Source Event

Last Friday was devoted to Nature’s science careers fair and conference. I was quite pleased to be invited to speak at the fair – some sort of recognition of what i have been doing here at King’s. Also some recognition of the role that professional careers advice can play in supporting the career management of researchers. Well done us – The Careers Group and King’s College Graduate school. 

Chairing my sesion was Tristram Hooley of Vitae. Tristram is moving onto head the Careers Research Unit at Derby University. So our paths might cross again in that context.

I went to session on bid-writing given by Tony Woods of the Wellcome Trust. Strongly recommend people to listen to the pod-cast: lots of very common sense points about bid writing. It reminded me of the sorts of things we say about CV’s. He reckoned that he could tell in about 80% of cases whether the bid would get funded within about 30 seconds; a bit scary if you think that it could take 6 months to put a bid together. Its all in the project summary. What is the research question, will the activities proposed answer that question. Use the classic SMART objectives.

A UCL lecturer gave a very personal account of the unpredictabilty of a Research career which in her case spanned a number of separate disciplines and roles and a many countries. She was a Marie Curie fellow.

There was a talk form Merck serono about Clinical trials management, and then a mad presentation by the brilliant William Bains. He had the audience in stitches though a couple of very strait-laced people did leave in the middle with very concermed looks on their faces.

The apparently rambling talk covered a steely analytical brain that was determined to have some FUN. We started with Isaac Asimov and electric trainsets, silicon, the cost of filing a patent (30 quid!), the importance of the confidentiality agreements, science as a personality defect (“How many of you are scientists?” Forest of hands. “Well half of you are wrong and the other half have my deepest sympathy”, how to lose 12 grand ( he did it his way). He is the Eddie Izzard of Biotechnology start-ups. He is that good.

Postdoc Career Management – or not

This is a very good summary by Denise Dear of Cambridge University staff development of the career management problem for postdocs. What oft as thought but ne’er so well expressed

 

Promotion procedures and pathways are limited for research staff who wish to stay in Cambridge and this is now the focus of considerable interest.  As you know, traditional academic roles have a defined promotion procedure  - lecturer/senior lecturer/reader/professor.  However, this is not a research route and I have found from a number of focus groups I have recently held with experienced research staff here, that there is widespread frustration at this fact.  Research staff are employed as research associates and may be promoted to senior research associates according to certain criteria ( available on our HR web-site).  After that, unless they continue to acquire competititve funding or manage to be taken on as a lecturer, they come to a sudden stop. Most senior researchers will have been doing research, managing and advising group members and will therefore have very little teaching experience.  They are therefore at a disadvantage in applying for lectureships.  In short, they end up in a career cul-de-sac.  We are currently working with this cohort to begin to work out possible future pathways for them, as they present an enormous resource that is in danger of being lost or wasted.  Many are the products of the short term funding procedures used in higher education, in particular.

Dentistry Postdoc society

Attended this great careers day organised by this really pro-active society. They persuaded 7 scientists to come and talk about their work in industry- no easy task. It made you realise that no career is a straightforward plan, no grand scheme. Everyone presented a story in chapters in which an interplay of personal priorities collided in more or less fruitful ways with opportunities. One man was currently a house husband after a successful stint with a pharma company. One went to Kent because his girlfriend had a job there and after a year in a biotech which he did not like he landed a job in Pfizer; he made some great asides about his initial reluctance to work in industry – I thought ~i might be working on a project which would be stopped by an accountant. Research in toothpaste and toothbrush companies (Unilever) was also covered – by a woman who had trained as a dentist and done her Phd here at King’s.

One man took a sabbatical to study theology before returning to science. One moved to a biotech because her Pharma company was relocating its neuro-degeneration research elsewhere in the world.

One man got a call from a recrutiemt agency where he had deposited his CV 4 years previously!

Goldsmiths Researchers

Did a day at Goldsmith’s on a consultancy job for Susie. It involved doing 2 workshops. I persuaded Vanessa to let me do the CV session. It allowed me to try out the new CV material I have been working on. In the event the groups were very small and I did not use the power point  but led a seminar style delivery – which I very much enjoyed.

Some of these Goldsmiths researchers were different from the King’s variety. They were artists ( music and visual) one of them at least did not have a first degree still less a PhD.

Science Publishing

Chris S a professional science editor came to talk to about 15 Phd students and postdocs last night. He gave an amusing walk/talk through his CV starting as a would-be vet through to degree in Biology and Phd in Bio-Physics.

It was interesting to hear the publishers side of the process which many in the room had experienced from the author’s side. Does the author have any rights – asked one psotdoc. None whatsoever, Chris cheerily replied.

The difficulties of finding a review panel sufficiently close to the subject to be knowledgeable, sufficiently distant to be objective were touched on.

How its different for him to go to a conference as he become s a magnet for everybody there. It wwas fun – he acknowledged,  but exhausting.

One thing he said about applications intrigued me; the cover letter was really important ( some organisations claim not to read it). For him the cover letter had to tell an interesting stroy about ewhy they would be good for publishing and publishing good for them.

Sample interview questions – Big Pharma

Give an example of a research project that required you to use your analytical skills and demonstrated your technical expertise in a scientific area. Explain your work

 

Describe a project where it was important for you to collaborate or consult with another group or organisation with whom you did not usually interface. What steps did you take to facilitate co-operation or resolve a conflict? What was the outcome?

 

Even though we all try to be expert in our study, it is impossible to know and understand everything. What aspects of your technical field are you still working to master? What steps have you taken to further your learning

Postdocs need guidance

One feature of the last few months has been the increased interest in guidance from our community of post-docs. They have always been there and we have always known the problem: no job security and no history of reflection on their skills and abilities. In short a need to make transitions without any transition skills. What I am finding is that they typically need more than one session. Solutions are not easy to come by and there is usally a ticking clock – the approaching end of the funding stream. Issues about management and poor management practice are not uncommon.

It is in these contexts that core counselling skills are tested and strengthened.

Notes on the Dental Postdoc Careers Day

Recently appointed lecturer: American Dr Karen Liu

Referred to differences between US and UK postdocs. More structured in US? Not sure.

The great thing about being an academic: – colleagues around the world.

 

Question for the audience – do you really want this job and would you be good at it?

The new elements will be ‘managing’  and ‘mentoring’ – and how do you fit yourself for these skills?

‘We’re figuring out little things’ – more relaistic than your first reasons for going into science.

CV: employers are going to look at your papers. You need to have a good story to tell.

Your letteres of recommendation need to be good. ( importance of productive collaborations)

You cannot succeed without a good network of support- colleagues who will read your draft proposals (for grants), will tell you about jobs.

How will you distinguish yourself, make yourself special. It may be that a department will like the way that you think. What will you add to the department?

Need to know what your goals are.

Q & A

What is preferable – one high impact publication or several low impact?

No clear answer. Did say that second and third author papaers are valuable – they demonstrate your ability to colalborate with others.

Q. What about open access journals?

A. Too early to assess – but at least your work is out there.

 

Remembers a professor and supervisor who confided that he still felt like an impostor who will one day be found out.

 

David Stokes – successful postdoc who switched to local government. Successful in that he got a patent out of his PhD work.

Changed because he saw redundancies at first hand in his institute. Joined the Kent Graduate Trainee programme. Interesting that he was able to move into projects that had an environmental / science emphasis.  

Interviews Session

4 students attended. It was good in that each individual got 30 minutes of interview practice and feedback. Slightly helped that they all havd a medical interest – one being a cliniicna doing an MD and going for consultancy posts. One was a post-doc