1 00:00:17,949 --> 00:00:22,103 What does it really take to build a successful career in in science? 2 00:00:22,540 --> 00:00:26,581 Is it intelligence, hard work, making the right decisions at the 3 00:00:26,581 --> 00:00:28,748 right time, or simply being lucky? 4 00:00:29,433 --> 00:00:35,139 And with AI rapidly changing the landscape of science, will the same rules 5 00:00:35,196 --> 00:00:37,821 still apply as they were 10 years ago? 6 00:00:38,619 --> 00:00:40,224 Welcome to Immunity by Design. 7 00:00:40,239 --> 00:00:44,447 My name is Hashim Kooy, and I'm delighted to be hosting this series. 8 00:00:45,458 --> 00:00:48,949 And today I'm very delighted to be joined by Professor Jan 9 00:00:49,289 --> 00:00:51,966 Rehwinkel from University of Oxford. 10 00:00:53,118 --> 00:01:00,177 And I have known Jan since 2017, and I have always admired not only his 11 00:01:00,177 --> 00:01:05,824 remarkable scientific achievements and career, but also his commitment to 12 00:01:06,010 --> 00:01:08,971 mentoring the next generation scientists. 13 00:01:09,824 --> 00:01:12,006 Jan, thank you so much for joining me. 14 00:01:12,007 --> 00:01:13,917 It's really a great honor to have you on board. 15 00:01:14,962 --> 00:01:16,218 Thanks for having me, Hashim. 16 00:01:16,278 --> 00:01:17,781 I'm looking forward to our chat. 17 00:01:18,361 --> 00:01:18,783 Thank you. 18 00:01:19,121 --> 00:01:24,512 So maybe for those that who don't know you please briefly introduce 19 00:01:24,514 --> 00:01:28,573 yourself, your research interest, and equally importantly, why you 20 00:01:28,573 --> 00:01:33,290 are so active in mentoring and supporting, and why you care that much. 21 00:01:33,331 --> 00:01:35,624 I've seen regular seminars from you. 22 00:01:36,479 --> 00:01:37,026 thanks, Hashim. 23 00:01:37,036 --> 00:01:41,604 So my research is dissecting how cells detect that they've 24 00:01:41,608 --> 00:01:45,195 been infected by viruses, and how they then defend themselves. 25 00:01:45,198 --> 00:01:48,694 For the immunologists in the audience, we are interested in a process called nucleic 26 00:01:48,696 --> 00:01:53,353 acid sensing, and in a family of cytokines called type I interferons that are 27 00:01:53,353 --> 00:01:58,234 induced by nucleic acid sensors, that in turn defend us against viral infections. 28 00:01:58,503 --> 00:02:03,066 And we're really dissecting the molecular mechanisms of how nucleic acids trigger 29 00:02:03,066 --> 00:02:08,498 innate immune responses, and of how interferons i- induce antiviral immunity. 30 00:02:08,755 --> 00:02:13,619 And for me, really making scientific discoveries is as important as 31 00:02:13,623 --> 00:02:17,578 training the next generation of people in my and adjacent fields. 32 00:02:17,613 --> 00:02:21,929 And that, that's where, my interest in career development and supporting 33 00:02:21,978 --> 00:02:23,710 individuals really comes from. 34 00:02:23,710 --> 00:02:27,519 Because I think scientific discoveries and training the next generation of 35 00:02:27,520 --> 00:02:31,418 scientists are things that ideally should go hand in hand, and perhaps 36 00:02:31,418 --> 00:02:33,061 also depend a little bit on each other. 37 00:02:33,347 --> 00:02:36,408 I think these are the probably two things that are closest to my heart 38 00:02:36,408 --> 00:02:37,936 in terms of the job that I do. 39 00:02:39,270 --> 00:02:39,766 Beautiful. 40 00:02:40,667 --> 00:02:43,906 as I said you have had a remarkably successful career. 41 00:02:44,321 --> 00:02:48,340 But you have also spent years mentoring young scientists. 42 00:02:48,982 --> 00:02:53,802 So why do you think some exceptionally talented scientists struggle to 43 00:02:53,805 --> 00:02:58,801 succeed, while others progress fairly smoothly in the ladder? 44 00:03:01,167 --> 00:03:05,937 I think that most people who are very talented if they try often and hard 45 00:03:05,938 --> 00:03:08,034 enough, they will eventually succeed. 46 00:03:08,330 --> 00:03:11,292 I think you, you've got to force luck a little bit by trying 47 00:03:11,292 --> 00:03:12,929 again and and not giving up. 48 00:03:13,232 --> 00:03:16,264 But clearly sometimes individuals find themselves in the wrong 49 00:03:16,268 --> 00:03:17,554 place at the wrong time. 50 00:03:17,894 --> 00:03:20,738 And for example, may run out of funding at some point. 51 00:03:20,998 --> 00:03:22,955 And may choose other career paths. 52 00:03:22,978 --> 00:03:26,467 Which is very tragic if these are talented individual people. 53 00:03:26,734 --> 00:03:29,911 I think it, it is important to, to choose wisely when it comes 54 00:03:29,912 --> 00:03:31,570 to the environment to work in. 55 00:03:31,571 --> 00:03:34,520 Because a little bit of support from the environment is needed 56 00:03:34,522 --> 00:03:38,473 in addition to talent and e- enthusiasm for the science itself. 57 00:03:38,473 --> 00:03:41,164 And for the… And in addition to the work that that you put in. 58 00:03:42,391 --> 00:03:42,998 Absolutely. 59 00:03:43,431 --> 00:03:43,603 Yeah. 60 00:03:43,603 --> 00:03:47,564 And I've heard some of your previous seminars, and I've really enjoyed 61 00:03:47,586 --> 00:03:52,417 them thinking about those seminars where you covered from doing PhD 62 00:03:52,443 --> 00:03:54,597 all the way to being independent. 63 00:03:55,180 --> 00:04:01,117 So let's put one step back and go to the time that people do PhD. One 64 00:04:01,142 --> 00:04:05,774 of the key questions that usually they either ask you or struggle is 65 00:04:05,784 --> 00:04:10,828 that whether they should choose to stay in science or go to industry. 66 00:04:11,291 --> 00:04:14,082 What advice would you have for them to begin with? 67 00:04:15,401 --> 00:04:20,080 I think the most important piece of advice is that people should do 68 00:04:20,114 --> 00:04:24,467 what they're most motivated and most enthusiastic for and what they think they 69 00:04:24,470 --> 00:04:26,402 will enjoy most at the end of the day. 70 00:04:26,716 --> 00:04:31,697 And to guide the decision whether, that might be found in industry or in academic 71 00:04:31,697 --> 00:04:36,663 research if someone's really interested in making discoveries understanding disease 72 00:04:36,666 --> 00:04:41,704 mechanisms, understanding how things work then maybe an academic environment is 73 00:04:41,705 --> 00:04:46,995 the best where you'll have the freedom to pursue y- your personal interests. 74 00:04:46,996 --> 00:04:51,297 If vice versa you might be more interested in taking an existing 75 00:04:51,297 --> 00:04:56,240 discovery that and turning it into a, a therapy or a diagnostic or in- 76 00:04:56,266 --> 00:04:57,785 into something that's really useful. 77 00:04:57,999 --> 00:05:04,000 Then often in, in my view i- in the industry th- there's more resources and 78 00:05:04,001 --> 00:05:09,566 clearer pathways to actually bring things to market a- and to to really translate 79 00:05:09,566 --> 00:05:11,925 them un- until they reach patients. 80 00:05:12,155 --> 00:05:15,774 And so I think it, it comes down to the question whether you wanna make a 81 00:05:15,774 --> 00:05:20,363 discovery a- and understand how things work or whether you wanna take existing 82 00:05:20,364 --> 00:05:24,991 knowledge and make the most of that knowledge for for the benefit of patients 83 00:05:24,995 --> 00:05:27,018 i- in the remit of biomedical research 84 00:05:28,265 --> 00:05:31,601 And how early should PhD students start thinking seriously 85 00:05:31,606 --> 00:05:33,180 about their future careers? 86 00:05:34,864 --> 00:05:40,545 So typically we've got three to four-year PhD programs in the WIMM 87 00:05:40,554 --> 00:05:43,295 here, and I would say halfway through. 88 00:05:43,590 --> 00:05:46,480 I would not start earlier than that because think at the beginning it's quite 89 00:05:46,480 --> 00:05:50,741 important to get settled into the project and to get the project off the ground. 90 00:05:51,038 --> 00:05:54,735 But at the halfway point so after a year and a half to two years, 91 00:05:55,063 --> 00:05:58,641 I think it'd be good to start thinking about the, the next steps. 92 00:05:58,910 --> 00:06:02,143 Because the type of training and the type of activities people 93 00:06:02,143 --> 00:06:05,293 might be doing will depend a little bit on what they wanna do after. 94 00:06:05,294 --> 00:06:09,807 And the last year of a PhD is always a b- a busy time with finishing up- the last 95 00:06:09,808 --> 00:06:13,901 sets of experiments, and then writing the thesis and preparing for the viva. 96 00:06:14,129 --> 00:06:18,192 And i- if you in the year before that start thinking about the longer term 97 00:06:18,194 --> 00:06:22,085 future plans, maybe you've got a bit more bandwidth to carefully sort of 98 00:06:22,093 --> 00:06:26,656 self-reflect and think about what you wanna do, and perhaps get involved in 99 00:06:26,765 --> 00:06:32,836 some activities or or trainings that may help you be more competitive for the, the 100 00:06:32,851 --> 00:06:34,617 type of career paths you're interested in. 101 00:06:35,719 --> 00:06:38,290 You mentioned thinking about next steps. 102 00:06:38,816 --> 00:06:41,781 When they do that, what matters the most? 103 00:06:41,808 --> 00:06:47,443 Is that the PI, the project, the institution, or the research field? 104 00:06:47,446 --> 00:06:51,722 So what should actually make the underlying of their thinking? 105 00:06:52,321 --> 00:06:55,522 Th-this question is specifically about academic careers yeah. 106 00:06:55,522 --> 00:07:00,131 And I think what really needs to be important is to think about the project. 107 00:07:00,170 --> 00:07:03,838 And I think the most important thing is to decide what you're really 108 00:07:03,840 --> 00:07:07,614 interested in, and what will get you out of bed every morning and what you 109 00:07:07,614 --> 00:07:11,326 really wanna work on as a postdoc if you follow the academic career path. 110 00:07:11,677 --> 00:07:14,827 And that, that's the most important thing to define. 111 00:07:14,863 --> 00:07:18,779 And o- once on- once you've got that, I think the, the second most 112 00:07:18,779 --> 00:07:23,306 important thing is to find a lab and a PI that, that works in that area and 113 00:07:23,343 --> 00:07:25,155 that will support you in your career. 114 00:07:25,512 --> 00:07:29,595 And I guess after that the institute, the wider institute that lab is operating 115 00:07:29,595 --> 00:07:33,577 in is of course, also important as are, and many other considerations 116 00:07:33,615 --> 00:07:37,668 such as geographically where this might be located a- and others. 117 00:07:38,601 --> 00:07:42,467 Looking back, which career decision turned out to be particularly 118 00:07:42,563 --> 00:07:47,889 important for you, and was there a risk you took that paid off later? 119 00:07:48,594 --> 00:07:48,912 Yes. 120 00:07:48,925 --> 00:07:52,906 I think for me I made a big a change in scientific direction. 121 00:07:52,906 --> 00:07:56,865 I'd done my PhD at the European Molecular Biology Laboratory in 122 00:07:56,875 --> 00:08:01,642 Heidelberg in Germany, and during that time, I worked on post-transcriptional 123 00:08:01,667 --> 00:08:03,175 control of messenger RNAs. 124 00:08:03,176 --> 00:08:07,513 And it was work in Drosophila cells, understanding basic mechanisms of 125 00:08:07,531 --> 00:08:11,635 how microRNAs work or how mRNAs are transported- … out of the cell nucleus. 126 00:08:11,947 --> 00:08:16,848 And then during my postdoc i- in London I I really changed fields 127 00:08:16,850 --> 00:08:19,262 and and got into innate immunology. 128 00:08:19,545 --> 00:08:24,098 And at the time I was very excited about getting into innate immun- 129 00:08:24,126 --> 00:08:27,171 immunology and the role of nucleic acids in the immune system. 130 00:08:27,446 --> 00:08:31,671 But it it was also apparent that I was changing direction quite fundamentally, 131 00:08:31,671 --> 00:08:35,360 and that the environment I was getting into was doing a lot of things that in the 132 00:08:35,362 --> 00:08:39,756 beginning, I I really needed to get up to speed to, to understand what was going on. 133 00:08:40,047 --> 00:08:43,448 And so there definitely was some, some risk there. 134 00:08:43,665 --> 00:08:48,172 But I think I, I was very curious learning new things and and trying to apply my 135 00:08:48,172 --> 00:08:50,462 skills into a different scientific field. 136 00:08:50,695 --> 00:08:54,583 And in retrospect I've got no regrets at all ma- making that choice. 137 00:08:54,925 --> 00:08:58,662 And so sometimes I think it's it's important to take risks a- and 138 00:08:58,760 --> 00:09:00,165 maybe change things a little bit. 139 00:09:00,195 --> 00:09:03,288 A- and generally, I think that will turn out for the better 140 00:09:04,388 --> 00:09:08,090 Yeah, when make a shift in your program, perhaps at the beginning 141 00:09:08,100 --> 00:09:10,760 you are not very sure whether it's the right decision or not. 142 00:09:11,228 --> 00:09:14,005 But you said now that you look into it, you are very happy 143 00:09:14,010 --> 00:09:15,763 that you made that decision. 144 00:09:16,155 --> 00:09:21,627 So how long it took, that you were comfortable that, okay, that was 145 00:09:21,628 --> 00:09:24,192 actually the right decision that I made and I'm happy with that? 146 00:09:25,545 --> 00:09:29,373 I think I was very fortunate that my, my post-doctoral supervisor, 147 00:09:29,431 --> 00:09:34,127 Caetano Reis e Sousa, a- and also members of his research group were all 148 00:09:34,237 --> 00:09:36,062 very welcoming and very supportive. 149 00:09:36,319 --> 00:09:38,820 And I felt at home very quickly. 150 00:09:39,069 --> 00:09:43,144 And it took me a little bit of time to, be familiar and comfortable 151 00:09:43,144 --> 00:09:44,780 with the science and immunology. 152 00:09:45,087 --> 00:09:49,973 And I think if you change field it is really important to have people to 153 00:09:49,975 --> 00:09:52,400 accommodate you and s- and support you. 154 00:09:52,628 --> 00:09:55,080 So i- in my case, I guess after a few months I was very 155 00:09:55,095 --> 00:09:56,460 comfortable in the new field. 156 00:09:56,734 --> 00:10:00,729 And just to reiterate, very, fortunate working with some very, very good 157 00:10:00,731 --> 00:10:03,199 and very supportive people Yeah. 158 00:10:03,533 --> 00:10:07,340 When people doing postdoc, then they have a number of things to take care. 159 00:10:07,343 --> 00:10:12,299 Having good publications, learning new technical skills, making some 160 00:10:12,306 --> 00:10:16,131 collaborations, networking, and teaching, and so on and so forth. 161 00:10:16,412 --> 00:10:20,987 So what should young scientists prioritize, and what matters 162 00:10:20,987 --> 00:10:22,469 less than people think? 163 00:10:23,393 --> 00:10:28,825 So I think my advice here is specifically for those who after a 164 00:10:28,829 --> 00:10:33,443 postdoc aspire to become independent scientists, become PIs, and run 165 00:10:33,444 --> 00:10:35,786 their own academic research programs. 166 00:10:36,075 --> 00:10:40,306 And i-i-if that's what you wanna do then really focusing on, on, on 167 00:10:40,307 --> 00:10:43,012 making a discovery, … is important. 168 00:10:43,294 --> 00:10:46,573 And that, that discovery, of course, has to be published, otherwise no one 169 00:10:46,573 --> 00:10:48,203 knows about it other than yourself. 170 00:10:48,487 --> 00:10:53,258 I think the main focus has to be to conduct some really exciting research 171 00:10:53,461 --> 00:10:59,219 to make a discovery that you can put your name to a-a-and then to g-get it 172 00:10:59,294 --> 00:11:03,720 published in a place where people will recognize this, and then also to promote 173 00:11:03,916 --> 00:11:07,606 that discovery that you've made through for example, giving talks about it and 174 00:11:07,607 --> 00:11:09,400 making sure that people are aware of it. 175 00:11:09,689 --> 00:11:13,168 So I think that- that's really above everything else. 176 00:11:13,455 --> 00:11:17,371 A-and and everything else has support you making a discovery. 177 00:11:17,372 --> 00:11:21,189 So you mentioned collaborations there, which if they support you 178 00:11:21,189 --> 00:11:24,571 in making a discovery, it's really important that you engage with them. 179 00:11:24,934 --> 00:11:30,047 If it turns out that they are distracting you from your primary l-line of 180 00:11:30,082 --> 00:11:35,501 investigation and become a, a drain on your time, then it is probably important 181 00:11:35,513 --> 00:11:39,482 to s- to, to not entirely step away from those collaborations but to limit 182 00:11:39,615 --> 00:11:41,294 the amount of time you spend on them. 183 00:11:41,622 --> 00:11:46,521 And then likewise for for training, if for example, if in order to make your 184 00:11:46,522 --> 00:11:51,011 discovery you need to use a new perhaps advanced technology, then it is of course 185 00:11:51,012 --> 00:11:54,861 very important that you get the training to use it properly and understand its ins 186 00:11:54,862 --> 00:11:57,605 and outs and to apply it successfully. 187 00:11:57,853 --> 00:12:01,520 But at the same time if there is a technique that you might only use once 188 00:12:01,520 --> 00:12:06,979 or twice or perhaps not at all, then it would again be a sink of time and taking 189 00:12:06,979 --> 00:12:10,837 away from your focus on your discovery if you were to take a lot of training 190 00:12:10,837 --> 00:12:14,019 in that technique, and perhaps then it would be easier to find a commercial 191 00:12:14,019 --> 00:12:19,894 supplier or a facility to help you- Get that small piece of work done 192 00:12:20,124 --> 00:12:24,842 without l- learning yourself exactly how to to apply a specific methodology 193 00:12:24,842 --> 00:12:26,529 or use a specific piece of equipment. 194 00:12:26,952 --> 00:12:31,443 So I think it, it really comes down to making a discovery a- and then 195 00:12:31,446 --> 00:12:34,709 promoting your discovery through publications and other channels. 196 00:12:35,024 --> 00:12:36,837 That, that's the most important thing in my view. 197 00:12:37,827 --> 00:12:38,376 Absolutely. 198 00:12:38,422 --> 00:12:42,848 You started by, highlighting the importance of discovery and 199 00:12:42,902 --> 00:12:45,926 publishing it so that people and the community know about that. 200 00:12:46,444 --> 00:12:48,900 But this is not always black and white. 201 00:12:48,950 --> 00:12:53,152 They have different levels of discoveries different levels of publications. 202 00:12:53,833 --> 00:12:58,869 And every so often I see some people, some postdocs, that they have ended 203 00:12:58,870 --> 00:13:03,904 up in a situation or in an environment that they can have a smaller 204 00:13:03,950 --> 00:13:05,971 publication perhaps and to move on. 205 00:13:06,423 --> 00:13:11,348 But either the PI or the research group, they, tie it to some other collaborations- 206 00:13:11,362 --> 00:13:14,607 … and that publication just is pushed back. 207 00:13:14,945 --> 00:13:17,831 So what your advice would be in that situation? 208 00:13:19,756 --> 00:13:23,297 It's sometimes there are long delays in papers getting out, and that can 209 00:13:23,300 --> 00:13:25,713 have a big impact on postdocs' careers. 210 00:13:26,069 --> 00:13:30,512 I think being a PI myself now and having lots of demands on my time what I would 211 00:13:30,512 --> 00:13:35,476 say is the more advanced the draft of the manuscript is that you create as 212 00:13:35,477 --> 00:13:39,758 a postdoc and put on the desk of your PI the higher your chances are that 213 00:13:39,815 --> 00:13:41,593 it's gonna be turned around quickly. 214 00:13:41,594 --> 00:13:46,237 If the PI looks at it and sees that it's really in a very good shape and may only 215 00:13:46,237 --> 00:13:50,598 require a few minor tweaks here and there, then they may be able to do it quicker. 216 00:13:50,651 --> 00:13:55,682 Whereas if they see that there is a, still a, a big piece of work here to to 217 00:13:55,682 --> 00:13:58,996 get it into a shape where the PI will put their name to it as corresponding 218 00:13:58,999 --> 00:14:02,741 author a- and be comfortable with how everything is presented and written 219 00:14:03,001 --> 00:14:07,257 then it might be much harder for the PI to find large chunks of time do that. 220 00:14:07,567 --> 00:14:13,080 A- and I think one piece of advice is to make sure that y- you've you've 221 00:14:13,083 --> 00:14:17,270 got your writing skills a- and get training if necessary or practice. 222 00:14:17,576 --> 00:14:21,981 A- and that y- you've got good skills in putting figures together a- and a- 223 00:14:21,981 --> 00:14:25,923 and, be prepared to really take the lead in putting the manuscript together, 224 00:14:25,924 --> 00:14:30,157 make it as easy as possible for your PI to finalize and submit things. 225 00:14:31,288 --> 00:14:35,366 When people, either PhD students thinking about next step, which is postdoc, or 226 00:14:35,393 --> 00:14:40,706 postdocs to become independent based on your experience, what are the most 227 00:14:40,758 --> 00:14:43,161 common mistakes they make usually? 228 00:14:44,394 --> 00:14:47,394 There are quite a few mistakes that I see people make. 229 00:14:47,683 --> 00:14:53,040 One of them is that when it comes to applying for jobs people often wait 230 00:14:53,040 --> 00:14:56,165 for jobs to be posted to be advertised. 231 00:14:56,189 --> 00:15:00,117 And again, this a- this advice, gi- given my limited experience is 232 00:15:00,117 --> 00:15:02,217 really for people who are interested in the academic career path. 233 00:15:02,219 --> 00:15:05,078 I can comment less on- other career paths. 234 00:15:05,079 --> 00:15:09,973 But really in academia, the, often the top labs or the top departments 235 00:15:10,022 --> 00:15:11,515 not necessarily advertise. 236 00:15:11,767 --> 00:15:15,844 They wait for people to send emails and and to introduce themselves 237 00:15:15,877 --> 00:15:17,473 and to apply out of the blue. 238 00:15:17,781 --> 00:15:23,073 A- and and the then they invite the attractive candidates to come 239 00:15:23,076 --> 00:15:26,701 for an interview, and that's true for both postdoc and PI positions. 240 00:15:26,885 --> 00:15:31,132 So a common mistake I see is that people not so much define what they really wanna 241 00:15:31,133 --> 00:15:34,729 do, … and what they're really interested in researching, but sort of they spend 242 00:15:34,729 --> 00:15:36,345 a lot of time looking at job ads. 243 00:15:36,623 --> 00:15:38,439 And I think it should be the other way around. 244 00:15:38,544 --> 00:15:42,730 You need to define what you really wanna do, and then look for labs if you want to 245 00:15:42,730 --> 00:15:46,537 do a postdoc, or for units or institutes or departments- … if you wanna start 246 00:15:46,538 --> 00:15:50,764 your own lab where you think you could do that research that you wanna do. 247 00:15:50,979 --> 00:15:54,204 And then approach them and see whether they've got any openings. 248 00:15:54,481 --> 00:16:00,154 So I think rather than waiting for job ads apply out of the blue is my advice here. 249 00:16:00,599 --> 00:16:05,845 A- and the other mistake that I've seen people make a- at all career stages 250 00:16:05,847 --> 00:16:10,785 is that they sometimes get distracted a little bit by activities that don't 251 00:16:10,886 --> 00:16:13,442 help them directly make discoveries. 252 00:16:13,776 --> 00:16:18,497 And I think at a, at, at the stage of PI you need to contribute to 253 00:16:18,498 --> 00:16:21,456 these, the, You do- you need to be a good citizen in your department. 254 00:16:21,458 --> 00:16:23,577 You need to contribute to the academic life in the department, 255 00:16:23,577 --> 00:16:27,865 and there will necessarily be activities that don't benefit your 256 00:16:27,866 --> 00:16:29,573 research, at least not directly. 257 00:16:29,860 --> 00:16:33,240 But at earlier career stages, PhD and postdoc, I think it is 258 00:16:33,241 --> 00:16:37,822 important to avoid getting drawn into doing too many things that not 259 00:16:37,836 --> 00:16:40,491 facilitate you making discoveries. 260 00:16:40,721 --> 00:16:45,262 And again that, that viewpoint is is obviously my subjective viewpoint, 261 00:16:45,263 --> 00:16:49,265 and it's also a piece of advice for people who want to go into 262 00:16:49,459 --> 00:16:53,209 academia or stay in academia and pursue the academic career track. 263 00:16:53,400 --> 00:16:57,369 For, other career paths it may be actually quite important to, get certain 264 00:16:57,374 --> 00:17:00,971 trainings or do certain activities, secondments, internships, placements, 265 00:17:00,972 --> 00:17:05,067 et cetera that give you o- other perspectives and that may make it that, 266 00:17:05,087 --> 00:17:09,572 that much easier to pursue other career paths in, in, in industry or elsewhere. 267 00:17:09,844 --> 00:17:13,482 Please view at these, these thoughts in the light of someone who wants 268 00:17:13,483 --> 00:17:16,889 to is clear that they want to pursue an academic career track. 269 00:17:17,940 --> 00:17:20,731 thinking about becoming scientifically independent. 270 00:17:20,819 --> 00:17:24,495 First of all, what does scientific independence really mean? 271 00:17:25,042 --> 00:17:29,606 When should a postdoc start developing their own research vision? 272 00:17:31,375 --> 00:17:34,980 Y- yeah, so again, a bit like for the students that we discussed earlier, 273 00:17:34,981 --> 00:17:38,810 I think halfway through a postdoc, if we have… think of a typical postdoc 274 00:17:38,851 --> 00:17:43,257 doing maybe four or five years at the two to three-year mark it, it would be 275 00:17:43,257 --> 00:17:46,560 good to start thinking about what you would do if you had your own little 276 00:17:46,567 --> 00:17:50,235 lab and funding for for five years and a team of three or four people. 277 00:17:50,681 --> 00:17:55,251 So I think that, that would be a good point in time to do that. 278 00:17:56,665 --> 00:17:59,014 And it looks like that the norm is two postdocs. 279 00:17:59,034 --> 00:18:03,872 Would you basically consider doing two postdocs or one postdoc is enough to 280 00:18:03,882 --> 00:18:05,941 move on and think about independency? 281 00:18:06,465 --> 00:18:06,769 Yeah. 282 00:18:06,770 --> 00:18:09,555 That's an interesting question that I think really depends. 283 00:18:09,565 --> 00:18:14,275 So in my personal case I've done one postdoc of of four 284 00:18:14,276 --> 00:18:15,617 and a half years approximately. 285 00:18:15,931 --> 00:18:18,301 And then I moved on to, to set up my own group. 286 00:18:18,673 --> 00:18:22,567 And one thing to consider here when doing two postdocs is that when 287 00:18:22,569 --> 00:18:26,504 people look at your track record they will look at what discoveries 288 00:18:26,505 --> 00:18:28,397 have you made at each career stage. 289 00:18:28,397 --> 00:18:32,416 They will ask what, what has, this applicant discovered as a PhD student? 290 00:18:32,433 --> 00:18:34,488 What have they done in their first postdoc? 291 00:18:34,511 --> 00:18:36,183 What have they done in their second postdoc? 292 00:18:36,564 --> 00:18:38,917 And so that means that there is a bit of a risk. 293 00:18:38,917 --> 00:18:43,386 If you've had a a, a successful postdoc, first postdoc, then you're 294 00:18:43,392 --> 00:18:46,008 setting the clock a little bit back if you start a second postdoc. 295 00:18:46,030 --> 00:18:49,103 But again, you've gotta be, successful in that second postdoc. 296 00:18:49,113 --> 00:18:53,013 If the second postdoc turns out you're unlucky or for any other 297 00:18:53,013 --> 00:18:56,736 reasons there, there's perhaps less productivity and less discovery then 298 00:18:56,737 --> 00:19:00,769 I think y- your position will … You will be weakening your position. 299 00:19:01,103 --> 00:19:06,333 And so what my advice generally is that if your first postdoc has gone quite well 300 00:19:06,695 --> 00:19:11,190 try and get a PI job after it 'cause you, you're gonna be in a strong position. 301 00:19:11,515 --> 00:19:16,944 If your first postdoc maybe you've ended up in an environment that isn't perfect 302 00:19:17,211 --> 00:19:21,734 and it doesn't look like you're gonna make a big breakthrough in your research, 303 00:19:21,954 --> 00:19:26,521 maybe that'd be a good moment to decide to move on and do a second postdoc elsewhere. 304 00:19:26,946 --> 00:19:28,975 To make that discovery somewhere else. 305 00:19:29,303 --> 00:19:32,690 But I would disagree that it's necessary to do two postdocs. 306 00:19:32,717 --> 00:19:37,883 I, I think if you've done one successful postdoc that that should put you in a good 307 00:19:37,885 --> 00:19:40,182 position to to apply for PI positions. 308 00:19:41,083 --> 00:19:45,989 And speaking of which, then how do you identify a genuinely important 309 00:19:46,002 --> 00:19:50,436 scientific question around which to build an independent research program? 310 00:19:52,564 --> 00:19:56,948 Yes, it's again, it's a similar ad- advice that- … i- in academic research, we've 311 00:19:56,950 --> 00:20:01,202 got to be self-motivated, and is one of the I guess beauties of aca- academic 312 00:20:01,203 --> 00:20:05,285 research that we are our own boss, and that once we occasionally have to justify 313 00:20:05,286 --> 00:20:10,352 ourselves at reviews that happen every few years typically every five years. 314 00:20:10,532 --> 00:20:14,482 In between those reviews, we are pretty free to to, to, to do what we want. 315 00:20:14,483 --> 00:20:17,746 And to, to be successful, I think it's important to be driven and 316 00:20:17,746 --> 00:20:21,344 self-motivated and enthusiastic about the work- … that we do. 317 00:20:21,654 --> 00:20:25,754 And so therefore, in identifying a research program what needs to be at the 318 00:20:25,764 --> 00:20:31,232 top of the priority list is something that you find worthwhile yourself doing. 319 00:20:31,282 --> 00:20:33,926 And that as I said earlier for postdoc project, that needs to 320 00:20:33,927 --> 00:20:35,336 get you out of bed every morning. 321 00:20:35,584 --> 00:20:39,498 A- and you really need to be very curious to find out the answer to the 322 00:20:39,499 --> 00:20:41,052 questions that, that you're asking. 323 00:20:41,362 --> 00:20:44,549 And y- that is i- is really important. 324 00:20:44,759 --> 00:20:47,933 But then there are some sort of more tangible things to say here. 325 00:20:48,224 --> 00:20:52,149 So it's important to not just do what the lab is doing, in which you've done your 326 00:20:52,161 --> 00:20:56,078 postdoc or your or even your PhD. You need to find your own niche a little bit. 327 00:20:56,465 --> 00:21:00,453 And, so you need to think a little bit about how you could be different from 328 00:21:00,541 --> 00:21:03,896 y-your current PI from the work that's going on- in your current lab because 329 00:21:04,295 --> 00:21:08,776 you will be unlikely to be successfully competing w-with, with an established 330 00:21:08,776 --> 00:21:10,758 research group as a junior PI setting out. 331 00:21:11,049 --> 00:21:14,820 So you need to have a bit your your niche and your unique selling point. 332 00:21:15,080 --> 00:21:16,987 That's one important thing to consider. 333 00:21:17,281 --> 00:21:22,551 And then also, it's important to be aware of what's going on in the 334 00:21:22,552 --> 00:21:28,046 field of maybe connecting a technique with a scientific question wh-where 335 00:21:28,046 --> 00:21:32,429 that connection hadn't been made or c-connecting diff-different questions with 336 00:21:32,431 --> 00:21:36,690 each other or approaching them in a new way that other people haven't done yet. 337 00:21:36,991 --> 00:21:42,527 All of this I think will help a, a postdoc coming to the point of transitioning to PI 338 00:21:42,554 --> 00:21:45,259 to, to shape a, a strong research program. 339 00:21:45,526 --> 00:21:49,221 And in addition that once people get to the stage where they've identified a 340 00:21:49,227 --> 00:21:54,556 university or a department in which they'd like to set up their lab, it becomes quite 341 00:21:54,556 --> 00:21:56,733 important to think about the synergies. 342 00:21:57,028 --> 00:22:00,125 Who would be your future collaborators in that department? 343 00:22:00,387 --> 00:22:02,690 Which of their facilities are you gonna use? 344 00:22:03,020 --> 00:22:06,552 And that, that needs to match up with what you want to do. 345 00:22:06,563 --> 00:22:10,989 So that becomes a, a practical consideration once things are narrowed 346 00:22:11,006 --> 00:22:13,840 down to a couple of departments that people applied to, that they maybe 347 00:22:13,840 --> 00:22:18,400 shape their research ideas a little bit by the resources, the facilities, 348 00:22:18,426 --> 00:22:22,259 the collaborators that may be i-in, in, available in that department. 349 00:22:23,368 --> 00:22:27,714 as, as I said earlier to my mind, you have done actually exceptionally successful 350 00:22:27,824 --> 00:22:32,751 career you made some discoveries during your y- PhD or postdoc, and then moved on. 351 00:22:33,612 --> 00:22:38,985 in other words You are on right-hand side of the distribution of all postdocs that 352 00:22:39,004 --> 00:22:44,266 we are talking about , but looking at that distribution for a normal or average 353 00:22:44,301 --> 00:22:49,888 postdoc that they do two postdocs- what are the indicators that they have done 354 00:22:49,935 --> 00:22:53,300 enough to move on towards independency? 355 00:22:54,293 --> 00:22:59,724 So I guess I could split my answer in sort of external and internal indicators. 356 00:23:00,043 --> 00:23:00,419 Yeah. 357 00:23:00,469 --> 00:23:04,616 So the external indicators I think are what's been published or… what's 358 00:23:04,627 --> 00:23:06,631 available in a, on a preprint server. 359 00:23:06,914 --> 00:23:12,129 A- and I think you need to have made the, a discovery of some sort i- in 360 00:23:12,129 --> 00:23:13,839 order to be ready to become a PI. 361 00:23:14,079 --> 00:23:19,211 And you need to be able to formulate a research vision an idea for what 362 00:23:19,211 --> 00:23:23,190 you wanna do with a lab i- in two or three pages that you can send. 363 00:23:23,238 --> 00:23:29,258 And I think if people can coherently articulate, A, a research program for five 364 00:23:29,258 --> 00:23:32,606 years that other people find convincing then, that, that's an indicator. 365 00:23:32,606 --> 00:23:36,013 And you can test that out internally in your current department as a postdoc 366 00:23:36,046 --> 00:23:39,286 by writing up a two or three-page research proposal and give it to a few 367 00:23:39,327 --> 00:23:43,050 c- colleagues give it to a few of the PIs in that department and see what 368 00:23:43,050 --> 00:23:45,036 they think a- and get some feedback. 369 00:23:45,038 --> 00:23:48,427 And if, people are excited about it and think that this would be a cool 370 00:23:48,428 --> 00:23:52,074 thing to do then you're probably ready if it comes with having the, 371 00:23:52,105 --> 00:23:54,689 having made some discoveries and having published some papers. 372 00:23:55,033 --> 00:23:57,595 And that's what the external world can tell you. 373 00:23:57,797 --> 00:24:01,468 And then I think it's also a bit of an internal personal perspective here. 374 00:24:01,685 --> 00:24:06,676 And I think a g- good test is if you see your own PI giving a talk presenting your 375 00:24:06,678 --> 00:24:10,553 data are you quite comfortable sitting in the back row of that auditorium 376 00:24:10,553 --> 00:24:12,125 listening to your PI presenting? 377 00:24:12,414 --> 00:24:14,407 And in that case, I think you're not ready. 378 00:24:14,571 --> 00:24:18,339 If you're rather sitting maybe somewhere in the middle or to the front, and you're 379 00:24:18,339 --> 00:24:22,924 really itching, and you would want to be the person up at the podium presenting 380 00:24:22,962 --> 00:24:26,418 th- your own work a- and y- you get really a little bit annoyed because 381 00:24:26,419 --> 00:24:31,487 your PI maybe the way they present it is is 99% accurate but not 100% accurate 382 00:24:31,489 --> 00:24:34,996 because you're the expert on that a- and that kind of annoys you a little bit, 383 00:24:35,033 --> 00:24:38,272 a- and you wanna be the person up there giving the talk, I think then you're 384 00:24:38,272 --> 00:24:40,780 ready to to make the jump becoming a PI. 385 00:24:41,067 --> 00:24:44,564 I think that, that's a a, a little test if you ask yourself, would you be 386 00:24:44,564 --> 00:24:47,700 the person in the back row comfortably sitting back listening to the PI showing 387 00:24:47,702 --> 00:24:52,095 you work, or would you be the person itching to be up on the stage themselves? 388 00:24:52,130 --> 00:24:55,209 That, that could be a test that you could g- give yourself. 389 00:24:55,741 --> 00:24:56,504 It's a very good one. 390 00:24:56,504 --> 00:24:57,611 I like that, actually. 391 00:24:58,369 --> 00:24:58,641 Yeah. 392 00:24:58,669 --> 00:25:04,156 Now thinking about early days of being a PI, being independent, what 393 00:25:04,156 --> 00:25:08,122 was the biggest challenge or surprise when you transitioned from a postdoc 394 00:25:08,162 --> 00:25:10,735 to leading your own research group? 395 00:25:11,848 --> 00:25:15,457 Yes, I think one of the biggest surprises I had was that th- there seemed to 396 00:25:15,464 --> 00:25:20,208 be a lot more unwritten rules and a l- lot more secrets and a lot more 397 00:25:20,211 --> 00:25:24,835 gossip and a lot more sort of indirect things happening when I became a PI. 398 00:25:24,852 --> 00:25:28,317 When I was a, a postdoc, I felt everything was pretty clear. 399 00:25:28,320 --> 00:25:31,287 I knew exactly where I was in terms of my salary. 400 00:25:31,287 --> 00:25:34,698 I knew that the postdocs around me would get pretty much the same amount 401 00:25:34,698 --> 00:25:39,572 of money that I would make, and it was all fairly s- straightforward i- 402 00:25:39,572 --> 00:25:41,711 in terms of it, it doing the science. 403 00:25:41,711 --> 00:25:46,262 And then when I became a PI, I, I realized that there's lots of unwritten rules. 404 00:25:46,300 --> 00:25:50,432 There's lots of, sort of hidden agendas and that o- one sort of 405 00:25:50,460 --> 00:25:54,045 needs to understand a little bit more what people are really looking for. 406 00:25:54,052 --> 00:25:57,759 Sometimes, when you apply for grants, for example, you've got the, the 407 00:25:57,759 --> 00:26:00,862 instructions that are published on the funder's website, and you can read them. 408 00:26:01,240 --> 00:26:05,284 But then really there are some unwritten rules, and what is actually 409 00:26:05,285 --> 00:26:10,819 really important i- is not that maybe y- your ethics is in tip-top shape. 410 00:26:11,052 --> 00:26:13,437 And the funder of course says that is really important, and it's gonna 411 00:26:13,446 --> 00:26:15,064 be re- reviewed very carefully. 412 00:26:15,305 --> 00:26:19,395 But the truth is that reviewers don't look at research ethics that much. 413 00:26:19,466 --> 00:26:20,659 I'm not saying they're not important. 414 00:26:20,659 --> 00:26:21,437 Don't get me wrong. 415 00:26:21,449 --> 00:26:22,435 They are really important. 416 00:26:22,657 --> 00:26:25,608 But for the process of assessing a grant application- … other 417 00:26:25,611 --> 00:26:26,943 things are much more important. 418 00:26:27,158 --> 00:26:32,468 And grants usually stand or fail because of the research a- and and the 419 00:26:32,468 --> 00:26:36,937 way it's phrased and not whether every s- every, I has been dotted and every 420 00:26:36,940 --> 00:26:38,802 T has been crossed for other things. 421 00:26:39,061 --> 00:26:42,062 And so there, there, there's some sort of unwritten rules that I felt 422 00:26:42,072 --> 00:26:45,411 I had to learn for the first few years and and then there's sort of 423 00:26:45,457 --> 00:26:47,444 dep- department politics going on. 424 00:26:47,445 --> 00:26:52,387 That was also a bit of a surprise and that you couldn't m- find out, what 425 00:26:52,392 --> 00:26:54,798 salary other people were making and so on. 426 00:26:55,069 --> 00:26:58,676 And that there's there's lots of opaqueness I would say. 427 00:26:58,887 --> 00:27:02,432 That was a, the, a bit of a challenge and a surprise at the beginning. 428 00:27:02,715 --> 00:27:06,112 But I now understand that then in some case it has to be that way. 429 00:27:06,414 --> 00:27:11,783 A- and like by, by talking to people and by having a network of friendly faces, 430 00:27:11,785 --> 00:27:16,018 you can sometimes ask, "Oh, is that really what I need to focus on, or is 431 00:27:16,018 --> 00:27:20,420 it w- justifiable that I ask for this or that, or should I ask for more or less?" 432 00:27:20,462 --> 00:27:24,006 I think, it, it will help navigate the, those, those issues. 433 00:27:25,008 --> 00:27:29,464 And during those early days, as you said, unwritten rules and politics 434 00:27:29,470 --> 00:27:31,595 and a lot of other uncertainties. 435 00:27:32,355 --> 00:27:34,979 So what should a junior PI prioritize? 436 00:27:34,987 --> 00:27:40,761 Is that building a strong team or securing some new fundings improving their 437 00:27:40,788 --> 00:27:43,313 publications- establishing collaborations? 438 00:27:43,326 --> 00:27:47,309 Although you mentioned this one good thing is that to talk to other peers 439 00:27:47,327 --> 00:27:49,348 and learn from their experiences. 440 00:27:49,381 --> 00:27:51,627 But what other advice you could share here? 441 00:27:52,506 --> 00:27:57,626 So I guess the funding if people are fortunate enough to start being a PI 442 00:27:57,629 --> 00:28:02,275 on the back of a career development fellowship or- an ESC Starting Grant or 443 00:28:02,286 --> 00:28:06,692 such like, then they- they'll have a lot of funding i- in the bank for a few years. 444 00:28:06,712 --> 00:28:11,189 And think rather than trying to i- in that case, to get more funding 445 00:28:11,459 --> 00:28:14,561 I think the focus really has to be to recruit very good people. 446 00:28:14,743 --> 00:28:17,710 Because, the saying is that it's the people that make or break your lab. 447 00:28:18,037 --> 00:28:20,036 And that, that … I've not invented that. 448 00:28:20,036 --> 00:28:22,984 I've heard that from other people, but I fully subscribe to that. 449 00:28:23,289 --> 00:28:27,431 And once funding is secured then recruiting the right people, and once 450 00:28:27,431 --> 00:28:31,095 they're recruited supporting them and building a team that where people 451 00:28:31,186 --> 00:28:35,276 interact with each other in a productive and pleasant way, I think i- is one of 452 00:28:35,281 --> 00:28:37,806 the most important tasks to focus on. 453 00:28:38,182 --> 00:28:42,610 And likewise, collaborations, I think it's it's an important aspect 454 00:28:42,611 --> 00:28:45,608 of running a research group to be supported by good collaborators. 455 00:28:45,929 --> 00:28:49,620 But I think that there is sometimes a risk a little bit for junior PIs, particularly 456 00:28:49,622 --> 00:28:53,821 if they relocate, come from a different country or from a different university, 457 00:28:54,055 --> 00:28:58,268 and they bring some sort of new expertise or skill set or new technology into the 458 00:28:58,269 --> 00:29:01,364 department that they're joining, that suddenly everyone in that department 459 00:29:01,364 --> 00:29:02,641 wants to collaborate with them. 460 00:29:02,949 --> 00:29:07,474 And sometimes people approach junior PIs without very clear plans of what they 461 00:29:07,474 --> 00:29:10,452 actually wanna do, and they basically just hope the junior PI will come up with 462 00:29:10,463 --> 00:29:12,452 some nice ideas for their own research. 463 00:29:12,743 --> 00:29:17,684 A- and it's easy to get dragged into into that as a junior PI trying to be 464 00:29:17,685 --> 00:29:19,862 helpful to too many people around you. 465 00:29:20,190 --> 00:29:23,469 And so if you find yourself in that situation, that you're the sort of the 466 00:29:23,470 --> 00:29:26,410 new guy in in the department, everyone wants to collaborate with you because 467 00:29:26,414 --> 00:29:32,004 you've got, let's say, that new m- piece of kit then I guess be careful and not 468 00:29:32,046 --> 00:29:36,050 stretch yourself too thinly because there's only so much time in the day. 469 00:29:36,100 --> 00:29:39,176 And I think it it's an interesting question of how to navigate that because 470 00:29:39,181 --> 00:29:43,070 obviously you don't wanna turn people down and create bad bad impressions. 471 00:29:43,312 --> 00:29:47,348 But it is important to find those people who are reliable collaborators who will 472 00:29:47,541 --> 00:29:51,219 put their weight behind the collaboration and who've got actually really good 473 00:29:51,220 --> 00:29:54,730 ideas how they could collaborate with you and where you're genuinely 474 00:29:54,730 --> 00:29:56,478 interested in actually pu- pursuing it 475 00:29:58,801 --> 00:30:02,159 So you very rightly described the importance of hiring good 476 00:30:02,162 --> 00:30:04,243 people as make it or break it. 477 00:30:05,017 --> 00:30:09,736 But the problem is that in those early days, you are new. 478 00:30:09,749 --> 00:30:11,417 You are not, well-established. 479 00:30:11,471 --> 00:30:15,682 And hiring the right people, talented people is a little bit tricky. 480 00:30:15,685 --> 00:30:17,922 So what advice do you have to share about that? 481 00:30:18,793 --> 00:30:23,390 I I fully a- agree that f- finding good students and postdocs can be 482 00:30:23,390 --> 00:30:26,994 a challenge for junior PIs 'cause they don't have, same profile that 483 00:30:26,995 --> 00:30:28,793 more established PIs would have. 484 00:30:29,190 --> 00:30:34,201 And so I think it, it's particularly i- important to be proactive about 485 00:30:34,526 --> 00:30:38,401 making it known widely that there are vacancies in your lab, and they've 486 00:30:38,410 --> 00:30:40,445 got an exciting research program. 487 00:30:40,753 --> 00:30:46,036 And I think if … use as many channels as you can to make that known. 488 00:30:46,326 --> 00:30:51,637 And o- one, one thing to do is to write to as many people in, 489 00:30:51,647 --> 00:30:53,423 in your field that you can know. 490 00:30:53,694 --> 00:30:55,532 Even if you don't really know them very well. 491 00:30:55,532 --> 00:30:59,436 If maybe just seen a talk from them at a conference, send them an email 492 00:30:59,766 --> 00:31:04,364 with a one-page PDF job advert attached, and say, I've got this. 493 00:31:04,385 --> 00:31:05,823 Could you circulate in your department? 494 00:31:05,823 --> 00:31:08,722 And also, if you had someone in your group who's maybe coming to the end of 495 00:31:08,723 --> 00:31:12,748 their PhD and is looking for a postdoc, c- could you flag this up with them? 496 00:31:13,105 --> 00:31:16,383 Or could you forward any applications that you're getting that, that 497 00:31:16,409 --> 00:31:17,923 you can't consider in your lab? 498 00:31:17,960 --> 00:31:22,037 could you give my name to those applicants?" And so that in my case, 499 00:31:22,037 --> 00:31:25,805 has worked on, on a few occasions where you know, making it known widely in my 500 00:31:25,805 --> 00:31:30,421 network that I was recruiting led to people, say to prospective applicants, 501 00:31:30,679 --> 00:31:34,126 "Look, I don't have a position, but I just heard that Jan has some positions. 502 00:31:34,359 --> 00:31:39,693 And i- if you want to send him an email, here's his email address." And 503 00:31:39,698 --> 00:31:41,413 so that, that's one way of doing it. 504 00:31:41,639 --> 00:31:45,198 And th- there are m- many others that people can pursue. 505 00:31:45,198 --> 00:31:48,103 And just make it known widely that you're recruiting. 506 00:31:49,744 --> 00:31:54,604 And looking back those early days of early years of your PI, what 507 00:31:54,604 --> 00:31:58,245 would you do differently, and what advice would you give someone 508 00:31:58,344 --> 00:32:00,149 starting their own group today? 509 00:32:00,876 --> 00:32:04,883 Yes, I think reflecting one thing I realized is that in the first few 510 00:32:04,883 --> 00:32:10,363 years I sometimes felt that people in administration or in, in support staff 511 00:32:10,650 --> 00:32:15,994 were, the enemy trying to stop me from doing what I wanted to do by not approving 512 00:32:16,405 --> 00:32:21,265 a, a certain document that I sent them or requesting extensive changes to to 513 00:32:21,285 --> 00:32:23,233 health and safety forms or other things. 514 00:32:23,234 --> 00:32:27,817 And I think in the first few years, I a bit saw, saw, the, those, those 515 00:32:27,824 --> 00:32:31,285 members of the university as my opponents that I had to, to… I 516 00:32:31,285 --> 00:32:35,635 had to win and get my way of getting everything approved the way I wanted it. 517 00:32:35,644 --> 00:32:40,055 And I think that attitude didn't serve me i- in that everyone's doing their 518 00:32:40,055 --> 00:32:42,217 job, and has a different perspective. 519 00:32:42,221 --> 00:32:46,255 And I think it's much better to try with rather than against support 520 00:32:46,258 --> 00:32:52,178 staff and to, establish good relation, working relationships with support 521 00:32:52,182 --> 00:32:56,253 staff, for example, the health and safety office or in other offices 522 00:32:56,253 --> 00:33:00,182 where people approve study protocols or other things you're doing. 523 00:33:00,432 --> 00:33:04,812 And I think, I also realized that sending long-winded emails about these things 524 00:33:04,814 --> 00:33:09,363 is sometimes not helping because the support staff often can speak a slightly 525 00:33:09,364 --> 00:33:10,975 different language to the scientists. 526 00:33:10,987 --> 00:33:15,952 And it's much easier to call them up on Teams and say, "Have-- You've got five 527 00:33:15,953 --> 00:33:20,663 minutes to just talk this through," and to to do it in a very nice personal way. 528 00:33:20,909 --> 00:33:23,851 And I think that, that makes the whole process more pleasant for everyone 529 00:33:23,851 --> 00:33:28,257 involved, and I think is also probably in the end the better strategy to to get 530 00:33:28,257 --> 00:33:31,845 to the point where y-you're in a good position to do the work that you wanna do. 531 00:33:31,897 --> 00:33:35,859 I think I… The mistake I made was that I saw some of the professional support 532 00:33:35,863 --> 00:33:40,870 staff more as the opponents rather than someone that I w-would work together with. 533 00:33:40,908 --> 00:33:41,495 And yeah. 534 00:33:41,548 --> 00:33:45,477 That that that's one of the things I would advise people f-from own experience. 535 00:33:46,496 --> 00:33:50,118 I'm very glad that you brought this up because that resonates a lot with 536 00:33:50,118 --> 00:33:54,685 me, and I feel that it is actually a rather a common trait among perhaps 537 00:33:54,686 --> 00:33:57,438 a good fraction of yeah, junior PIs. 538 00:33:58,497 --> 00:34:04,351 So your scientific career and much of your earlier career advice 539 00:34:04,821 --> 00:34:07,572 predated generative AI revolution. 540 00:34:08,530 --> 00:34:13,753 What do you think AI will fundamentally change about scientific careers, 541 00:34:13,795 --> 00:34:15,396 and what will remain important? 542 00:34:17,272 --> 00:34:22,838 I think in terms of career a-advice that, that I give, I think all the 543 00:34:22,846 --> 00:34:26,265 fundamental points w-will remain in place. 544 00:34:26,292 --> 00:34:29,004 That you need to be really enthusiastic about what you do, you 545 00:34:29,005 --> 00:34:31,460 need to be proactive e-e-et cetera. 546 00:34:31,728 --> 00:34:36,676 But I think one thing where the large language models are really 547 00:34:36,676 --> 00:34:39,953 making it a lot easier these days for people is to get information. 548 00:34:40,358 --> 00:34:44,303 And one piece of advice that I sometimes give is that if you know 549 00:34:44,303 --> 00:34:47,562 that you want an academic career path if you choose the lab that you do 550 00:34:47,562 --> 00:34:51,753 as a postdoc find out what previous postdocs from that lab are doing now. 551 00:34:51,816 --> 00:34:56,106 And if this lab has got a number of alumni that are now PIs in their own 552 00:34:56,106 --> 00:35:00,226 right, then probably, that's a good environment to develop a career as a PI. 553 00:35:00,498 --> 00:35:05,756 And so I think it's much easier now to ask an AI tool to make a list of 554 00:35:05,774 --> 00:35:09,901 alumni of this lab and what their, next destinations were, et cetera. 555 00:35:10,147 --> 00:35:13,689 And th-this had to be done one by one, going through papers then 556 00:35:13,693 --> 00:35:17,147 Googling names, et cetera, i-in the past, which is what I did. 557 00:35:17,395 --> 00:35:21,920 And I think it's become much easier to get information and to find things out about 558 00:35:21,926 --> 00:35:27,256 people by, by using AI tools as, glorified search engines in in, in some way. 559 00:35:27,711 --> 00:35:31,165 So I think yeah, th-that's in terms of career, o-one thing 560 00:35:31,165 --> 00:35:32,822 that's become easier, I think. 561 00:35:33,322 --> 00:35:38,814 And maybe generally getting information about funding sources, et cetera. 562 00:35:38,856 --> 00:35:40,162 This has become easier. 563 00:35:41,132 --> 00:35:41,437 Yeah. 564 00:35:41,447 --> 00:35:45,489 That again resonates with me quite a lot because I remember my own 565 00:35:45,541 --> 00:35:47,248 transition and my own interview. 566 00:35:47,253 --> 00:35:52,391 Because it was a transition from taking a more immunologically intense post. 567 00:35:52,915 --> 00:35:59,651 So what I did, I collected all the abstracts or webpage description of PIs, 568 00:35:59,689 --> 00:36:01,822 and at the time there wasn't any AI. 569 00:36:01,836 --> 00:36:06,067 So I did a little bit of computational modeling to find out the enrichment 570 00:36:06,102 --> 00:36:07,889 of common words that they come out. 571 00:36:07,889 --> 00:36:07,899 Yeah. 572 00:36:07,899 --> 00:36:09,434 Or which techniques they used. 573 00:36:09,680 --> 00:36:12,062 To at least know about those techniques. 574 00:36:12,170 --> 00:36:12,454 Yeah. 575 00:36:13,374 --> 00:36:17,607 now that we talk about AI, let me give you a hypothetical scenario. 576 00:36:18,285 --> 00:36:21,566 So imagine you advertise for a postdoc position. 577 00:36:21,926 --> 00:36:28,657 And an AI company approaches you and tells you that they will be basically 578 00:36:28,689 --> 00:36:34,722 offering you a AI postdoc capable of doing 90% of the job description 579 00:36:35,222 --> 00:36:40,800 with perhaps 10% of the total cost that you offer for that position. 580 00:36:41,351 --> 00:36:43,713 Will you be taking that or not? 581 00:36:45,118 --> 00:36:48,528 In, in our research group, we do, do wet lab experimentation. 582 00:36:48,535 --> 00:36:52,127 So I think that offer would have to come with a robot that that 583 00:36:52,143 --> 00:36:54,003 actually does experiments for us. 584 00:36:54,237 --> 00:36:55,587 But I think the, the answer is no. 585 00:36:55,588 --> 00:37:00,211 I wouldn't because I think the, the, the personal interaction i- is 586 00:37:00,214 --> 00:37:04,308 something that makes science enjoyable for me and working together with smart 587 00:37:04,340 --> 00:37:09,682 people a- and discussing science a- and developing ideas together and 588 00:37:09,682 --> 00:37:11,912 seeing people grow in the process. 589 00:37:11,990 --> 00:37:13,410 That, that's really important to me. 590 00:37:13,410 --> 00:37:18,246 And even if you had the, the robot postdoc programmed by an AI 591 00:37:18,248 --> 00:37:23,554 algorithm I I don't think I, I would ever employ su- such a postdoc. 592 00:37:23,630 --> 00:37:27,695 Now, that's not to say that I'm against doing everything- … old school manually. 593 00:37:27,888 --> 00:37:32,237 If things can be automated and repetitive tasks can be performed by 594 00:37:32,287 --> 00:37:37,206 robots or robotic equipment w- with AI dr- programming it and driving 595 00:37:37,208 --> 00:37:39,776 it, then, I would be all, all for it. 596 00:37:40,156 --> 00:37:43,289 But I don't think it can ever replace a, a PhD student or a 597 00:37:43,289 --> 00:37:45,296 research assistant or a postdoc. 598 00:37:45,631 --> 00:37:51,626 Because I think the i- innovation, the ability of connecting previously 599 00:37:51,626 --> 00:37:56,746 unconnected thoughts that is really what w- will result in discoveries. 600 00:37:56,809 --> 00:38:01,061 And with my admittedly limited understanding of AI I'm I don't 601 00:38:01,067 --> 00:38:03,680 see it's it's doing that the same way humans are doing it. 602 00:38:04,314 --> 00:38:05,386 That, that's fair enough. 603 00:38:05,395 --> 00:38:09,424 And that actually brings me to my next question regarding AI. 604 00:38:09,962 --> 00:38:14,035 So in that regard, do you worry that increasing reliance on 605 00:38:14,125 --> 00:38:19,070 AI could undermine critical thinking and scientific curiosity? 606 00:38:19,775 --> 00:38:24,673 If you were starting your PhD today, what skills would you prioritize 607 00:38:24,675 --> 00:38:27,274 to remain a valuable scientist? 608 00:38:30,220 --> 00:38:34,550 Yeah, and I think being able to do experiments and to understand 609 00:38:34,656 --> 00:38:36,996 protocols and is really important. 610 00:38:37,263 --> 00:38:40,028 And I'm worried that maybe some of that knowledge might 611 00:38:40,029 --> 00:38:41,295 be disappearing a little bit. 612 00:38:41,577 --> 00:38:45,458 And I think that's not so much a problem as long as all the protocols work fine. 613 00:38:45,732 --> 00:38:49,733 But the moment that there is some problem and, we all know that troubleshooting 614 00:38:49,749 --> 00:38:52,810 and optimizing protocols is quite a routine thing of working in a, 615 00:38:53,343 --> 00:38:55,198 in, in a biomedical research lab. 616 00:38:55,551 --> 00:38:59,267 Then I think that's where I see the, the issue that if there's an over-reliance 617 00:38:59,303 --> 00:39:03,287 on AI tools writing protocols, and then just cooking them like, like a 618 00:39:03,287 --> 00:39:09,346 recipe without really understanding what every buffer, what every step i- 619 00:39:09,348 --> 00:39:13,954 is doing in a biochemical sense then it becomes very hard to, to troubleshoot. 620 00:39:14,279 --> 00:39:18,348 And and I think, Being an expert and having the deep technical 621 00:39:18,352 --> 00:39:22,276 understanding even of seemingly simple techniques such as Western blot, 622 00:39:22,283 --> 00:39:24,502 for example, i- is really important. 623 00:39:24,534 --> 00:39:28,825 And i- it's something that, that we need to continue training people a- 624 00:39:28,825 --> 00:39:32,565 and that that if we lose that skill, I think it, it could be it could be 625 00:39:32,565 --> 00:39:37,032 dangerous for the ability of biomedical research to do certain things. 626 00:39:38,584 --> 00:39:38,818 Sure. 627 00:39:38,862 --> 00:39:43,171 And for the last few minutes of this conversation, I would like to, more 628 00:39:43,179 --> 00:39:47,868 generally look into what does it really take to succeed in science. 629 00:39:47,882 --> 00:39:52,200 And in that regard- … we often talk about intelligence and hard work as 630 00:39:52,232 --> 00:39:54,967 the foundations of scientific success. 631 00:39:55,888 --> 00:39:59,780 But how important are mentorship, environment, 632 00:39:59,891 --> 00:40:02,813 timing, and simply being lucky? 633 00:40:03,972 --> 00:40:06,891 I think all of these, these factors are important. 634 00:40:07,332 --> 00:40:11,727 I think working with the right people at the right time and the right place 635 00:40:11,729 --> 00:40:13,378 and the right environment is important. 636 00:40:13,752 --> 00:40:18,640 And I think very carefully thinking about next career steps i- is a good 637 00:40:18,666 --> 00:40:24,468 way of ensuring to end up in a place that's supportive a- and that where 638 00:40:24,505 --> 00:40:27,374 you get mentoring, which I think is really important, particularly 639 00:40:27,633 --> 00:40:30,819 if there are these unwritten rules that we touched upon earlier where 640 00:40:30,821 --> 00:40:34,052 people can, tell you a little bit how things work if it's not obvious. 641 00:40:34,373 --> 00:40:38,513 And I also wanted to comment on the point of luck because I often hear that people 642 00:40:38,526 --> 00:40:42,758 say, "Oh, I just was lucky," or, "This person's only where they are because they 643 00:40:42,758 --> 00:40:48,222 were lucky." And I think in part that's… there is some truth to that because we 644 00:40:48,222 --> 00:40:53,506 are, Often working to either verify or falsify an hypothesis that we start out 645 00:40:53,516 --> 00:40:58,278 with, and a, a falsified hypothesis is often not very interesting to the wider 646 00:40:58,280 --> 00:41:03,705 community, and doesn't classify as much as a discovery as a verified hypothesis. 647 00:41:04,007 --> 00:41:07,045 And w-we do experiments 'cause we don't know w-whether the 648 00:41:07,047 --> 00:41:08,304 hypothesis is true or not. 649 00:41:08,618 --> 00:41:12,901 A-and sometimes we might have a streak of luck in that many of the hypotheses 650 00:41:12,907 --> 00:41:18,150 are true, and that then builds up to a, a discovery that, that is notable. 651 00:41:18,434 --> 00:41:21,400 But, the thing to say here is that I think luck is also something 652 00:41:21,400 --> 00:41:23,204 that one can work towards to. 653 00:41:23,502 --> 00:41:28,993 I-i-if if it's a bit like rolling the dice if you roll it multiple times, 654 00:41:29,060 --> 00:41:32,658 then you're more likely to get a six if that's the number you're after. 655 00:41:32,973 --> 00:41:37,364 And I think trying hard, trying multiple times, not giving up reframing 656 00:41:37,375 --> 00:41:41,155 the hypothesis and the question and trying again i-is important. 657 00:41:41,182 --> 00:41:45,751 And yes luck is a factor, and unfortunately some really talented 658 00:41:45,751 --> 00:41:50,355 people get lucky… u-unlucky multiple times and maybe drop out of science. 659 00:41:50,473 --> 00:41:56,596 But I think b-being innovative, having good ideas, being enthusiastic and trying 660 00:41:56,600 --> 00:42:02,237 hard is is will create the conditions in which luck will eventually present itself. 661 00:42:02,837 --> 00:42:07,491 And of course also if you get lucky a-and there are opportunities, 662 00:42:07,492 --> 00:42:10,638 often opportunities are time limited because there might be other people 663 00:42:10,638 --> 00:42:13,697 in the field that might be doing similar research, and they might 664 00:42:13,699 --> 00:42:15,537 have been asking similar hypotheses. 665 00:42:15,541 --> 00:42:19,608 And, if you've if you strike gold in a research project then it 666 00:42:19,608 --> 00:42:23,921 also, you need to realize that and a-and then capitalize on it. 667 00:42:23,964 --> 00:42:27,144 And so it's not only being lucky, but also when you get lucky to 668 00:42:27,145 --> 00:42:28,765 make the most out of that luck. 669 00:42:29,572 --> 00:42:29,746 Yeah. 670 00:42:29,750 --> 00:42:33,753 That's that reminds me an expression in my home language something that 671 00:42:33,968 --> 00:42:39,086 kind of translates into if you need to be lucky, y- you need to 672 00:42:39,102 --> 00:42:40,616 make the foundations for the luck. 673 00:42:40,628 --> 00:42:40,806 Yeah. 674 00:42:40,806 --> 00:42:41,501 Something along those lines. 675 00:42:41,766 --> 00:42:41,998 Yeah. 676 00:42:41,998 --> 00:42:44,468 That's precisely y- what I was trying to say. 677 00:42:44,474 --> 00:42:46,522 Building the foundations for being lucky. 678 00:42:46,710 --> 00:42:46,972 Yeah, exactly. 679 00:42:46,972 --> 00:42:48,096 I- it is important. 680 00:42:48,927 --> 00:42:49,135 Yeah. 681 00:42:49,173 --> 00:42:53,753 And another very important basically part of our scientific career that 682 00:42:53,754 --> 00:42:58,690 I would like to hear your advice in particular for young people, 683 00:42:58,727 --> 00:43:00,834 PhD students, or early postdocs. 684 00:43:00,938 --> 00:43:04,648 That is rejections and failures that are almost inevitable 685 00:43:04,695 --> 00:43:05,711 part of- Yeah … science. 686 00:43:06,452 --> 00:43:10,221 How should young scientists deal with them, and what have 687 00:43:10,222 --> 00:43:12,023 your own experience taught you? 688 00:43:13,049 --> 00:43:13,279 Yeah. 689 00:43:13,329 --> 00:43:16,451 I-I-- rejections are a normal part of everyone's career. 690 00:43:16,503 --> 00:43:19,613 Grant applications get rejected, manuscripts get rejected, 691 00:43:20,070 --> 00:43:21,487 applications get rejected. 692 00:43:21,530 --> 00:43:27,448 And so I think wh-when that happens, it it is a bit of a shock to the system, and it 693 00:43:27,448 --> 00:43:29,883 still is for me e-every time it happens. 694 00:43:30,218 --> 00:43:34,160 But I think it's important to when you get a rejection is to distance yourself from 695 00:43:34,160 --> 00:43:36,399 it mentally as, as quickly as possible. 696 00:43:36,644 --> 00:43:39,548 I do something that's perhaps slightly silly, but whenever I get 697 00:43:39,549 --> 00:43:43,259 a rejection i-in my inbox, I get an email saying, "Unfortunately, your 698 00:43:43,259 --> 00:43:47,123 grant couldn't be funded," then I will very quickly take that email and 699 00:43:47,124 --> 00:43:49,130 put it into a subfolder in my inbox. 700 00:43:49,461 --> 00:43:53,371 I've got, folders for grants and then subfolders for specific applications. 701 00:43:53,371 --> 00:43:56,166 So that email quickly goes into the subfolder, so I don't have 702 00:43:56,169 --> 00:43:57,657 to see it in my inbox anymore. 703 00:43:57,949 --> 00:44:01,216 And then I usually take a day or so to cool down and then I come 704 00:44:01,225 --> 00:44:05,480 back and read that email and see if there's any useful feedback. 705 00:44:05,795 --> 00:44:08,954 Often, unfortunately, there isn't and they just tell you that there were 706 00:44:08,954 --> 00:44:11,713 so many that they couldn't fund you, and, that's obviously not helping. 707 00:44:12,012 --> 00:44:16,947 And and then just to to move on and to mentally compartmentalize it and try 708 00:44:16,949 --> 00:44:19,160 and ig-ignore it as much as you can. 709 00:44:19,160 --> 00:44:24,733 That's that's my strategy coupled with an awareness that the most 710 00:44:24,733 --> 00:44:28,332 famous scientist that you can think of, they will have many grants and 711 00:44:28,333 --> 00:44:30,603 papers rejected over their career. 712 00:44:30,623 --> 00:44:35,260 And success rates are low, and it is a part of the job, and it is 713 00:44:35,261 --> 00:44:40,375 normal and not not a, a vote of of no confidence in, in, in a person. 714 00:44:40,801 --> 00:44:42,905 And it shouldn't be seen as as one. 715 00:44:43,621 --> 00:44:46,095 I think it, it does take some time to develop a thick skin. 716 00:44:46,402 --> 00:44:51,184 But it just, to tell yourself that it is normal whi-which it is and and that it 717 00:44:51,186 --> 00:44:56,763 often takes multiple tries often four or five times until people get get a grant. 718 00:44:56,813 --> 00:45:01,030 I know some very famous people in my field who eventually, after trying 719 00:45:01,040 --> 00:45:04,526 multiple times, got that grant that they wanted, but it took three or 720 00:45:04,528 --> 00:45:07,623 four unsuccessful applications to get to to eventually getting it. 721 00:45:07,626 --> 00:45:08,436 So that's normal. 722 00:45:09,969 --> 00:45:15,033 And finally, is becoming a PI or a full professor necessarily the right 723 00:45:15,061 --> 00:45:18,118 definition of success in science? 724 00:45:18,950 --> 00:45:21,613 No, I think absolutely not. 725 00:45:21,653 --> 00:45:24,757 I disagree with that qui- quite fundamentally. 726 00:45:24,757 --> 00:45:31,015 I think if someone works as a research technician and does some really good 727 00:45:31,455 --> 00:45:35,939 work running a specific essay or running a specific machine or supporting a, 728 00:45:35,999 --> 00:45:39,898 a piece of work in another way, then that person is as successful o- of 729 00:45:39,898 --> 00:45:44,943 a scientist a- as the sort of big professor that is the corresponding 730 00:45:44,943 --> 00:45:46,494 author of many important papers 731 00:45:46,941 --> 00:45:52,303 So I think it, it it is really lots of people that make research successful. 732 00:45:53,468 --> 00:45:58,040 S- and also there's lots of really good research outside of academia 733 00:45:58,274 --> 00:46:02,060 where people aren't professors and PIs but have other job titles. 734 00:46:02,089 --> 00:46:05,617 And there, there's no worse or better in, in one or another sector. 735 00:46:05,928 --> 00:46:10,140 So I think getting to the stage of a professor is what you want to get to if 736 00:46:10,141 --> 00:46:15,585 you want to do independent research and direct a team and do, do so in academia. 737 00:46:15,913 --> 00:46:19,992 And yes, it does signify success, but there are many other routes to being 738 00:46:19,992 --> 00:46:22,025 a successful scientist than that. 739 00:46:23,158 --> 00:46:23,347 Yeah. 740 00:46:23,686 --> 00:46:29,525 Although you basically spoke from different angles but as my final question- 741 00:46:29,525 --> 00:46:36,495 … I would like to know if you could go back and give one piece of advice to 742 00:46:36,622 --> 00:46:39,678 your younger self, what would it be? 743 00:46:43,450 --> 00:46:48,791 It's perhaps that item about working with people rather than against people. 744 00:46:49,117 --> 00:46:52,802 I think that, that would probably be it. 745 00:46:52,927 --> 00:46:53,579 And yeah. 746 00:46:53,581 --> 00:46:57,838 Em- embrace rather than oppose if there's difficulties. 747 00:46:59,318 --> 00:47:02,372 Jan, has been there anything that you would like to discuss but I 748 00:47:02,377 --> 00:47:04,357 have actually missed out to ask? 749 00:47:05,130 --> 00:47:10,184 I think we've really gone through a, a lot of m- material in, in the last hour or so. 750 00:47:10,552 --> 00:47:15,354 I'm just trying to think whether there's a major issue that we w- we haven't covered. 751 00:47:15,354 --> 00:47:16,871 But I actually I don't think so. 752 00:47:17,380 --> 00:47:20,778 I think we … It's been a, a very comprehensive discussion. 753 00:47:21,380 --> 00:47:21,541 Yeah. 754 00:47:21,544 --> 00:47:24,583 In that case thank you so much again for your time. 755 00:47:24,584 --> 00:47:30,225 I really appreciate your willingness to share this advice and experience 756 00:47:30,269 --> 00:47:32,019 with me and with my audience. 757 00:47:32,629 --> 00:47:37,036 I hope this discussion was helpful and interesting to the audience, 758 00:47:37,073 --> 00:47:39,329 and I hope to see you all next time. 759 00:47:40,241 --> 00:47:40,501 Great. 760 00:47:40,506 --> 00:47:41,629 Thanks for having me, Hashem.