Well technically, no.

Lately I've noticed a sad theme among the grad students and young postdocs.

No, they have not yet realized what a pyramid scheme they've bought into.

I mean sad because it's one of the same mistakes I made, so I decided I should blog about it here and hopefully save a few poor souls some pain.

So here it is, Yet Another YFS Rule for Postdocs:

If you are looking for an academic career, do not worry about what techniques you will learn as a postdoc.

Now, I know, some of you are saying But-! But-! But-!

But you are wrong. Now shut up and let me tell you why.

1. Most of the successful people I know did NOT switch fields for their postdoc.
Yeah yeah, I know. Your PIs are telling you to do something different and preferably far away. Ignore them. If you don't want to switch, you don't have to go that far, scientifically or geographically (especially if you're already in Boston or the Bay Area).

2. You will not be recruited to your future faculty position interviews for the techniques that you do, NO MATTER HOW COOL THEY ARE, if you don't have the other important things (famous PI; high-impact papers; topic relevant to the department; ideally also funding; ability to kiss everyone's ass).

In reality, your Future Colleagues actually do care what techniques you use, and if you're going to join their department, they WILL expect you to collaborate with them, which means you better bring something they want and need.

But even though many places still advertise for certain specialties (mass spec; structural biology meaning it has to be crystallography or NMR; etc.), they don't actually want you to show up and plug your techniques per se.

They want you to come and tell them a scientific story with a few main players, a plot line, and a fabulous conclusion (surprise ending is optional).

3. Last but not least, the techniques you think are hot today? Will be gone tamale.

Bioscience is moving faster than ever, and shows no signs of slowing down in this regard: whatever RNAi is now, will be something else for your first batch of postdocs, and the batch of postdocs who come after them.

Whatever you think you're an expert in now, yes some of that knowledge will transfer if you understand the concepts. But the key thing will not be what techniques you know. It will be how well you pick up new techniques every time you need to, even if you're not the one doing them yourself.

I've had some interesting experiences in this regard. Trying to troubleshoot over email? An acquired skill.

Trying to troubleshoot something you've never actually done yourself? Learnable.

Now try it over email. #$%^! Pretty damn frustrating.

Learning how to ask the right questions to help figure out what's wrong?

Priceless. That, my friends, is what a good PI is all about.

Now go out there and get yourself some useful training, not a bag of soon-to-be-outdated generic tricks that all your fellow postdocs also know.

....


...Unless you want to go to industry. There, they want you to have certain hot skills, and preferably a big long list of them.

The funny part there is, industry is actually ahead of academia in many respects when it comes to technical stuff. Some of their toys might not even be available to you as an academic postdoc. So you'll have to be careful to pick labs doing the relevant things (maybe collaborating with companies?) or do an industrial postdoc, if that option is available to you (and those are few in number these days, unless you're in Japan).

So choose wisely, little grasshoppers. Don't pick your lab for techniques.

Pick it for the mentor*; for the prestige; because you like the location and/or the other people in the lab.

Whatever, I don't know. I've tried all the obvious things and it didn't work out so well for me!

Just don't pick it because you think you want to learn X, unless you have an amazing cool question you want to use X to answer. Don't expect your Lab of X to hand you an awesome project that you can take with you to start your own lab, because they usually won't. All that time you've spent debating over model organism? Irrelevant if you don't know what kind of QUESTION you want to ask with your science.

Lesson over. Now go out there and sign yourself up for more indentured servitude. And yes, you can debate endlessly over what kind of pen to use.

Okay, go.



*if you believe in such things, like the Tooth Fairy

Biology in Industry - "Just Don't."

So a while back I wrote that I had given my CV to a friend in industry who offered to show it to her relatively-high-up mentor at her relatively large company, and see what kind of advice she had for me to apply for jobs there (or at other companies).

Well, this was a while ago, before the market crash.

So I finally talked to this friend yesterday. I hadn't heard anything back so I figured her mentor didn't say anything good.

The word back was basically this:

NOBODY should go into biology right now.

ANYBODY who can do ANYTHING ELSE should leave and GO DO IT.

There are NO JOBS right now for biologists.

We're LAYING PEOPLE OFF, not hiring.

My friend didn't want to tell me, but I appreciate that she did.

While I was surprised that her mentor was so blunt, it wasn't exactly news.

---

Ironically, literally an hour after I had this conversation, a different friend, who has been unemployed for a while, told me she got an interview at a small local company.

And then she proceeded to ask if I could coach her on what to say during the interview, and what to do if she got the job, because the job is MUCH closer to my expertise than hers.

My answer?

Ask google first, then we'll talk about it.

(What I really wanted to say? Uh, NOOOOO????)

---

She's a really good friend. What could I say? It's not like she asked me to be on a microphone inserted in her ear during the interview.

And when I thought about it, I realized that most of my frustration recently has been working with people whom I didn't think were actually qualified for their jobs.

But you know what? Some of them worked hard and learned fast.

And THOSE people ended up being the ones I DO want to work with. Those are the kind of people I would want to have in my lab.

---

She also thinks that, while the company sounds pretty desperate and like they'd take anyone willing and able to do the work, it's going to be pretty competitive for this one position.

Apparently this company is interviewing a lot of people in quick succession, because rather than the usual full day visit, they have my friend scheduled to visit for 1 hour.

My guess is that they'll take someone with more experience using these kinds of methods, but who knows. My friend works hard and learns fast.

And she has been working in industry already, so I don't know if that will count for more than someone coming straight out of a grad program or academic postdoc.

---

So that's two data points. Can't really interpret much from it, unless it's true that big companies are doing badly and small companies haven't been as hard hit?

I'll also say that I would not want the job my friend is interviewing for, unless I were really desperate, because I think I would be bored.

For her, it might be fun since it will be mostly things she hasn't done before. And she loves doing new things.

And she really is pretty desperate at this point.

I told her if she can get it, it would be a good stepping stone, since she could broaden her skills. And who knows, maybe the company will do really well?

---

Now, if I could just find someone to help me the way I've been helping her. Hmm.

I have a headache.

Had another run-in with Permadoc.

Clarified for myself that Permadoc maintains incorrect memories of events past, wherein every time I was right about something, I wasn't actually right, and the reason why my suggestions fixed all the problems we were having "Is still a mystery."

I love scientists who use words like Mystery to explain troubleshooting success.

*Sigh*

Again, I suppressed the urge to confront. I could have argued more. I do have more ammunition that I am actually using.

So yeah, sure, I could "stand up" for myself. But bear with me. Here's my reasoning:

Logic does not work with this person. SCIENCE does not work with this person.

Can't reason with someone who has the rational thinking ability of a doorknob.

I figure, yes I can be scary when I need to. But in this case, I think that aggression will only feed the fire. This is the sort of person who has deeply held beliefs about how women should put up and shut up.

And the PI adores this person, so I won't get any help there.

Better to just move past it, work around it, and not expect any help.



[And will NOT feel bad about pissing these people off. I refuse. If they get in my way, I will not hold back.]



Yesterday I was talking to a friend about this kind of thing, and she said she couldn't believe I still have to put up with it at all.

Interestingly, she seems to think that SHE has to put up with this kind of shit.

She thinks of herself as coming across as too girly. Like she's asking to be treated condescendingly by her mannerisms and manicure.

I personally still think it's unfair and stupid that people judge her on things like that instead of on her work.

But she thinks I'm very capable and come across that way.

(Not that I really fit the scientist stereotype, either.)

No, my friend is surprised that I still have to put up with a lot of people who assume I'm incapable and clueless.

I told her the point is that these are not observant people who look at my work objectively.

They see everything through the gender filter: I'm a girl, so I must be wrong. It simplifies things: nothing I say gets through. They just tune it out.

My friend said she had the same experience at the company where she was working.

But she has been unemployed for a few months now. And her unemployment is running out.

Despite everything, she can't imagine doing anything other than science.

She is hoping that the economy will improve, and then she'll find a new job.

I have a hard time believing the glut of PhDs looking for jobs will be cured by that alone.

All I can do is worry about her, and wonder what I'm going to do when I'm in her position. Except that, as a postdoc, I'm not an employee, so I already know I won't qualify for unemployment.






Quote for the day, from a House rerun:

"If you're right, and you doubt yourself, it doesn't help anybody."

Dear other readers,

I know you're still out there, despite the embittered industry trolls who seem to hijack every third post.

I promise to try not to get dragged into those debates anymore, because I really don't care what those people think about who I am or what I should do with my life.

To a couple of people who send kindly worded yet still insulting advice, I appreciate that you at least try to word it kindly. But you'll excuse me if I continue to ignore it.

The debate continues: is industry really better?

Yes, I'm sure it sounds like a broken record, both from me and from the commenters.

Funny how commenters usually refuse to read the archives, and so they show up and just ask the same "why don't you...?" questions over and over.

_______________

In response to the joke that I "now" have a friend in industry:

I do have friends in industry, quite a few in fact. They've been there for a while. I talk to them frequently. I hear all about industry.

Most of my friends are just as stressed out as I am, since it's never clear if their companies are doing well or if they are, for how long that will last.

If the big drug fails in clinical trials, everyone gets axed. And you're screwed even if you're not one of the people who gets laid off early, because morale goes down like the Titanic. And nobody wants to work in a place like that.

Meanwhile there are no openings anywhere because everyone who just got laid off is out snatching them up.

____________________________

Despite having been hired with research oriented job descriptions, three of my friends have gotten suckered into doing what's essentially glorified sales and tech support, just to try to keep their companies and their jobs afloat.

Meanwhile they're on LinkedIn, desperately networking, because they've signed contracts barring them from taking a job with any of their current company's clients that they've met while doing sales...!

Gosh, sales and tech support! That sounds like loads of fun!

....Oh wait, I wouldn't want to do that in a million years.

Yeah. No thanks.

________________________________
As I've said before:

Maybe the people aspects are better because everyone isn't squabbling over pennies like we do in academia?

I'm sure that, like in academia, some places are better than others.
________________________________________

And I'm sure interesting things get done and that I would probably be happy doing them somewhere, if I hadn't found a project I like so much that just isn't application-oriented at all.

Lately I'm more interested in basic principles than I am in applications, but I can certainly see how that would be fun, too.
__________

I guess one component that most people don't mention is my impression that there are more rules in industry.

I know there are very strict regulations on anything that will be used clinically, how the stuff is made and quality control and all of that. I have one friend who has to have someone sign her lab notebook every day, like a notary, to verify what she's been doing and that she's been writing it all down correctly.

Gaaah! That would drive me crazy!

So I might have mentioned this before but... I hate rules. HATE them.

_______

And I'm just not convinced that making more money would make any of my real problems go away, unless I can buy some magic Asshole Repellent Spray that works everywhere and lasts at least 12 hours??

I think I saw some in a boutique when I was on vacation at a spa...

Clearly such things are beyond my budget on a postdoc salary.

Another installment of: Sometimes I wish I hadn't gone to grad school.

Recently I've had the opportunity to meet more professional women from industry, and talk to them more than I had before. Some of them do not have PhDs.

And yet. They are doing the same kind of work that a person with postdoc experience would do. They are designing new assays and doing research. They are using multiple techniques.

Multiple techniques! And here I thought that without a PhD, I'd be doing nothing but multiplex PCR, day in and day out.

(In fact, I know some people who have PhDs who do nothing but one technique, day in and day out).

They are paid well. They dress well. They get per diem when they travel. They work with other women because the imbalance is less severe. They have all the toys at work. They don't work weekends.

And so I have to wonder what the hell I was thinking. If I had known how much the industry would change, and that there were industrial bachelors or masters degree level positions where I could do a multitude of interesting things, I might have thought twice about grad school.

If I had any idea what grad school would actually be like, I'd like to think I wouldn't have gone. I'd like to think I would have chosen the chance the get paid more right off the bat and move up sooner based on abilities and experience, rather than irrelevant diplomas and other superficial measures.

The one shining light in all this is that I know I get more freedom. And I get to read.

Unfortunately I can't go back now, and there's no guarantee that even in industry all the suffering to get the degrees and postdoc experience would pay off.

Benchwork Procrastinating

I did benchwork today. It was fun. More fun than writing papers or grants, just now.

I know I should get a student to do this menial stuff for me. I know I should work on fixing up my figures for the paper, the grant, the poster. But doing experiments is a legitimate excuse, right??

I keep saying I'll do it in the morning, but then I have a morning meeting on the day I wanted to do it. Afternoons and evenings are out, I can't think late in the day. I say I'll do it on the weekend, but then I tell myself a day off (!!) is really important or I won't make it through the next week of benchwork and meetings. Right??

Sigh. Time is dragging on, and I'm using the excuse that I still have a couple more experiments I could do, should do, and there's no point in fixing the figures for the paper if these new data have to get put in anyway, I'll just have to remake the figures again...

It's pathetic, I know.

A vacation would be good, to the person who suggested that, but for a bunch of reasons I've discussed in previous posts, it usually backfires on me.

No, I think it would help if I used my one and a half days off on the weekend to do more rejuvenating things, but I usually end up sitting around like a frog on a log, which doesn't actually make me feel any better. I'm usually too tired to come up with fun things to do.

France sounds good. I always wanted to end up in Europe, until I went there to work for a little while. Now I'm not so sure. And I have friends who are desperately competing for jobs there and not getting them. So, kudos to the person who wrote and said she got a faculty position there. They are hard to get.

To the person who said you don't have to work 9 to 5 in industry, and that industry does more to help people than academia does.... give me a break. Where do you think all those ideas for assays come from? You wouldn't know what to measure, or how to measure it, without us. You don't get to try anywhere near the level of crazy things we do. Trust me, we're way more on the cutting edge than you are. It sucks, too, because most of the technology to do what we need to do ends up being custom-made, and thus more expensive. By the time you get to use it, we've already moved on to the next big problem.

And, what's the incentive to have someone tell me what to do, if I still have to work just as much? I'd much rather work long hours on my own ideas. Money doesn't make up the difference.

Speaking of other people's work, lately I'm spending a lot of time in other people's journal clubs. Not by choice, mind you, but to keep up appearances, and all that good networking stuff.

So I'm annoyed because the papers aren't that useful to me. Do I volunteer to do one of my own? Because that will take a lot longer than just catching up on my reading, on my own.

Along those lines, I'm working on a relatively hot topic right now, so I'm torn about whether it would be beneficial or completely naive and stupid to try to start a meeting for a group of people working on similar things. Should I be open and optimistic? Does paranoia really get you anywhere?

See what I mean? I can't think late in the day. Still can't decide whether to get the new laptop, or wait longer. Can't decide whether to go back on the pill or not. Can't decide whether to go visit my parents or not worry about it until next spring.

One thing I can decide: as soon as this gel is finished, I'm outta here. Next question: do I watch tv, and if so, what do I watch on Thursday night? Do I exercise? Yes, probably should. Will feel oh so virtuous if I do.

More responses to comments

ADude said...
How badly do you want to go into academia? Is science something you enjoy, or is it an all consuming passion (or close to it)? Is getting an academic position the only thing that will validate you?

I'm just asking because I have followed your blog off and on, and I'd think you would be happier in industry.

Not having been in industry, I can't say for sure.

But as I've said before, the #1 reason I want to be in academia is because I HATE having people tell me what I should be studying, scientifically. I have plenty of my own ideas. And I have no interest in working on other people's ideas. It's just never as fun as seeing the whole project go from the inception, the moment of realization, to the end. If not proof, then at least consistently supporting evidence... it's really satisfying. I like that feeling of finding out if I was right. It's not as much fun when you're testing someone else's hypothesis.

And I don't mind being wrong. That's okay in academia. I don't think it's appreciated so much in industry!?

So yeah, science is something I enjoy. When I get to do it my way, it is great fun. I love discovering new things.

It's not an all-consuming passion. It's hard to be constantly passionate about something as frustrating as science. I'm used to the 99% failure rate for experiments. It's worth it to me because I like the aspect of getting constant feedback from the universe. Try something, and at least you know, if you designed it the right way, what to do next. I'm used to taking joy from the little things that just keep the momentum going forward- the gel worked! I got colonies from my transformation! They're not all big discoveries, but you have to enjoy, as they say, the journey as much as the destination.

But I don't think it's healthy to be consumed by anything. It's good to fuel yourself off your passions... but don't let your candle burn at both ends.

Is getting an academic position going to validate me? NO WAY.

Will it give me a chance to see what I can do if I'm allowed to do things my way? HELL YEAH.

And wouldn't that be a hell of a lot of fun?!

Let's put it this way: since the day I started my first postdoc, I began my Wish List for things I would get and do when I have my own lab. Is that something the - let's call them Idunno postdocs- is that something that Idunno postdocs typically do?

Did I mention how I've had newly hired faculty ask me, on more than one occasion, what they should buy with their startup package? I mean, COME ON!!! Haven't you ever thought about this before now???

And isn't it something they should ask in the interview?? Why would you hire someone who didn't know how they would answer that question?

A friend was saying to me at dinner the other night that I'd - in his words- kick ass if I had a team of just 3 or 4 people and a little money and the freedom to do research the way I think it should be done.

Most people who know me are pretty convinced I'd be good at the job if given the chance.

Anonymous said...
Just curious ... what is your Publication Record like? Have you published in Big Journals? Are you working in a Hot Field? Worked for Famous People?

Uh, publications quite decent.

Big Journals, no. Not in the Top Three.

I have one paper that has been cited quite a few times, though. But I think my advisor likes to take credit for that one. We both know it was mostly my own, independent work, but I'm not sure if that's something that comes across in my letters of recommendation. I probably should make a point of asking that it be mentioned explicitly. You never know what people might forget to say!

Hot Field? Yes. Right now, yes. But wait five minutes, who knows what will be 'in' for next year's new crop of fresh meat faculty!

Famous People? Yes. Do I have letters from them? No. Why not, you ask? Well, life is funny. And most of the Famous People that I've worked with were ... extremely self-absorbed at best, royal f@#$-ing assholes at worst.

I have high (probably overly optimistic) hopes that the current Famous People with whom I work will be more helpful to me than the previous ones. They seem like they at least mean well, as higher-ups usually do at first, if given the benefit of the doubt. Though I'm sure that given enough time, they will disappoint me, at which point I will fail to hide my irritation, and this will piss them off, if I'm not careful. Hence my desire to get good letters and get out of there before I find out all their weaknesses and shortcomings.

Yes, I have problems with Authority.

***

I'm sitting here watching The Count of Monte Cristo on tv. It's one of my favorite movies.

I love how the turning point in the plot is when he finds a mentor.... in jail. I love how the mentor firmly believes he can teach him everything he knows, and he doesn't give him an IQ test beforehand. The message is that it's really a matter of believing that almost anyone can learn almost everything, if taught well.

Hooray for education!

And last but not least, I love the revenge plot. There's a lot to be said for the idea that living well is the best revenge. And this is such a great illustration of when revenge is warranted, and how to go about getting it.

Halelujah.

the things people say.

So today I was talking to this guy and he doesn't know that much about me, but he knows I've been a postdoc for X number of years and that I'm looking for a faculty position, what field I'm in, what I'm working on. He initially assumed that I was single, so then I told him well yeah I have a boyfriend and it makes it a little bit more stressful looking for a job.

So he started asking me what does your boyfriend do, and I told him, and he said:

"Oh well then it sounds like your boyfriend is on a faster track than you."

??

Apparently it is easier to get a job in that field than in mine. Okay, fine. But I guess I am feeling hypersensitive today because I felt like the wording he chose implied your boyfriend must be much better than you.

Now, I'm sure my boyfriend would argue vehemently against that, since if anything he's got a dose of impostor syndrome himself. I'm just shocked at how it made me feel: tremendously insulted, not to mention extremely discouraged.

My boyfriend is an amazing, talented and smart person, and I would be happy enough to get a job by following him somewhere. But we just thought it was unlikely since I've been a postdoc longer than he has. Now I'm wondering if we should go back to the plan where he gets a job and I get hired only because they want him.

After all, most of the women faculty I know got their jobs that way.

Not exactly a vote for feminism, but at this point I'd rather do that, I think, and just have that be the way it is, than sit around wondering how it is that the one thing I'm actually pretty good at is really not something I can get a job doing.

***

In other news, talked to a friend today who got an industry job at Big Drug Company. She's a star chemist and said she's surprised at how much she's loving this new job, that it's much more like academia than she thought.

!That sounds great! I'm sooooo happy for her.

Well then the caveats are all that she's in the best department, at the best location, with the best people. She said I should really consider industry because it's so much fun and everyone is so great, but I'm sure I wouldn't be so lucky since I'm neither a star of her caliber, nor a chemist.

Nor, apparently, do I have very good karma. This whole week felt like payback for last week, which was actually really good.

The math seems to go something like this:

Ms.PhD has 1 good week ---> therefore she deserves 8 bad weeks in payment.