Wednesday, October 15, 2014

Starting Over: 5 things you didn’t realize would slow you down in a new post doc.


You leave your PhD lab feeling confident because you just spent 4-8 years in your field, where you have read, researched, and written parts of your field.  You believe that you have a strong technical background in what you’ve done, and you may decide to change fields slightly for your post-doc. Doing this opens you up to expanding your knowledge much further than if you maintained a position in your current field, and it also opens you up to feeling stupid most of the time. (See The Importance of Stupidity in Scientific Research: http://jcs.biologists.org/content/121/11/1771.full.pdf+html).

Don’t worry – this is normal.

Just like when you first started graduate school and knew nothing about the field, you will need time to adapt. I changed from a microbiology lab with a focus on the immune response against whooping cough (vaccinate your kids!), to an erythropoiesis lab, learning how the body deals with stresses that cause dramatic loss of red blood cells due to either trauma or leukemia. Because these fields are very different, I expected it to take some time to adapt, but I wasn’t sure how long before I started to really get going. 

Here is what I’ve learned:
1. Paperwork doesn’t normally transfer. Even though I have decided to continue my career at the same institution that I carried out my graduate work in, new paperwork is needed as an employee that was either different because of my change in status from graduate student to employee or did not transfer to my new laboratory. You will be expected to complete the same training you have already completed because you are in a different building, lab, or department. You will need to be added to new IACUCs, IRBs, and IBCs, because these are laboratory specific. This paperwork will take a while.

2. Just because you learned a technique previously doesn’t mean you know how to do it.  Every lab has their own way of doing things. Some may extract bone marrow by drilling into the bone and flushing the marrow out while others may just pulverize the whole bone and filter out the unwanted cells. Neither of these versions are incorrect, but labs have a tendency to maintain their standard operating procedures (SOPs) to make sure that data are comparable among members within the lab. It will take time to learn from the lab members to know how certain procedures and techniques are expected to be performed, which leads to our next point.

3. You will need to work on someone else’s schedule until you have learned those SOPs. When you first start a lab and are trying to learn how that lab does things, you will need to observe other labmates, and even work side by side with them until you can master their SOPs.

4. You will need to learn a new set of jargon and the literature of a new field. This one is pretty obvious. Whether you change course slightly or hop into a brand new field that you know little to nothing about, you will need to learn the update views, big names in the field, and

5. You will need to learn how your new boss operates. How often do you meet? Are you expecting to share data on a specific day at a specific time or should you report new data as it comes in? Is there a regular lab meeting, and if so, what is the format? Will you share or present data every time? Is this a general update on progress? Are important journal articles discussed? How closely related are the journal articles to people’s work? This is very much so lab specific, and every lab has a different way of doing things. The best advice suggests that you talk to labmates to discover how things run and how you should contribute.

For these reasons, it really will take you about 2 months to start being a productive member of the lab when you change field. Most PIs expect this, and although you should be working hard to get yourself deeper into the new field, give yourself a break now and then to step back and realize how much you will have learned when starting over.

This post was written by Dr. Laura Goodfield, post-doc in Dr. Paulson's lab. 


Monday, October 13, 2014

It’s a bird! No…it’s a plane! No… its “The Speed of Trust!”

In August, Rick Parmely of Professional and Polished, LCC visited our CMIID group and mentioned “The Speed of Trust” by Stephen M.R. Covey as part of his professional development talk.  As of late, I’ve been very interested in leaving grad school being well-rounded - that is, having more skills under my belt than flow cytometry and mucosal cell isolations, so I decided to read it.

While there were many good points and interesting ideas from the book, I came away with two points that really made me think.
1: Trust is made of two parts: integrity and capability.  I would trust my lab mate to homogenize the spleens from my experiment but not to perform my open heart surgery.  My doctor could perform the surgery but probably not isolate my lamina propria lymphocytes.

2: The degree of trust is directly proportional to how fast tasks get accomplished and inversely proportional to how much it costs to finish the task.  For example, if trust is low, it can take a long time for a collaboration project to produce data, which will cost more money and result in fewer publications or patents.  But if the trust is high, the collaboration can work quickly to produce results, which will cost less money and result in more frequent publications. 

The majority of the book focuses on how to increase trust within your organization which was interesting to me because as I said before, I had never thought about how trust could be important in the work environment.  “The Speed of Trust” has definitely made a strong case for trust in the workplace.  Trust within personal relationships is also discussed in this book but for this, I’ll stick to the workplace examples.       

While we are all science nerds and therefore notorious for our lack of social skills, we still need to have interpersonal skills in order for our work to run smoothly.  Isn’t it easier to have a lab mate that you trust take care of a small part of your big experiment so that you can focus on the main objective?  Isn’t it easier to communicate with your PI when you trust them to guide you through a rough patch of experiments and when they are confident in your ability to perform the actual science correctly?  Doesn’t the work get done faster when you’re not worried about whether the PBS you made last week hasn’t been swapped out with HCl by one of your lab mates? (I haven’t had any experience with this but it was a horror story somebody told me while I was interviewing at grad schools.)

All of this has made me think about how my actions are perceived in the lab. Do my actions help people trust me?  Do my actions help me trust me?  I believe that people want to be connected to other people and by having integrity and expressing compassion.  I personally feel my best when I’m working positively with others, making a connection with them whether it is through a collaborative experiment or an idea exchange.  When we connect with other, it forms a network of support and a platform for productivity and positivity.  Learning how to build a network and platform now will help us transition into any job opportunities, research based or non-traditional, and any professional and personal relationships we have in the future.

And on that note, what do your actions say about you?  Can your lab trust you to get your work and participate positively as member of the lab community?   Or are you that person that nobody wants to work with and has a reputation for being unreliable?  Are you in the process of building a supportive network?  If you are interested in learning about how trust is a vital part to our lives in and out of the lab, I highly suggest reading “The Speed of Trust.”



“Whether you’re on a sports team, in an office or a member of a family, if you can’t trust one another there’s going to be trouble.” – Joe Paterno

“There are no moral shortcuts in the game of business – or life.  There are, basically three kinds of people: the unsuccessful, the temporarily successful and those who become and remain successful.  The difference is character.”  - Jon Hunstman, Chairman – Huntsman Chemical

“What creates trust, in the end, is the leader’s manifest respect for the followers.” – James O’Toole, Author of Leading Change



This post was written by Kaitlin McDaniel, a 5th yr PhD. Candidate in Dr. Cantorna’s lab.  

Monday, September 15, 2014

WE ARE...CMIID

Welcome to the Penn State CMIID graduate student and post doctoral website!  This is meant to be an informal resource for collaboration, communication and information sharing.  We have a running list of labs involved with this group and the mouse strains/techniques they use.  We also have list of career development resources.  In addition, any member who wants to write an article for this can do so.  The article can be about their scientific interests, review of a journal article, reviews of conferences, meeting or new techniques  or interests outside of lab that help them deal with research!  Contact Kaitlin McDaniel (kwm5258@psu.edu) or Stephanie Bora (sub224@psu.edu) if you are interested in contributing.  Now…STAND BACK WE ARE GOING TO TRY SCIENCE!




Career Development
These are websites that are helpful for career development and useful resources. 

Penn State Links
Penn State Veterinary and Biomedical Science Department

Penn State CMIID Graduate Student and Post Doc Group - official page


Penn State Career Services
            They will help you with resumes, interview skills, personal business cards (for free) and many other aspects of networking and finding a job after grad school.

Penn State Graduate Student Science Policy Group
            This is a brand new group!  More information to come, please contact Stephanine Bora (sub224@psu.edu) if you are interested in science policy or outreach.



Career Development
AAAS Careers

My Individual Development Plan
            This website can help you explore various career paths and help focus your efforts and set goals to follow the career path you want.


Linkedin

Research Gate

WEST – Women in the Enterprise of Science and Technology
            This is a networking community for women in science and technology fields.  Most universities have local chapters.

AWIS – Association for Women in Science
            Another networking community for women in science and technology fields.  Members of this group work on developing advocacy, leadership development, research collaboration and publications.

Isaiah Hankel
            Taken from his website…
            “Isaiah Hankel is an internationally recognized speaker and author who helps individuals, teams and organizations develop a more entrepreneurial mindset to accelerate their business success.  Isaiah’s unique background allows him to offer a scientific approach and tangible methodology to the pursuit of purpose, focus and other entrepreneurial values that every individual and even the largest company can apply.

Isaiah has a Ph.D. in Anatomy and Cell Biology and has worked extensively as a Fortune 500 consultant in the biotechnology industry and with some of the world’s leading corporations, including Amgen, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Roche and Genentech. He has also presented at many of the world’s premier academic institutions, including Harvard University, Stanford University, Oxford University, Cambridge University, The Pasteur Institute and The Curie Institute.”

His book “Black Hole Focus” is exceptionally good for people wondering what to do with their scientific degrees – I have it and highly recommend it. 

His Ted Talk