thinking about doing a post on animal research. I got an email months ago about the expectations of doing animal research coming out of grad school when you don't really want to (where the highest species a grad student works on is usually live mice...though there are the rare wealthy labs...). This could be a valid concern because there is a lot of money in industry for animal research and we do a ton of it. And a lot of people hate seeing dogs, cats, pigs, etc. on the experimentation table. I didn't want to do a post before, but thought it may be useful for students to read about jumping into animal studies from the perspective of someone that did not want to do them originally.
I want to preface this with the fact that I love animals. I have two dogs now, and throughout my life I've had rabbits, fish, and even a pig as pets. I hadn't seen an animal die until graduate school (I swear all my old pets are at farms...) when I found a local butcher to get cheap, high quality meat from and he offered to show me the process from farm to table. I was heartbroken but grateful because it has made me far more grateful for the meat that I eat. And I never ever waste it now. In my home country meat is a side dish of small quantity so it was easy to eat all of it. But after coming here I started to eat more meat and noticed a little waste if I wasn't hungry and things spoiled in the fridge. I hate seeing animals die, but I always thank them (or their "spirit" if I just have the meat) for their life. Of all the animals I've seen pass I have never gotten over it, even if it's just on an operating table and all I see is an open wound because of the dressing on it.
In graduate school I worked with mice and pigs (I didn't do bio before grad school....I was a physicist). The mice were transgenic used for all kinds of things. When I had to kill and harvest my first mouse I was terrified and felt like I wasn't built for this kind of research. I brought this up to my advisor and she understood but explained to me the usefulness of animal research and how using surrogates would be impossible to replace all animals with because of inaccuracies. And how people would die without it. But she didn't pressure me. She referred me to organizations like kids4research.org and explained the necessity of animal research. I told myself I would continue to try it and by the fifth animal I wasn't as upset by it, though I have never gotten over the fact that I'm ending its life. One thing I made sure of was that every experiment went well and gave me good data. I didn't want the mouse's life to end for no reason. I've seen so many people waste animals or the data, and it really pisses me off.
I moved on to porcine subjects and had the same reservations, though didn't have to do as much of the killing/husbandry. This was handled by techs and vets. But I still maintained the same level of respect for the animal: ensuring that pain and anesthesia was completely under control, death occurred painlessly, and data was very complete. And I thanked the animal ever time...even though I know they can't hear me...or understand me.
When I moved to industry I started to have to do research on dogs. Dogs hold a very special place in my heart so this took a while to get used to. But I realize that there's no other way other than testing on humans since other animal models have proven inaccurate. Technically I do test on humans, though the priority is the treatment...the data is just icing for me. Talking to other people at my company there are plenty that don't go into the OR. They get to do awesome R&D without ever seeing an animal. They just see the data. I forced myself to come to terms with the canine studies because I knew that if I was there I could guide the study from the control room to get the most out of the animal. So if you're worried about the animal study just mention this to the recruiter and they'll try to find the suitable environment for you. Or just try to desensitize yourself, as I have. When I see my dogs at home (one's sitting on my feet right now!) I never think of what happens in the OR. I separate myself. It makes it easier to separate given that all I see of the animals are a couple squares of skin as revealed by windows in the dressing over the animal. I occasionally I'll see a paw, and this gets to me. At first I would hang out in the corner of the OR, letting the doctors and techs handle the testing with interjections from myself when I want a change to the testing or more testing done. I now stand right by the table because I realized it makes the testing more effective with the 'expert' right there by the table. And I want to make sure testing is as efficient as possible. Never wasting an animal. For the most part though I don't really have to touch live animals anymore. I'll get excised tissue but this doesn't affect my psyche at all. Just seeing the animal on the table.
It's impossible to get away from animal products. If someone says they don't use anything that has an animal byproduct they're wrong. When I was at the butcher they explained everything that animal products are used in or that have been tested on animals and I realized that getting away from animal use would be impossible. And for me, I really care about patients and their families. So if I have to bite-the-bullet and do something a little uncomfortable for me then I'll do it. Seeing the patients I've touched makes it all worth it. Though it did take some time....
A friend came into town and we were having some pretty heavy discussions on the use of animals in research. We both came to agreement that animals could be used more efficiently, and fewer killed by researchers, but it got me thinking about doing a post on animal research. I got an email months ago about the expectations of doing animal research coming out of grad school when you don't really want to (where the highest species a grad student works on is usually live mice...though there are the rare wealthy labs...). This could be a valid concern because there is a lot of money in industry for animal research and we do a ton of it. And a lot of people hate seeing dogs, cats, pigs, etc. on the experimentation table. I didn't want to do a post before, but thought it may be useful for students to read about jumping into animal studies from the perspective of someone that did not want to do them originally.
I want to preface this with the fact that I love animals. I have two dogs now, and throughout my life I've had rabbits, fish, and even a pig as pets. I hadn't seen an animal die until graduate school (I swear all my old pets are at farms...) when I found a local butcher to get cheap, high quality meat from and he offered to show me the process from farm to table. I was heartbroken but grateful because it has made me far more grateful for the meat that I eat. And I never ever waste it now. In my home country meat is a side dish of small quantity so it was easy to eat all of it. But after coming here I started to eat more meat and noticed a little waste if I wasn't hungry and things spoiled in the fridge. I hate seeing animals die, but I always thank them (or their "spirit" if I just have the meat) for their life. Of all the animals I've seen pass I have never gotten over it, even if it's just on an operating table and all I see is an open wound because of the dressing on it.
In graduate school I worked with mice and pigs (I didn't do bio before grad school....I was a physicist). The mice were transgenic used for all kinds of things. When I had to kill and harvest my first mouse I was terrified and felt like I wasn't built for this kind of research. I brought this up to my advisor and she understood but explained to me the usefulness of animal research and how using surrogates would be impossible to replace all animals with because of inaccuracies. And how people would die without it. But she didn't pressure me. She referred me to organizations like kids4research.org and explained the necessity of animal research. I told myself I would continue to try it and by the fifth animal I wasn't as upset by it, though I have never gotten over the fact that I'm ending its life. One thing I made sure of was that every experiment went well and gave me good data. I didn't want the mouse's life to end for no reason. I've seen so many people waste animals or the data, and it really pisses me off.
I moved on to porcine subjects and had the same reservations, though didn't have to do as much of the killing/husbandry. This was handled by techs and vets. But I still maintained the same level of respect for the animal: ensuring that pain and anesthesia was completely under control, death occurred painlessly, and data was very complete. And I thanked the animal ever time...even though I know they can't hear me...or understand me.
When I moved to industry I started to have to do research on dogs. Dogs hold a very special place in my heart so this took a while to get used to. But I realize that there's no other way other than testing on humans since other animal models have proven inaccurate. Technically I do test on humans, though the priority is the treatment...the data is just icing for me. Talking to other people at my company there are plenty that don't go into the OR. They get to do awesome R&D without ever seeing an animal. They just see the data. I forced myself to come to terms with the canine studies because I knew that if I was there I could guide the study from the control room to get the most out of the animal. So if you're worried about the animal study just mention this to the recruiter and they'll try to find the suitable environment for you. Or just try to desensitize yourself, as I have. When I see my dogs at home (one's sitting on my feet right now!) I never think of what happens in the OR. I separate myself. It makes it easier to separate given that all I see of the animals are a couple squares of skin as revealed by windows in the dressing over the animal. I occasionally I'll see a paw, and this gets to me. At first I would hang out in the corner of the OR, letting the doctors and techs handle the testing with interjections from myself when I want a change to the testing or more testing done. I now stand right by the table because I realized it makes the testing more effective with the 'expert' right there by the table. And I want to make sure testing is as efficient as possible. Never wasting an animal. For the most part though I don't really have to touch live animals anymore. I'll get excised tissue but this doesn't affect my psyche at all. Just seeing the animal on the table.
It's impossible to get away from animal products. If someone says they don't use anything that has an animal byproduct they're wrong. When I was at the butcher they explained everything that animal products are used in or that have been tested on animals and I realized that getting away from animal use would be impossible. And for me, I really care about patients and their families. So if I have to bite-the-bullet and do something a little uncomfortable for me then I'll do it. Seeing the patients I've touched makes it all worth it. Though it did take some time....
Friday, July 25, 2014
My average days-when I first started
Xykademiqz made a good point in my last post that I posted my current hours when I was asked by a student about industry hours. I've moved up at a rate much higher than the average, and have been taking the learning lumps that goes with being underqualified for a position. I started in a role similar to a lot of people straight out of grad school, if not just a little higher since I had a good amount of industry and national lab experience before I tried to earn my letters. I got my first big promotion about 8 months in, and at my meeting with the head of my company for the promotion I pitched a new type of idea for medical device design. One that has paid off big for my company. He made me in charge of this new group (which I still lead). He set aside a small amount of money and within a year our budget increased by 10x because of the results my group had. It was three of us, and we're easily responsible for all the upcoming products in our company's pipeline. Everyone in my group gets promoted at 2x what everyone else does because of our success. Any success I have is 99% luck from this meeting with the head of my company. My hours changed dramatically at this stage. I wanted...needed...to make this concept work. I have a surprising amount of free time, especially outside of work, rarely working outside of the office. I had a ton more free time (and fewer gray hairs) when I first started here. Though I would never trade my current position for my old one. Without further ado, here's my hours when I first showed up:
Very laid back day:
9am Arrive
9-11am Experiments/design
11am-1pm Lunch
1pm-3pm Reading...occasional short meeting...emails
3pm-5pm Emails, calls, some design work or experiments
5pm Gone!
Laid back day
8:30am Arrive
8:30-9am Emails and day planning
9am-10am Meting
10am-11am Experiments
11am-noon Small group stuff, experiments, design stuff
Noon-1pm Lunch
1pm-4pm Work (experiments, design, etc)
4pm-5pm Email, reading
5pm Gone!!!
Busy day
8am Arrive
8am-9am Meeting
9am-10am Computer stuff
10am-noon Experiments
Noon-1pm Look at data while eating
1pm-3pm Experiments...maybe some small group meeting stuff
3pm-4pm Meeting
4pm-6pm Experiments and prototyping
6pm-7pm Emails, reading, transcribing notes
7pm Gone
Average day while traveling
5am-6am Check email during breakfast
6am Report to hospital
6am-8am Prepare equipment
8am-1pm Run animal study
1pm-2pm Lunch
2pm-7pm Run animal study
7pm-8pm Put equipment away
Do this 5 days in a row.
My percentages were probably like so, on average:
20% VLBD
60% LBD
5% BD
15% Travel
Those students out there: if you're worried about the hours, mine were definitely better than grad school. And my starting salary was definitely higher than my old advisor's...but there are trade offs :)
Very laid back day:
9am Arrive
9-11am Experiments/design
11am-1pm Lunch
1pm-3pm Reading...occasional short meeting...emails
3pm-5pm Emails, calls, some design work or experiments
5pm Gone!
Laid back day
8:30am Arrive
8:30-9am Emails and day planning
9am-10am Meting
10am-11am Experiments
11am-noon Small group stuff, experiments, design stuff
Noon-1pm Lunch
1pm-4pm Work (experiments, design, etc)
4pm-5pm Email, reading
5pm Gone!!!
Busy day
8am Arrive
8am-9am Meeting
9am-10am Computer stuff
10am-noon Experiments
Noon-1pm Look at data while eating
1pm-3pm Experiments...maybe some small group meeting stuff
3pm-4pm Meeting
4pm-6pm Experiments and prototyping
6pm-7pm Emails, reading, transcribing notes
7pm Gone
Average day while traveling
5am-6am Check email during breakfast
6am Report to hospital
6am-8am Prepare equipment
8am-1pm Run animal study
1pm-2pm Lunch
2pm-7pm Run animal study
7pm-8pm Put equipment away
Do this 5 days in a row.
My percentages were probably like so, on average:
20% VLBD
60% LBD
5% BD
15% Travel
Those students out there: if you're worried about the hours, mine were definitely better than grad school. And my starting salary was definitely higher than my old advisor's...but there are trade offs :)
Sunday, July 20, 2014
My average days
Someone looking at whether to go industry or academia asked me what my schedule is like. The question came from a grad student figuring out which direction to go after graduation. I obviously (or maybe, not so obvious...I'm an enigma...) said to look at academia for the reasons I've discussed in this blog, but I thought I'd explain my average busy day, my average laid-back day, and my average travel schedule day. I'll throw in my most laid back and most busy days along with the relative percentages of the frequency of each type of day, too.
Very laid back day:
9am Arrive
9-10am Emails
10am-11am Meeting
11am-1pm Lunch
1pm-3pm Work (experiments, design, etc)
3pm-5pm Email and read articles/patents/etc
5pm Leave and forget I even have a job
Laid back day
8am Arrive
8-9am Emails
9am-10am Experiments
10am-11am Meeting
11am-noon Brainstorming
Noon-1pm Lunch
1pm-4pm Work (experiments, design, etc)
4pm-5pm Email and read articles/patents/etc
5pm Leave while rarely thinking about work outside of work.
Busy day
7am Arrive
7am-8am Email
8am-9am Meeting
9am-10am Work on designs
10am-noon Experiments
Noon-1pm Look at data while eating
1pm-3pm Prototype changes and more experimentation
3pm-4pm Meeting
4pm-6pm Experiments and prototyping
6pm-7pm Emails
7pm Leave tired
Very busy day
6am Arrive
6am-7am Email
7am-8am Prepare materials for big meeting
8am-10am Big meeting
10am-11am Work on designs
11am-1pm Experiment while eating lunch
1pm-3pm Big meeting
3pm-5pm Experiments and prototyping
5pm-7pm International meeting
7pm-9pm Experiments to prepare for big show-and-tell
9pm-10pm Data processing
10pm-11pm Work on presentation
11pm-midnight Emails
midnight Sometimes leave while thinking about work...sometimes sleep in my office
midnight Sometimes leave while thinking about work...sometimes sleep in my office
Average day while traveling
5am-6am Check email during breakfast
6am Report to hospital
6am-8am Prepare equipment
8am-1pm Run animal study
1pm-2pm Lunch
2pm-7pm Run animal study
7pm-8pm Put equipment away
Do this 5 days in a row.
My percentages are probably like so, on average:
2% VLBD
8% LBD
50% BD
10% VBD
30% Travel
Overall, I am very satisfied with my work, and it doesn't always seem like work since I'm having fun. The clinical-impact makes me feel great about the long days at the office, but I prefer VLBD :)
Saturday, July 12, 2014
Sponsoring research
I sponsor more academic research on my company than any other group here. It's a great way to stay in touch with the academic community, give to people who really need it, and give kids an 'in' at a great (the best) medical device company ever. Also, I've been using my past success to convince people at my company that I can guide great academic research and those in charge have been very open and enthusiastic about sponsoring some of the research I intend on pursuing next year. Even going to the point of starting to talk numbers and aims with me.
My most recent exploit has been very successful, however, the PI I'm dealing with wants to push results to publication. I love publishing, but this work has been going so well that I may be able to turn this into a great medical device. It's the first project where the profit will be realized immediately rather than 20 years down the road. Sooooo, I'm pub-blocking them.
I feel bad, especially since I really like the student on this, and this will delay their publishing. The agreement with the school is that I control when things are released. My concern with this now is that the PI will get antsy and leak information. Not through a conference or manuscript, but just in talking with people while at a conference or faculty meeting. Especially since they're starting to get frustrated, and in venting anger they may vent the idea. I've already filed for patents on this, but the patent probably won't be public for at least six months. When it's public, even though we don't have it issued yet, I've agreed to let it get submitted for conferences and manuscripts.
I'm trying to see this from the PIs point-of-view since I'll probably be in that situation before I know it. But I'm hoping that I will empathize more with my [past] company, and relay this to the student. Anyone out there that gets industry sponsorship and you're frustrated: please don't get too mad. We're not just doing this for greed or ego. This is something we have to...please understand. And please relay this to your students.
My most recent exploit has been very successful, however, the PI I'm dealing with wants to push results to publication. I love publishing, but this work has been going so well that I may be able to turn this into a great medical device. It's the first project where the profit will be realized immediately rather than 20 years down the road. Sooooo, I'm pub-blocking them.
I feel bad, especially since I really like the student on this, and this will delay their publishing. The agreement with the school is that I control when things are released. My concern with this now is that the PI will get antsy and leak information. Not through a conference or manuscript, but just in talking with people while at a conference or faculty meeting. Especially since they're starting to get frustrated, and in venting anger they may vent the idea. I've already filed for patents on this, but the patent probably won't be public for at least six months. When it's public, even though we don't have it issued yet, I've agreed to let it get submitted for conferences and manuscripts.
I'm trying to see this from the PIs point-of-view since I'll probably be in that situation before I know it. But I'm hoping that I will empathize more with my [past] company, and relay this to the student. Anyone out there that gets industry sponsorship and you're frustrated: please don't get too mad. We're not just doing this for greed or ego. This is something we have to...please understand. And please relay this to your students.
Friday, July 11, 2014
Life is less busy
I had a post a little while back about how busy life has been. I've noticed that it seems awfully quiet right now and I'm embracing it. Though I'm noticing things are just about to pick up. It's a little too quiet right now...like a zombie movie before the heroes get ripped apart. I love spending more time with friends and going on long walks, or watching some television.
There's two approaches I'm debating in my head:
1. Embrace this totally and wait until crap hits the fan to get busy again,
2. Take this time to get everything of mine in order and prepare for the next crap-storm.
I'm rolling with the first one. It totally sucks to be on-edge, and I just want to clear things out. I've got a nice vacation coming up. I'd like to think that the average stress level ends up less if I handle a lot at once instead of a steady state of stress. I was never a boy or girl scout so being prepared just isn't part of me. For now, I'll start writing up a few blog posts and recover some of my natural-colored hair...leaving the grays as a distant memory. Sit by the beach more frequently than not, watch some movies, hike a little, play some games, ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.......relaxation......for now.......
There's two approaches I'm debating in my head:
1. Embrace this totally and wait until crap hits the fan to get busy again,
2. Take this time to get everything of mine in order and prepare for the next crap-storm.
I'm rolling with the first one. It totally sucks to be on-edge, and I just want to clear things out. I've got a nice vacation coming up. I'd like to think that the average stress level ends up less if I handle a lot at once instead of a steady state of stress. I was never a boy or girl scout so being prepared just isn't part of me. For now, I'll start writing up a few blog posts and recover some of my natural-colored hair...leaving the grays as a distant memory. Sit by the beach more frequently than not, watch some movies, hike a little, play some games, ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.......relaxation......for now.......
Tuesday, July 8, 2014
Passion=bad
I give great presentations. People are engaged. They understand the topics. The crowd loves me. Either there's great conversations and laughter because they feel sorry for me, or it's good enough to get the point across and get people thinking. I choose to believe the latter. But I've been told it's unprofessional. A friend actually said it can seemed almost like scientific stand-up. I give engaging presentations because I love my work. And because I love my work, I love talking about it. It flows off the tongue with lots of relatable analogies and detailed theory...but also some jokes.
I've been told today my style is 'unprofessional for academia' by a soon-to-be-faculty-mentor at my new school. My thought is the point of presenting the work is to get the point across to as many people as possible. Or sometimes just the important ones. The presentation I gave when I was interviewing was a healthy mix of slides and talking-style geared towards undergrad, grads, and faculty depending on the section and depth. Everyone said they understood it well.
My advisor loved recording my talks because of how easy things were to understand. And a committee member told me that my defense was the most lively one he's ever been apart of in the 30 years he's been advising. I started presenting this way early in grad school when I realized that unenthusiastic talks put everyone asleep, and the point of a talk is to get your point across....can't do that if everyone is asleep. There's a second point to this too: it's unresponsible science to not disseminate your results (usually paid by the public) to the public. I want to see at least a little effort to keep the audience engaged. I go the extra mile making my slides and speech great. A friend thinks people think it's unprofessional because it looks like I'm trying really hard and appear too approachable. That I need to appear at least a little unapproachable and put in the bare minimum of work.
I may be misinterpreting this, but when I see a drab talk, I immediately think either a) they don't give good talks, b) they don't care that other people are bored, or c) they're unpassionate about their work. I love seeing a speaker that loves their work, and loves to show it. I'm going to try a find a safe point between talking passionately about my work and trying to get people engaged through humor and the lifeless talks that I've come to expect at most conferences and seminars. Actually...screw that. I'm going to present the way I want. If people are 'too engaged' or 'too entertained' then that's their problem!
My advisor loved recording my talks because of how easy things were to understand. And a committee member told me that my defense was the most lively one he's ever been apart of in the 30 years he's been advising. I started presenting this way early in grad school when I realized that unenthusiastic talks put everyone asleep, and the point of a talk is to get your point across....can't do that if everyone is asleep. There's a second point to this too: it's unresponsible science to not disseminate your results (usually paid by the public) to the public. I want to see at least a little effort to keep the audience engaged. I go the extra mile making my slides and speech great. A friend thinks people think it's unprofessional because it looks like I'm trying really hard and appear too approachable. That I need to appear at least a little unapproachable and put in the bare minimum of work.
I may be misinterpreting this, but when I see a drab talk, I immediately think either a) they don't give good talks, b) they don't care that other people are bored, or c) they're unpassionate about their work. I love seeing a speaker that loves their work, and loves to show it. I'm going to try a find a safe point between talking passionately about my work and trying to get people engaged through humor and the lifeless talks that I've come to expect at most conferences and seminars. Actually...screw that. I'm going to present the way I want. If people are 'too engaged' or 'too entertained' then that's their problem!
Friday, July 4, 2014
Expanding diversity
I am a big proponent of diversity in STEMs. First off, we need more bodies in STEM. The less diverse the field is, the fewer minorities will join. Given the problems of this world, we need as many people as possible to solve them. Growth of new ideas, directions for marketing, and progress on projects is stymied when everyone has the same background.
My problem with the current approach is approaching target demographics by using representatives from the target demographic (men recruit men, women recruit women, Latin Americans recruit Latin Americans, etc.). During grad school and after grad school I have been doing my best to try and infiltrate the specialized organizations to spread awareness and learn all I can about demographics other than my own. My reason for this is 1. It will allow me to better understand what they're going through, 2. Develop strategies best for the specific groups, and 3. It exposes the students to me. Me, being someone different than their groups. My (perhaps misguided) reasoning is if they learn that people of all races and sexes are approachable and want them to succeed they will pick STEMs. Being from industry also offers them someone outside of academia they can approach. Why any we all just get along? I know there are hidden discriminations that often people don't know they have, but I wonder what it will take to put everyone on the same level. Is that even achieveable?
My problem with the current approach is approaching target demographics by using representatives from the target demographic (men recruit men, women recruit women, Latin Americans recruit Latin Americans, etc.). During grad school and after grad school I have been doing my best to try and infiltrate the specialized organizations to spread awareness and learn all I can about demographics other than my own. My reason for this is 1. It will allow me to better understand what they're going through, 2. Develop strategies best for the specific groups, and 3. It exposes the students to me. Me, being someone different than their groups. My (perhaps misguided) reasoning is if they learn that people of all races and sexes are approachable and want them to succeed they will pick STEMs. Being from industry also offers them someone outside of academia they can approach. Why any we all just get along? I know there are hidden discriminations that often people don't know they have, but I wonder what it will take to put everyone on the same level. Is that even achieveable?
I'm doing an outreach thing for a club in my demo and I tried convincing others to team up with a different demo and they aren't hearing it. They think it will dilute our impact. What the heck? There's got to be a reason, I just can't pinpoint it.
I'm in the airport with a colleague and he thinks that I'm just naive: thinking that people can get over their subconsciouses. I'll try and get over my naivety while I'm embracing other cultures in my upcoming travels.
PS: Happy Birthday, America!!!
I'm in the airport with a colleague and he thinks that I'm just naive: thinking that people can get over their subconsciouses. I'll try and get over my naivety while I'm embracing other cultures in my upcoming travels.
PS: Happy Birthday, America!!!
Tuesday, July 1, 2014
Moving in before commitment
So like many married couples, my spouse and I co-habitated together prior to marriage. Marriage seemed like a formality. And when we started to live together we already started our lifestyles into more of a married one. Why delay moving in if we know we're going to be together? I know there are personal as religious implications, but from a personal standpoint, if I know something is inevitable I have trouble focusing on the present because I know what's on the horizon. So we moved in immediately when we thought we were ready.
In 13 months I'll be quitting my job and moving to New College University (NCU). I know it's inevitable, but in this case I can't leave early because of obligations. So I'm stuck with this anxiety about my next stage in life.
I keep looking online at houses at NCU even though these probably won't be on the market when I move out there. I kind of want to pull the trigger on a house just to have there; ready for me. I can start making upgrades while I'm away. But I think this is just my anxiety: wanting to 'move' in before I'm married....
I keep looking online at houses at NCU even though these probably won't be on the market when I move out there. I kind of want to pull the trigger on a house just to have there; ready for me. I can start making upgrades while I'm away. But I think this is just my anxiety: wanting to 'move' in before I'm married....
Tuesday, June 24, 2014
New equipment at my new school
When I accepted the academic position I'm going to be taking in a year (seriously, I'm getting crazy excited and anxious), my new school (NS) agreed to buy a critical piece of equipment so long as I run it as a core facility.
NS is pulling kind of a dick move: they're asking me to find a lesser costing system. A system that will be able to do the job, though not exactly what I want. I really should have gotten this in writing. On the plus side, they said I can start ordering equipment and outfitting my new lab space. This will allow me to really start as soon as I show up (I hope) and get students faster (I hope) since everything will already be ready (I hope).
One thing I'm trying to work out given the lesser equipment is that I may be able to get a lab tech with some of the saved money difference. Though a couple year's salary of a lab tech hardly makes up for the equipment difference. I'm going to miss the days of my practically unlimited budget....
Saturday, June 21, 2014
Dear Yelpers,
As I have been traveling a ton lately, I am trying to find good places to eat. Some coworkers know of places, some friends have recommendations, and I randomly walk around in cities and find some gems. Sometimes I turn to the internet. Yelp is usually my go-to.
There are a few breeds of Yelpers:
1. The kind that just reads.
2. The kind that posts pics of food.
3. The kind that posts pics of the business.
4. The kind that posts funny pics.
5. The kind of posts personal pics.
6. The kind that review everything and have to throw in their opinions all the time.
7. The kind that genuinely have good tips.
8. Combinations of the above.
Yelp also has review-inflation. This is one of the worst parts of Yelp: most people have horrible tastes in food compared to my preferences. A five star review rarely results in five star flavor. I sometimes think people are scared to go against the majority so reviews just become more and more positive.
So Yelpers, here's a few comments in regard to each archetype you may fall into:
1. If you see something missing from a review (incorrect hours, better bartenders than others, etc). Add it. Otherwise, you're just a user. But be sure to at least rate the place, regardless of whether you post a review.
2. There are enough pics of food. Do a quick search and see if the food you want to post hasn't been posted. If it has, then don't post. If it hasn't, absolutely make sure that of the 400+ photos already posted that your's will actually contribute.
3. Thank you. I frequently want to know if the restaurant is dingy, has a good view, etc. These pics are rare, but again, if it's been posted then don't post.
4. I don't care. Unless it sheds light on the ambiance.
5. I really really don't care.
6. Please make sure it's not the same as every other review. If it is, just rate. While you may think we all care about your opinion...we don't.
7. Please keep posting. I know your good, unique tips get drowned out by the crap, but I dream of a world where the crap disappears.
8. See above.
4. I don't care. Unless it sheds light on the ambiance.
5. I really really don't care.
6. Please make sure it's not the same as every other review. If it is, just rate. While you may think we all care about your opinion...we don't.
7. Please keep posting. I know your good, unique tips get drowned out by the crap, but I dream of a world where the crap disappears.
8. See above.
Seriously, a recent city I was in had hundreds of pics and reviews per place and it was impossible to really see what the restaurant had. Five stars, but worth maybe two. The bathroom was the dirtiest place, and $$$.
Yelp is supposed to make things easier. In the time it takes me to see all the freaking pictures of the same foods, and people, and crap reviews I could just go to the restaurant and learn for myself. In my home city, that's fine, but when I'm traveling in countries where I probably won't visit again, I want to make sure I get the best. Though I've started to just play restaurant-roulette lately and ignore Yelp. If any readers out there work for Yelp: a feature where you upload and have to list whether its food, ambiance, or other would be awesome.
Sincerely,
Phindustry
Yelp is supposed to make things easier. In the time it takes me to see all the freaking pictures of the same foods, and people, and crap reviews I could just go to the restaurant and learn for myself. In my home city, that's fine, but when I'm traveling in countries where I probably won't visit again, I want to make sure I get the best. Though I've started to just play restaurant-roulette lately and ignore Yelp. If any readers out there work for Yelp: a feature where you upload and have to list whether its food, ambiance, or other would be awesome.
Sincerely,
Phindustry
Saturday, June 14, 2014
So much travel!!!
I hate traveling. And I've been on the road more than at home lately. Normally time on the plane and airports and getting driven around gives me chances to relax, blog, watch movies, etc. But things have been so damn busy that all I've had time for is work. With a multiple devices getting ready for FDA-level animal studies and human studies I have to be around to support a lot of MDs. I get to talk advantages while the VP of my company, sales, and other engineers watch.
Because of this travel I've been missing home a ton. And realizing that I hate the following cities (don't be offended, to each their own...I love certain cities that people despise...and I never get mad at people when they rip on them): Los Angeles, Phoenix, Hope, Houston, and Marseille. And being away from home makes me even more mad about these other cities. And I haven't had time to blog about the frustrations! My Möbius strip of frustration.
One interesting thing: yesterday in the airport I sat next to a kid and his mom. They're looking at apartments in the city of a certain Ivy League school. This kid has a lot to his advantage: clearly rich parents that can afford to send him anywhere, years of right control over his life and extracurriculars and school. Part of me is kind of jealous since I got into a lot of these schools but couldn't afford to attend. And I can't help but wonder if a better pedigree would've made job hunting easier. But part of me realizes how the focus of this persons life has been school and school alone. I talked with him a little and there are few people more boring than him. There must be a good balance of overbearing parent and having an interesting, funny, and balanced kid. Right? ....starting to feel the pressure of wanting to be a parent....
One last thing: I've been flying to tons of places and with tons of different airlines. I love Delta, Alaska, and Virgin airlines. Economy, first, and business classes are all awesome with these two airlines. Considering the prices aren't much different how come other airlines can't bring it like these airlines have?
Friday, June 6, 2014
My no-longer-replacement
I've written about the guy that my company said is to replace me here. At a recent conference he was showcasing some of our new stuff to a few select physicians (the kind of physicians that will keep their mouths shut about our up-and-coming products). Some of these physicians know and like me, and it's always nice to chat with them. I would introduce my replacement and we would all talk about the medical devices on the horizon. My replacement (Mr. MBA), would chime in every once in a while when he was directed a question during our discussions. He was able to joke around and develop back-and-forth with the physicians, but as soon as anything technical came up (either about the diseases or the devices) he seemed like an idiot. On top of this, it didn't seem like he cares about patients, which is part of why I despise this guy. The physicians relayed this to me and my superiors that were there. And they were not amused.
So the president of my company has notified me that Mr. MBA will be transferring to marketing since the physicians have notified management that Mr. MBA is not someone they want to work with. Party with, yes, but work with, never. This makes me feel good and bad. Good that he'll be gone (he was horrible for our group) and bad because the physicians don't think I'd be fun to party with.
So the president, realizing that they made a bad decision, has put me on charge of the hiring committee. I have 2 weeks to make a short-list and 1 week to complete the first round of phone interviews. Then on-sites after that. They want to rush this so they can start training under me. I've been pushing to get my #2 in charge of my group when I depart in a year but for some reason leadership is obsessed with finding someone external. I suspect it's because my #2 is a quiet kinda gal. She isn't too aggressive (unlike me), though she's insanely motivated. I'm planning on training her for the committee. I suspect her reserved attitude is part of why leadership doesn't want her leading my group.
Monday, June 2, 2014
Patent or perish
Question from a reader:
I want to make the transition from industry to academia, as you are about to. I haven't published in five years, how can I supplement my CV? I'm assuming you were in the same boat as I, and most advice I find online is about making the transition to a professorship from a current academic position (post-doc/grad school).
I can't publish my industry work in journals. The only data of mine that goes public is in FDA filings, so this isn't always the most novel stuff. I'm somewhere between second-fifteenth author on a couple major publications and conference abstracts where physicians have put me on their work since it's my device they're using, but I didn't really think these counted. And any data that I got on my own needs to stay within the company. If competitors take my data and turn it into a successful product then shareholders will be quite upset. The only way I've been able to publish my work (and keep my CV fresh) was to turn this novel data into medical devices. This is where patents come in.
With patents, I come up with an idea based on something crazy I think of in the shower (hot, right?) or when I realize that we can turn our data into a device I write a paragraph and attach a couple pics then upload it to our lawyers. Our lawyers do a prior art search (I can write about the patent process from my point-of-view if you'd like...) then come back to me with how we should write the patent. Without going into all the details, eventually this results in a plaque with my name and USPTO number on it.
This is how I bridged my academic publications and my industry work. You've heard of 'publish or perish', in most high-level medical device jobs it's 'patent or perish'. We get awards, crazy money, and recognition for patents...even if we just submit it and it never turns into a patent...or just a utility patent. If you're not patenting (thereby preventing the competition from pursuing your awesome idea) then you're falling behind. Those in the highest levels of scientific leadership here hold tons of patents.
I don't know if this is actually the best thing to do, and some companies choose trade secrets over patents...in which case I don't know what you'd do (advice from other readers, please?). But this is how I managed to convince academics that I've done something between grad school and my current position. I'm not sure if this even mattered. Maybe the pedigree matters more than any patents or pubs...
I want to make the transition from industry to academia, as you are about to. I haven't published in five years, how can I supplement my CV? I'm assuming you were in the same boat as I, and most advice I find online is about making the transition to a professorship from a current academic position (post-doc/grad school).
I can't publish my industry work in journals. The only data of mine that goes public is in FDA filings, so this isn't always the most novel stuff. I'm somewhere between second-fifteenth author on a couple major publications and conference abstracts where physicians have put me on their work since it's my device they're using, but I didn't really think these counted. And any data that I got on my own needs to stay within the company. If competitors take my data and turn it into a successful product then shareholders will be quite upset. The only way I've been able to publish my work (and keep my CV fresh) was to turn this novel data into medical devices. This is where patents come in.
With patents, I come up with an idea based on something crazy I think of in the shower (hot, right?) or when I realize that we can turn our data into a device I write a paragraph and attach a couple pics then upload it to our lawyers. Our lawyers do a prior art search (I can write about the patent process from my point-of-view if you'd like...) then come back to me with how we should write the patent. Without going into all the details, eventually this results in a plaque with my name and USPTO number on it.
This is how I bridged my academic publications and my industry work. You've heard of 'publish or perish', in most high-level medical device jobs it's 'patent or perish'. We get awards, crazy money, and recognition for patents...even if we just submit it and it never turns into a patent...or just a utility patent. If you're not patenting (thereby preventing the competition from pursuing your awesome idea) then you're falling behind. Those in the highest levels of scientific leadership here hold tons of patents.
I don't know if this is actually the best thing to do, and some companies choose trade secrets over patents...in which case I don't know what you'd do (advice from other readers, please?). But this is how I managed to convince academics that I've done something between grad school and my current position. I'm not sure if this even mattered. Maybe the pedigree matters more than any patents or pubs...
Wednesday, May 28, 2014
Phone+business
I never use my phone for work. The only thing I have in it is Busy/Available synced to my work Outlook so I don't mess up my scheduling for tests/dinners/etc. Also, since I travel for a lot of studies and corporate portfolio meetings I need to make sure I'm not in the wrong place at the wrong time. The email on my phone is personal. No one, but a select few from work, have my cell. Not even the president of my company (my boss). I don't even do web searches on it for work. Here's my open tabs:
Cracked
NPR News
AV Club
Food Network
Amazon for watches
Wikipedia for Frozen (Film)
The homepage for my new department<-this is kind of work related, I know....
Nothing related to my current work. Something about work encroaching on my real life bums me out. My entire group is like this. There should be work-life balance; not work-life integration. We all realize that if you don't have time to switch off then you'll burn out. Some people can handle it, we just would rather be hiking or hanging out with friends.
But my soon-to-be-successor asked me today how to get his phone on the 'network'. Then he was shocked and started passing judgement on us when we said we didn't know. First, he said we were luddites! Then he said it made us seem undedicated! We work on the cutting edge of technology. We have created complicated implants that can manipulate the body into doing what we want. We've written software that Google would drool over. But because we don't want to constantly be connected to the office we're undedicated and dumb? Our group of a few has impacted more lives than the thousands of other groups in our company combined even though we switch off at the end of the day.
I understand some people like to be connected, but don't insult us when we want to have separate lives from work. There's a conference next week where he'll be showcasing some of our technology with me to some MDs. I guarantee he can't answer the first question they ask him. And when leadership hears this I'm certain he'll be moving groups. Probably through a promotion...
Cracked
NPR News
AV Club
Food Network
Amazon for watches
Wikipedia for Frozen (Film)
The homepage for my new department<-this is kind of work related, I know....
Nothing related to my current work. Something about work encroaching on my real life bums me out. My entire group is like this. There should be work-life balance; not work-life integration. We all realize that if you don't have time to switch off then you'll burn out. Some people can handle it, we just would rather be hiking or hanging out with friends.
But my soon-to-be-successor asked me today how to get his phone on the 'network'. Then he was shocked and started passing judgement on us when we said we didn't know. First, he said we were luddites! Then he said it made us seem undedicated! We work on the cutting edge of technology. We have created complicated implants that can manipulate the body into doing what we want. We've written software that Google would drool over. But because we don't want to constantly be connected to the office we're undedicated and dumb? Our group of a few has impacted more lives than the thousands of other groups in our company combined even though we switch off at the end of the day.
I understand some people like to be connected, but don't insult us when we want to have separate lives from work. There's a conference next week where he'll be showcasing some of our technology with me to some MDs. I guarantee he can't answer the first question they ask him. And when leadership hears this I'm certain he'll be moving groups. Probably through a promotion...
Thursday, May 22, 2014
Paper review
To stay in the academic loop, I'm a reviewer for two major journals in my field. Been doing this since as soon as I graduated a few years back. The past year I've reviewed about a dozen papers.
When I was in grad school, at first I thought everything was brand spanking new and going to change the world. That quickly changed as I realized that the research was cool and beneficial but 99.9% of it won't have any direct clinical impact. For the stuff that isn't basic science it's still so far cutting edge that the impact is unrealized. In industry, my work has changed the medical device world with tons of direct impact. Well, maybe not the world, but 10's of thousand's of peoples' lives. But it's not really brand spanking new besides a few things. But I have to keep these things on the D.L. to keep other companies from utilizing it. A lot of the ideas in the papers I've read have been thought of before. I've only read one article that I was amazed by, but it was written so poorly it nearly got completely rejected. I reviewed this paper this week and it reminded me about how awesome writing is.
It's a great way to organize your thoughts. Throw some pictures and diagrams in a great document and you've just won yourself a multimillion dollar grant. Or look back at your old writing and discover how much better you've become. Or discover how you've changed as a person and scientist. But you don't necessarily need good writing for nonprofessional writing (ahem...this blog).
I love technical writing because it's the culmination of a lot of hard work. Through the planning, organizing, reporting, and discussing results, it's a lot of fun to pull everything together and let the world know what's going on. In order to do this, the language of most prevalence is English. While my English isn't the best I'm pretty decent at disseminating my work. This paper I'm reviewing is reminding me that if you want to do science you should either learn great English writing or work and publish in an area where you don't need good English. With this paper I'm reading it's just such a shame that the PI approved submitting this paper without reworking the writing and figures. I'm going to try and push this into major revs (so it's not killed) because it's great work. It's just very tough since the writing and figs are sub-par. As a big fan of writing, it just kills me to see work like this that's been approved by a PI. If this person tried to submit this crap to the FDA he would be heavily punished for it. The PI is doing the grad student that wrote this a disservice by not pushing the student to learn better writing skills. Some people will probably say, "students won't listen, are incapable, don't have time, etc". To that, I was a mediocre writer when I entered grad school. My former advisor wouldn't let me submit anything for publication until he says it was acceptable. This improved my writing dramatically. At first it took forever (months of constant rewrites) to submit pubs. Holding off publication (and therefore graduation) is one of the few things PIs can use to control the students. And it's for good reason: learning to disseminate information is part of the scientific process, so this needs to be learned.
Again, this is probably just my naïveté. But my advisor was just as busy as the rest and had time to teach me writing. I teach entry level scientists and engineers better writing. Why can't the corresponding author on this paper teach good writing? Or at least not let this garbage get submitted.
Thursday, May 15, 2014
#InnovationDeficit
I've always wanted to help become a bridge between industry and academia. I think this is part of why departments took kindly to me while looking for an academic post. I think so, but I still don't know how the faculty hiring process works. This involves a few different approaches (I'm omitting some things but these are the biggest):
1. Funding acacdemic labs to do basic science I don't have time for
2. Hiring interns from schools
3. Giving talks at academic conferences and universities
4. Convincing my company to sponsor academic conferences and different university events and students
5. Working directly with local schools (K-12 and universities) and my company to show the youths that STEMs are fun, lucrative, necessary, and useful.
The last one involves me traveling to schools, taking part in tours, outreach with FIRST, SWE, ASME, MAES, SASE, and BMES (e.g., random acronyms) events, etc. I try my hardest to get people into STEMs. We need more of us of any race, religion, and creed. The problem with this is we can convince more people to want to join, but without the funds to pay for college and have jobs for them, my recruiting efforts are useless.
While I wasn't born in the USA, I bleed the stars and stripes. I love this country, which is part of why I recruit so heavily for STEMs. To prevent our country from falling behind we have to have innovation. And we need people with advanced knowledge to spur this on. And to have innovation, we must have the funds to provide the best possible education, paying for tuition, fees, and stipends; especially for those who can't pay on their own. We need funds to pay for more (and accountable) professors (and K-12 teachers) for the influx of students. We need the funds to create the technologies that turn into the next generation of businesses to fund many a STEMer to come. In industry, I fund a lot of academic research, but it's still a drop in the bucket compared to what the NIH/NSF/DoD give out. But to handle the influx of STEMers we need to keep innovation going on the homefront. We need more investment. This is something I've always preached.
This bring me to this website: http://www.innovationdeficit.org
When I saw this today, I saw statistics that I've always seen, but this is a very nice way to present them. There has been all kinds of talk about funding being so bleak right now from federal agencies. I have heard it in regard mainly to grant-funding. But there's so much more to the lack of funding occurring in the academic environment. There needs to be more professors to handl the influx of students (and grants for them), we need the best labs and classrooms for them. And events to get them pumped about the fields. As a country we need to start thinking about this and understanding our priorities. Or companies need to start investing in our future since these students will be the eventual STEMers these companies need. There needs to be an interaction between industry and the government. Discussions about how they can work together: the government spending in a way to protect our intellectual future, with industry willing to shoulder some of the burden.
#InnovationDeficit
5. Working directly with local schools (K-12 and universities) and my company to show the youths that STEMs are fun, lucrative, necessary, and useful.
The last one involves me traveling to schools, taking part in tours, outreach with FIRST, SWE, ASME, MAES, SASE, and BMES (e.g., random acronyms) events, etc. I try my hardest to get people into STEMs. We need more of us of any race, religion, and creed. The problem with this is we can convince more people to want to join, but without the funds to pay for college and have jobs for them, my recruiting efforts are useless.
While I wasn't born in the USA, I bleed the stars and stripes. I love this country, which is part of why I recruit so heavily for STEMs. To prevent our country from falling behind we have to have innovation. And we need people with advanced knowledge to spur this on. And to have innovation, we must have the funds to provide the best possible education, paying for tuition, fees, and stipends; especially for those who can't pay on their own. We need funds to pay for more (and accountable) professors (and K-12 teachers) for the influx of students. We need the funds to create the technologies that turn into the next generation of businesses to fund many a STEMer to come. In industry, I fund a lot of academic research, but it's still a drop in the bucket compared to what the NIH/NSF/DoD give out. But to handle the influx of STEMers we need to keep innovation going on the homefront. We need more investment. This is something I've always preached.
This bring me to this website: http://www.innovationdeficit.org
When I saw this today, I saw statistics that I've always seen, but this is a very nice way to present them. There has been all kinds of talk about funding being so bleak right now from federal agencies. I have heard it in regard mainly to grant-funding. But there's so much more to the lack of funding occurring in the academic environment. There needs to be more professors to handl the influx of students (and grants for them), we need the best labs and classrooms for them. And events to get them pumped about the fields. As a country we need to start thinking about this and understanding our priorities. Or companies need to start investing in our future since these students will be the eventual STEMers these companies need. There needs to be an interaction between industry and the government. Discussions about how they can work together: the government spending in a way to protect our intellectual future, with industry willing to shoulder some of the burden.
#InnovationDeficit
Tuesday, May 13, 2014
Sponsoring the children
I donate to a scholarship where I can sponsor the students I specifically pick (all applications are from the same university). It costs me around $10k/student/year (I sponsor two) and mainly this provides a partial stipend, but the schools appreciate the private money so much the university fills in the rest if the stipend and covers tuition/fees/etc. I had this when I was in grad school so it's only right that I give back. If the student has a fellowship already then this money goes on top of that. Pretty awesome. I pick my students based on what kind of research they do and then their personal/professional essays. I've met some great people this way. There's a big ceremony where the students get their awards and get to meet their sponsors. It's a lot of fun to take part in as a student, and just as fun as a sponsor.
I really enjoy this because I get to see some of the state-of-the-art, talk with interesting people that really care about research, and get a couple nice dinners. At the most recent dinner I started to realize that I may not be able to take part as much for a couple reasons next year. First, I'll have less disposable income. Second, I'm concerned about the conflict-of-interest. Is funding a different PI's student at a competing university ethical? I guess I could reach out to my new school's local chapter of this scholarship and fund a student, but what if I like one of my own student's research the most. If I don't select the one I want to fund I fear it's wrong, and if I do select my own, then I'm using personal money to fund one of my "employees". But giving to another university when my new place could use the money presents me with a dilemma.
Regardless, I will take part, if nothing else but volunteering with the organization. I really enjoyed my experience with this scholarship, and I don't want to give up sponsoring students. Should I?
I really enjoy this because I get to see some of the state-of-the-art, talk with interesting people that really care about research, and get a couple nice dinners. At the most recent dinner I started to realize that I may not be able to take part as much for a couple reasons next year. First, I'll have less disposable income. Second, I'm concerned about the conflict-of-interest. Is funding a different PI's student at a competing university ethical? I guess I could reach out to my new school's local chapter of this scholarship and fund a student, but what if I like one of my own student's research the most. If I don't select the one I want to fund I fear it's wrong, and if I do select my own, then I'm using personal money to fund one of my "employees". But giving to another university when my new place could use the money presents me with a dilemma.
Regardless, I will take part, if nothing else but volunteering with the organization. I really enjoyed my experience with this scholarship, and I don't want to give up sponsoring students. Should I?
Friday, May 9, 2014
Requesting vacation time
When I took my industry job I ended up with 2.5 weeks of vacation time in my first year. Coming from grad school this was actually kind of low so I ended up using every second. After the first year I was promoted to a pay grade where we're required to have 4 allocated weeks regardless of time with the company (typically promotions here give 2 days/year of service) with 0.5 weeks added per year. I use about 3 weeks when you factor in the holidays, occasional Fridays off, miscellaneous time for when family or friends are in town, half days, etc. The amount of time off doesn't bother me since my schedule prevents me from taking more than that, my problem with vacation time is that I have to request it, get approved, and make sure that I'm not taking too much time off in the eyes of the higher-ups. I get even more judgment passed on me because I have a bustling out-of-work life with plenty of friends and hobbies. The higher-ups work all the time. So when I'm taking long weekends and extra vacation time beyond the 1 week the higher-ups allocate to themselves I get looks of disappointment. I felt guilty at first but now I don't. While I love my work, I love my personal life more.
But I still hate getting the looks of disappointment/anger every time I put on vacation time. That is one thing I'm really looking forward to about academia. If I need to take off for something personal or just need some time off to decompress, or help out family or friends. I don't have to formally request anything. It also opens me up for longer lunches. So long as I make meetings and classes I get relative freedom. Sure, there will still be judgment and lots of work to make up for, but I won't have to login to the vacation website and request a set number of hours while keeping track of what I have left. There's a quote I've heard before: "academia is great; you can work 80 hours a week whenever you want." I'm fine with long hours, I just want to work and take time off without requesting it. Something about that website reminds me of how owned I am. And NO PERSON SHALL OWN ME! :)
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
Life's been nuts!
I saw my old advisor recently and he was very excited about the summer: two conferences, no teaching, all the students spending most of their time on the lab, etc. He said he gets more free time for whatever he wants. I would love that.
My schedule has been absolutely crazy as of late. I try to keep a few short term goals for every couple months. My current goals include finishing four projects, and trying these out in animals by June 1. We're on track, but we still have to do bench testing. So I've been working with my techs to get these done so I can try these out ex vivo. This is coupled with some big corporate meetings that are taking a lot of my time. But more importantly, I'm also prepping for conference travels. These are conferences to start building my academic reputation. I can't present work, but I can show up as an industry representative, take professors out for dinner and drinks on the corporate card (their students will have to come to make it a recruiting expense...otherwise it's just stealing money), and talk starting up my own lab. I want to get this kind of research out of the way so as soon as I get there I can start getting equipment. My plan is to go out there a year from now to start recruiting students and finding a house.
So I've been doing a lot of research at home, started on grants, and even started spewing out exactly the equipment I want to buy. This has been in my off-time, which there isn't much because of these devices I want to get out before I close-up-shop. I also want to really show leadership how I got stuff done, and that they would be stupid not to fund my academic lab.
So during the day I'm doing R&D, planning studies, traveling, and reporting results. At night I write, read, and plan for my future life (this is in addition to donning a cape a mask for all the crime fighting at night). I know that the less I plan for now, the more hectic life will be when I'm trying I find a house and set up my lab come next summer. Too darn busy.
So while my advisor is relaxing in the tower, I'm preparing to visit the tower while also working in the fields. Part of me wants to just delay all the academic stuff until I start, but I don't want to screw over future-Phindustry.
This is all packed on top of several social obligations that have arisen recently (weddings, dinners, game-nights, etc). I rely heavily on friends for support. And so I spread myself thinner to ensure friends (and spouse) don't feel ignored. Honestly, these are the only people I care about disappointing. And so I type these blog entries when I'm in public and it's too noisy to get work done. It's the only 'alone' time I have to decompress from obligations. I don't know how the hyper busy people manage their lives. Do they let something slide?
My boss is technically a senior citizen and never been married. And I never hear him talking about friends. My fear is that I'll eventually slip into his mindset and be devoid of the things I find most fun in life because I'm too focused on ensuring the career is taken care of. I don't have kids but I liken it to having multiple kids. If you spend too much time on one, the others will fall behind on parental influence. I want a well-rounded family but I find that 24 hours in a day just isn't enough right now.
Thursday, May 1, 2014
Dancing for the executives
Every year, throughout my company and its sister companies, we have to present a bunch of new technologies to the executives. Today was that day. This is a way to let management know what's in the pipeline. If we present technology that they like, we get to keep our budget. If we present technology they hate, we can all be confident people will be getting fired. However, if we present something absolutely amazing they will give us an extra $15 million (this happened last year). So tensions have been high lately. People have been doing everything they can to show off as many ground-breaking things as possible. Internal groups compete like we're from different companies. It's absolutely insane, and I despise it.
I hate it because I feel like such a pawn. I put on my tap shoes and have to dance for a bunch of higher-ups that think of me as just another chess piece they can replace. I've never felt so unappreciated. And I hate talking sales all day, when we SHOULD be making these products to save lives. This week we worked 2x our usual hours to get ready for the visit. We tested every last project, and wowed the executives.
We got a crazy amount of money for two projects specifically and they want these in people by December. Considering we haven't done a single animal study we're a little on-edge. Except me. I don't feel anything. I feel like a kid that just worked overtime for my parents' praise, got it, but realized that life will go on and I can be happy without it. I'm glad we got the money since it will go a long ways to save lives. I just hate having to do this show every year. I feel like I'm whoring my science out to a bunch of rich businessmen...
Added to this are the talks by the executives. I was the representative from my division for a meeting attended by a bunch of board members and presidents of sister companies, and I heard "forward-thinking", "synergize", "vertical integration", and "value added" enough times to drive someone mad. I went nuts. These same people came by to look at my group's new technology and they kept asking "what's the market?" and "what kind of sales would you expect?". These are different ways of asking "what's the disease target?" and "how many lives will this save?". The difference is that business-types think of sales numbers. This is something I can't wait to get away from. In my bio I say I'm a PhD in the medical device field trying to cleanse the soul and get into academia. This is the soul-cleansing I'm talking about. I understand that we always have to fight for more money, but I hate being trotted in front of the executives like I'm at Westminster.
On the plus side, my boss took my group out for one hell of a nice dinner.
Monday, April 21, 2014
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.
I already hated business-types. I'm about to hate them more.
Friday, April 18, 2014
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.
Tuesday, April 15, 2014
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?
Saturday, April 12, 2014
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.
------------------------------------
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.
Wednesday, April 9, 2014
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.
Monday, April 7, 2014
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.
------------------------------------
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.
Wednesday, April 2, 2014
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?
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 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.
Saturday, March 29, 2014
Why blog?
One of my biggest fears is that someone discovers who I am. I thought that the likelihood was low because I don't really blog to get famous. I blog because it's cathartic. The interactions with other awesome people (well, I hope you're people and not bots) has been a great side effect (or affect...I never know which one).
On this note, someone I know in my real life discovered who I am. Someone in a competing group within my company. And groups within my company are cut-throat. We compete like rival companies compete so the threat of him trying to hurt me was real. What the heck were the odds that someone would find me out?!?!? He mentioned it in a passing fashion and said, "that must be you [in reference to a blog from a PhD in the med device industry], huh?". It seemed half-joking, but the timing of my posts with things that happened in my real life (especially the award I won a little while ago), made this person act more serious about the accusation. I thought this person was going to out me. They said they weren't, but everyone (including me) has let things slip that they shouldn't have.
This would have been very very detrimental if people here found about about the academic search. Especially since I have two products getting ready for human studies. If I got fired or moved around, this could potentially change the lives of the patients that might have relied on these products. I was terrified. So I left the blogosphere. Well...I went private. I needed to turn the identity off. I still read everything I could, and not posting comments was killing me! I couldn't risk any of my posts going public. I know my comments weren't damning, but I felt I needed to switch off to protect my job, and the patients. He said that he would keep it a secret, but we were one argument away from him letting everything loose. My goal was to keep things private until I had an academic offer in-hand. I try not to disclose anything that my company wouldn't want me to disclose, so I know I wouldn't get in trouble, but I couldn't risk losing my job or being shifted away from my projects.
Notice how everything's been past tense. I got two offers shortly after taking the blog private, and so I thought that I was home free. But neither of these positions were right for me. Either I hated the city or the department, or both. Then something magical happened: the perfect school in one of my favorite cities gave me an offer. I thought I was home-free. I could quit my job, take this new one, and get back on the blogosphere. As I was in negotiations with my new school another product of mine had been approved for human studies. This has the potential to double efficacy for this particular therapy. My involvement in this study is crucial. So I turned down what could be my dream job. I can't leave patients in the lurch and thought there will be more opportunities. The department head said he was very disappointed, then a week later mentioned that I could start a year late. A year from this upcoming August, if I wanted. This was too perfect: I get to finish this human study and pass off my devices in a nearly complete stage, meaning patients will see it much sooner, and afterwards I get to start my dream job in a much more awesome city (not to mention-make my crazy high salary for another year)! This also gives me a chance to work on grants early-on and submit and start running experiments as soon as I start the faculty post. I know it may seem cocky that I think I'm the only one that can get this product past the first human studies, but I've been burned three times in the past when handing off projects to people. They've screwed them up bad in animal and human studies delaying release of the life-saving devices.
Everyone in my company knows I'm going to leave, and my final 1.5 years here gives me a chance to pass on a ton of knowledge and leave on great terms (helloooooooo industry money for the lab :) ). It also means, that even if this person does out me, it'll only make him look petty. So I don't have anything to lose. The paperwork has been signed.
I can start to post again! Ahhhhhhhhhhh. It feels so good. Given that I haven't been able to post my writing, it reminded me about why I like to blog. Below are a few disconnected thoughts related to why I like it. In the next few posts I'll be posting things I wrote up but had to keep on the DL. Some things related to the job search, and some things related to industry. Some might be a little outdated, as I wrote them while on hiatus. Oh yeah...and there will be other random thoughts, too. I'm worried that this guy will out me to my new faculty colleagues, but I'm not worried if people find out now. I intend to try different things to make it difficult to tie me to the posts. I intend to make it very difficult for people to link my Earth-self to my blogosphere-self. In the next 1+ year I intend to post more on industry, my transition, and ultimately ending my industrial tenure...for a whole different type of tenure :). Thank you to those that have emailed me about my little hiatus. I am really pumped about interacting with all of you again! I'm so excited to be coming back!
-----------------------------------
Why blog?
In the past couple of months I've done a lot of self-evaluation. I think my current situation is partly to blame in addition to the fact that writing all this stuff down in a blog causes one to reflect. The only friend that knows my real identity said that blogging would be a waste of my time.
-----------------------------------
Why blog?
In the past couple of months I've done a lot of self-evaluation. I think my current situation is partly to blame in addition to the fact that writing all this stuff down in a blog causes one to reflect. The only friend that knows my real identity said that blogging would be a waste of my time.
I've said this before, but I'd like to reiterate. Blogging has been great to get things off my chest. I play things very political here on Earth, and try not to ruffle feathers. So I rarely get to vent. It really is cathartic. But in the blogosphere...in the blogsphere, I can say anything I want. Politics don't exist here (mostly). But since politics don't exist here, it's a place of fantasy; hence the existence of trolls. But as long as you don't feed them, they starve and die.
Reading is cathartic, too, as many of the issues that plague research, work, life, etc. are universal. Something about knowing that RandomInternetPerson is having issues lets me realize that I'm not on an island.
I'm constantly getting ideas for new projects at work/home and topics that I feel could make an interesting post. But I don't really have time to make really detailed posts all the time. So I try to keep my posts short (this one totally violates this principle) and I mostly read short posts. I find that I don't have the patience for typing or reading really long posts. Not to mention, I type most of my posts on my phone while I'm on-the-go. So lengthy posts can wear my thumbs out.
Aside from the psychological benefits of the blog, I also like to let people know about how searches go and how life is in industry. I'm sure my industrial position is different than others, but I'm sure there's overlap. And graduating students should get a feel for what it's like in industry, what it takes to succeed, what's great, and what sucks.
My friend that said blogging is a waste could possibly be correct, but I fear I'd turn into a psychopath without an outlet. Ted Kaczynski could've used a blog...
Monday, February 17, 2014
Self-doubt and the impostor syndrome
In my pre-biomed days I was an engineering physicist at a major national laboratory. I was involved in projects ranging from star wars-type projects to using lasers to destroy stuff (including biological stuff...hence part of my interest in biomed...on that note, I got an email asking about my background...thinking of making a post about this...). Some of the coolest stuff I liked to work on was related to astronomy stuff. I have always been obsessed with space and I still keep up to date on astronomy. My BS and MS in physics help out with understanding astronomy. I was looking for something related to 2014J, and this article was linked:
http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/articles/10.1038/nj7280-574a
This link was linked from that one:
http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/articles/10.1038/nj7245-468a
It's about feeling like you're not good enough when you are. I'm not going to go into my demographic because I love secrecy (sex, race, etc.), but the impostor syndrome is very relevant. Since I entered the science world, I constantly have to prove myself, whereas it seems other people of different backgrounds get the assumption that they know what they're talking about. I feel like I'm constantly being challenged heavily. I know I belong wherever I go because my publications, presentations, products, and patents speak for themselves. I know I have the talent to do crazy things, but I often feel bullied, resulting in losses of confidence. I've developed pretty thick-skin, starting at my national lab days. Nothing will turn me away, and since I love to argue, I will always fight. I really do get off on this fighting. But I can see how people (especially women or minorities) could get turned away from the field because of this.
This is part of the reason I choose to listen to everyone. I take everyone's opinion under consideration, since I don't want them to feel less valued and potentially turn them away. I'm very proud of my mentorship track record. Every student/tech/engineer I've been involved in mentorship with has stayed in the field. And ~80% of these people are women.
Being in the midst of the academic search makes this article resonate even stronger. I know I'm good enough for a good academic post, but the fact that my top schools haven't called makes me wonder if I'm just an impostor. My documents are solid, or so says the 10 profs that have reviewed it from multiple universities. And these are brutally honest profs. I'm good enough to perform well in my niche field, but I feel that I just don't know enough, or maybe I can't argue that well anymore. I sometimes I feel I got to where I am, not because of my skills, but because of other extraneous factors. I feel that I definitely don't argue as well anymore because I find myself losing more arguments...I feel like I'm losing steam...like all the years of constantly being on the defensive (and subsequent offensive) more than the average person has been wrecking my brain.
The impostor syndrome is tricky because younger scientists don't know exactly if they're not good enough. We have metrics like grades, but once we're on teams or on the job, I often wonder, am I in this position because the company has to fill out some kind of statistic, or is it because I'm actually good enough. I think I'm good enough, but we have to be more cognizant of times when we've all felt a little inadequate (there's an impotence joke somewhere in here...I just can't seem to find it). We need to remember that we've all had self-doubt, why should we feed into it more. The article says to just remind yourself how you're not lucky, you're talented. But this is so much easier said than done.
http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/articles/10.1038/nj7280-574a
This link was linked from that one:
http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/articles/10.1038/nj7245-468a
It's about feeling like you're not good enough when you are. I'm not going to go into my demographic because I love secrecy (sex, race, etc.), but the impostor syndrome is very relevant. Since I entered the science world, I constantly have to prove myself, whereas it seems other people of different backgrounds get the assumption that they know what they're talking about. I feel like I'm constantly being challenged heavily. I know I belong wherever I go because my publications, presentations, products, and patents speak for themselves. I know I have the talent to do crazy things, but I often feel bullied, resulting in losses of confidence. I've developed pretty thick-skin, starting at my national lab days. Nothing will turn me away, and since I love to argue, I will always fight. I really do get off on this fighting. But I can see how people (especially women or minorities) could get turned away from the field because of this.
This is part of the reason I choose to listen to everyone. I take everyone's opinion under consideration, since I don't want them to feel less valued and potentially turn them away. I'm very proud of my mentorship track record. Every student/tech/engineer I've been involved in mentorship with has stayed in the field. And ~80% of these people are women.
Being in the midst of the academic search makes this article resonate even stronger. I know I'm good enough for a good academic post, but the fact that my top schools haven't called makes me wonder if I'm just an impostor. My documents are solid, or so says the 10 profs that have reviewed it from multiple universities. And these are brutally honest profs. I'm good enough to perform well in my niche field, but I feel that I just don't know enough, or maybe I can't argue that well anymore. I sometimes I feel I got to where I am, not because of my skills, but because of other extraneous factors. I feel that I definitely don't argue as well anymore because I find myself losing more arguments...I feel like I'm losing steam...like all the years of constantly being on the defensive (and subsequent offensive) more than the average person has been wrecking my brain.
The impostor syndrome is tricky because younger scientists don't know exactly if they're not good enough. We have metrics like grades, but once we're on teams or on the job, I often wonder, am I in this position because the company has to fill out some kind of statistic, or is it because I'm actually good enough. I think I'm good enough, but we have to be more cognizant of times when we've all felt a little inadequate (there's an impotence joke somewhere in here...I just can't seem to find it). We need to remember that we've all had self-doubt, why should we feed into it more. The article says to just remind yourself how you're not lucky, you're talented. But this is so much easier said than done.
Saturday, February 15, 2014
I hate Windows!!!!!
Since I was in high school I've used Mac or Linux OSs. I used Windows for some simulation work in grad school, but that was the only time. Even then, I used a Mac to post-process the results from the simulation. In the past few years I've had to use Windows. And an old version of Windows, at that. It's a company mandated thing since they can control data flow and security in Windows. To me, Windows is slow and clunky. I can use it, and I use it better than most of my Windows-for-life colleagues but it seems like there's always something slowing it down or screwing it up. Hopefully, too few people read this blog to start an OS flame war. I just hate being forced to use this system.
In grad school I had freedom in my OS choice with the exception of Windows-specific programs (of which, there weren't many). The first thing I'll do when switching careers is stop using Windows at all. And if a program necessitates Windows, I'll stop using the program. There are other (digital) fish in the sea. Again, this is just my experience. I don't have a preference for Apple, Microsoft, Open Source. I have a preference for things that work. And actually, Apple's new OS has made it so I can't use some of my own programs. And it's a little slow with more crashes since the update than all past updates I had combined. So I may have to start sticking with Linux.
I just can't stand another random error message, waiting for my computer to do things, or a blue screen. Grrrr.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)