Lessons Learned

The NAVBO Education Committee has asked some junior faculty to share their experiences during the transition from trainee to first independent post. We hope that their accounts of challenges confronted, dilemmas dissected, and lessons learned will help smooth your career path.

Ziqing Liu, Medical College of Wisconsin

Lessons Learned
by Ziqing Liu, Medical College of Wisconsin

My name is Ziqing Liu, and I am an Assistant Professor in the Department of Physiology at the Medical College of Wisconsin. I earned my PhD from Indiana University, followed by two postdoctoral positions at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill with Dr. Li Qian and Dr. Victoria Bautch. In October 2022, I started my own lab here in Milwaukee. I am truly grateful to the NAVBO Education Committee for the opportunity to share my lessons learned during the past two years as a junior faculty. I've also included some of my current thoughts and questions. I believe that sometimes questions are more important than answers, because while your answers might differ from mine, we likely share similar questions.

Finance

As a postdoc, I thought science was the most important thing in a faculty career—and of course, it is. But there are other crucial elements to consider, such as understanding and preparing budgets for grants. Running a lab is similar to running a startup. The main difference is that as faculty, we serve as the CEO, COO, CTO, HR, and CFO all in one. I had no idea how naïve I was about budgeting until I submitted my first grant. If you’re transitioning from a postdoc position, I encourage you to seek out every opportunity to learn about lab management, particularly finance and administration. These skills are often overlooked in postdoc training, but they are essential once you become independent.

Hiring & Management

In today’s job market, where great postdocs are hard to find—even for established PIs—junior faculty like myself sometimes need to be patient and realistic. Here are a few questions I asked myself before starting my lab. I had clear answers for all of them at the time, but upon reflection, some of those answers have already changed.

1. Technician or postdoc? Technicians can often be hired more quickly (though experienced ones are harder to find), but securing a good postdoc usually takes much longer. Both roles have their pros and cons for a new lab.

2. Should I hire a lab manager? If yes, should I ask them to focus solely on managing the lab and providing technical support, or should they also lead a project simultaneously?

3. Should I still do bench work ("super-postdoc") or let go of the bench once I’ve trained my founding members?

4. How quickly do I want to expand my lab, and how large do I want it to grow if grant funding and other factors go well? Managing a team of 4 is very different from managing a team of 8.

Project Management

As a PI, you’ll likely have multiple projects running in parallel (you need a few different projects for grant applications). Initially, I thought prioritizing projects was a purely scientific decision. Of course, I was naïve. The answer depends not only on the scientific merits of the project, but also on the people driving those projects—how motivated they are and where their interests lie. Assigning the right project to the right person is one of the most challenging aspects of being a PI. To date, I haven’t found a perfect solution, and it often comes down to trial and error.

Grants

If you attend any academic meeting these days, you’ll hear one topic on repeat: grants. Grants, grants, and more grants. Here are some of the questions I’ve been asking myself:

1. Should I focus solely on science and use my startup funds to get the work done first, or should I apply for grants as soon as possible?

2. How many grants should I submit per year? One, two, or eight?

3. When should I submit my first R01? Should I submit one or two in the same cycle?

4. How much money is enough? Will I ever have a break from this process?

After speaking with many colleagues and mentors, a consensus has emerged under the current funding climate: apply early, keep writing, don’t stop, and submit two grants in the same cycle if you can. Encourage everyone in your lab to submit as well to increase the chances of success. I know this may sound desperate, but if you choose to stay in academia, this is the reality. One of my mentors, a well-established investigator, once told me he felt sorry for new faculty like me due to the challenging funding landscape compared to when he started 30 years ago. Despite the difficulties, I remain hopeful (and I believe you should be too if science is where you belong). Over the past two years, I submitted nine foundational and internal pilot grants (many of which were recycled and short), and in October, I submitted my first R01—two years after starting my position. I wish I could do more, but I’m content with what I’ve achieved so far.

Am I Happy with My Faculty Life?

I considered writing about other topics for the conclusion, such as "Safe vs. Risky Projects" or "How to Motivate Trainees." But in the end, I decided to reflect on a more fundamental question that I believe is crucial for anyone embarking on this challenging, stressful career. In response to this routine mental health check-in question, my answer is “Yes, I am happy and satisfied.”

We often hear junior faculty complain about many aspects of academia; I, too, share my frustrations with colleagues. But the majority of us genuinely enjoy our faculty lives. We have the freedom to work on virtually any scientific question that interests us, and we are passionate about what we do. This freedom was the reason I chose to pursue a faculty position in the first place. Yes, that freedom comes at the price of endless grant writing, constant learning about budgeting and management, and the inevitable setbacks. But I am still happy. I enjoy my job, especially when my student finally gets a challenging 80-page protocol to work, when I catch up with an old friend at a conference, or when I take a break from grant writing to spend an afternoon with my children at the zoo.

My PhD mentor once told me that to stay in science, you must be optimistic, because science is 99% failure. I completely agree with him, and this optimism is something I share with my mentors and colleagues. To anyone reading this blog, I wish you good luck with grants, papers, and everything in between. I look forward to meeting you at NAVBO 2025!

Guizhen Zhao, University of Houston

Lessons Learned
by Guizhen Zhao, University of Houston

My name is Guizhen Zhao, and I am an Assistant Professor in the Department of Pharmacological and Pharmaceutical Sciences at the University of Houston College of Pharmacy (UH-COP). I came to UH-COP in July 2024 after an enriching postdoctoral experience and a rewarding year as junior faculty in Dr. Eugene Chen’s lab at the University of Michigan Medical School. The transition from dependent trainee to independent faculty is truly long, challenging and exciting. Throughout this journey, I have learned a lot from my mentors, collaborators, colleagues and administrator team about identifying research niche, recruitment, networking, and grant submission, etc. Although I started my own lab in a new state just two months ago, I’m happy to share some of the experiences and challenges I’ve faced. I appreciate NAVBO for the opportunity to share my lessons, and I hope they will benefit both trainees and junior faculty alike.

Identify your research niche early: I am incredibly grateful for and continue to benefit from, the insightful advice of my mentor, Dr. Eugene Chen, on establishing a unique research niche, even during my postdoctoral period. Developing a distinct research identity can greatly shape your career trajectory and make it easier to address a common faculty interview question: ‘How will you distinguish yourself and your research from your mentor?’ To do so, focus on new trends and unanswered questions in your field, and reflect on what excites you most in your current work. Mentors, with their broad perspective, can help you identify areas where your skills fit into existing research without overlapping too much, guiding you toward underexplored avenues. Additionally, integrating concepts from different fields can lead to innovative approaches, helping your work stand out and further establishing your unique research niche.

Continue writing and applying funding: Stay informed about funding opportunities relevant to your research. Securing funding is the key for transitioning to independence and successfully running a lab. In addition to NIH funding, there are many other funding resources, like the American Heart Association-Career Development Award (AHA-CDA), state and institute internal grants available to early investigators. Throughout my career, I have consistently written and applied for fellowship and funding opportunities for which I quality. As a result, I was awarded an AHA-postdoctoral fellowship, received a fundable score on my NIH-K99 application and secured funding from AHA-CDA on my first attempt. These small grants are excellent for practice and experience. After my promotion to faculty at the University of Michigan, I submitted two R01 applications, both at their first submission. One was funded without the benefit of the 10 percentile points for early-stage investigator (ESI), and the other was close to the payline. Although I did not utilize this advantage, I recommend that other junior faculty submit two or more R01 applications in the same cycle to benefit from ESI review. Additionally, seek opportunities to serve on study sections when possible.

Start early to set up your lab: Preparing a detailed budget will help you during negotiations. Once you accept your job offer, start drafting IACUC, IRB, IBC protocols, initiating grant and material transfers, and ordering computers and equipment as early as possible before arriving at your new institution. It’s also essential to get acquainted with research protocol coordinators, grants administrators, and department administrators, and to treat them as key contacts in this process. It is worth asking your administrative staffs and colleagues, particularly the early-stage faculty, in the new institution for advice on recruitment posting and contracted vendors. You can contact the HR at the new institution to post recruitment ads and interview candidates before arriving but be careful to staff your lab with individuals who are committed to staying for at least two years and show a strong passion for your research topics.

Expand your collaborative network: Actively engaging with the scientific communities and establishing a visible presence can foster connections and expand your collaborative network. Joining UH-COP has made me extremely excited to work with people with extensive expertise in pharmacology, pharmaceutics and medicinal chemistry. Shortly after arriving, I was lucky to attend my department’s research symposium and serve as a judge for the poster presentations. This experience allowed me to quickly learn about ongoing research and explore potential collaborative projects. Moreover, exposing yourself in the new faculty orientation can help you connect with other faculty members at a similar career stage, providing further opportunities for interdisciplinary collaborations.

Establishing a new lab and transitioning into an independent faculty position is an exciting and challenging endeavor. Remember, the journey is a continuous learning process. Embrace the challenges, remain patient and continuously strive to improve and innovate. I hope my experiences will be helpful to both trainees and junior faculty as they navigate their own paths.

Laura Pillay, Western Washington University

Lessons Learned
by Laura Pillay, Western Washington University

My name is Laura Pillay. I joined the Biology Department at Western Washington University as an Assistant Professor in September 2022. Here are some lessons that I have learned in my first few years as junior faculty at a Primarily Undergraduate Institution (PUI):

Community – When choosing a faculty position, it is important to consider who you will be working with. My new colleagues and mentors in the Biology Department at WWU are generous with their limited time and readily share information, advice, equipment, and teaching materials. It is clear that they want me to succeed in my new role – and their support has been invaluable for setting up a research program and learning how to navigate my new administrative and service duties.

Find a group of faculty friends to hang out with! Even though I am frequently surrounded by students at work, I still sometimes feel lonely. The company (and support) of people who understand what I am going through provides me with a sense of belonging and helps to combat stress.

Time Management – Perfectionist tendencies helped me get to where I am today. However, they consume time and energy that I no longer have. I initially spent far too much time on course preparation and teaching, and constantly felt burned out and exhausted. I am now begrudgingly learning to let things be “good enough.” I find it useful to block off time for each task on my calendar to make sure that I accomplish it in a reasonable timeframe.

Admittedly, I am still struggling to achieve a healthy work-life balance. I frequently work too-long hours and feel guilty for not spending more time with my family. I also find myself constantly thinking about work on my rare days off. To quiet my “work brain,” I have found it useful to participate in activities that require significant focus (e.g., playing on a co-ed soccer team with my husband and learning how to skateboard with my daughter).

Mentoring – My research team is made up entirely of MSc and undergraduate students. Prior to joining my lab, most of my trainees had little-to-no lab experience. I have learned that this is not necessarily a bad thing; students without previous training have not been taught improper techniques and do not come with bad habits. However, training inexperienced students can also be extremely time consuming. I have learned to adjust my expectations – and to accept that the pace of research in my new lab is going to be slower than I had originally anticipated. I am still struggling to establish a balance between i) ensuring that all trainees accomplish their research objectives in timely fashion, and ii) giving my students the freedom to make mistakes, and to learn from them.

I naively assumed that the possibility of making exciting new scientific discoveries or of obtaining authorship on a published manuscript would be enough to motivate any student researcher. I have now learned that the definition of “success” is very different for different people, and that there is no “one size fits all” approach to mentorship. I am a more effective mentor when I tailor my approach to bring out the best in each one of my trainees. I have also learned that being flexible and accommodating to diverse needs and situations (when feasible) can have a tremendous positive impact on student success. My expectations are now more realistic, and I have learned to be much more thoughtful, strategic, and selective when adding new members to my research group.

Project Management – When I started my research program, I initially took on too many student researchers and too many projects all at once. I gave each undergraduate student their own mini project, which in retrospect was a terrible idea. I should have focused all my trainees’ efforts on a single project with more immediate gains (i.e., to be completed and published in a short timeframe.) With a full courseload, most undergraduates cannot spend long hours in the lab each week, and having a heavy teaching load makes it difficult for me to effectively manage several different undergraduate projects all at once. Moving forward, I plan to organize my student researchers in teams that will work collaboratively together to accomplish a small portion of a larger project.

Coda – After nearly two years, I am still learning how to navigate my new faculty position. I find it incredibly rewarding whenever my students grasp a challenging new concept in class, successfully master a new technique in the lab, and especially when an experiment works! Student success feels like my success! These small yet significant moments make this challenging job worth it.

Cristina Espinosa-Diez, Wayne State University

Lessons Learned
by Cristina Espinosa-Diez, Wayne State University

My name is Cristina Espinosa-Diez, and I am an Assistant Professor at the Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics and the Department of Physiology at Wayne State University. I earned my PhD from Universidad Complutense de Madrid in Spain. Following that, I moved to the US, where I completed my first postdoctoral fellowship at Oregon Health & Science University and my second at the University of Pittsburgh. In October 2023, I began my independent faculty position.

I am immensely grateful to the NAVBO Education Committee for the opportunity to share my thoughts and lessons learned during these initial months. My journey as a principal investigator has deepened my understanding and increased my admiration for my mentors. I have always respected Dr. Delphine Gomez, Dr. Sudarshan Anand, and Dr. Santiago Lamas, but this experience has elevated my appreciation for their guidance and contributions to my professional growth. I want to dedicate these lessons learned to them.

It is lonely, but you are not alone: One of the most unexpected things nobody warned me about was how lonely I felt during my first days on the job. Coming from a lively lab where we were always chatting and helping each other to an empty office and lab space was quite dramatic, and I was unprepared for it. I felt really sad. Being very social, suddenly finding myself alone without knowing exactly what I had to do felt strange. I felt ashamed for the first few weeks and didn’t talk to anyone about it except my partner. I didn’t want to admit that I didn’t like the job I had worked so hard to get and was so excited to start. One of my best friends, Judit, had started her lab just a month before me. After a couple of weeks, she reached out to me, and we scheduled a Zoom call. We started chatting, and I realized we were both going through the same issues. We shared anecdotes, tips, and ideas and felt better afterward. After that, I felt more confident about contacting colleagues and sharing my experiences. Following Vascular Biology 2023 in Newport, some new PIs and I created an Early Career PI group chat that has been growing since. We reach out to each other with questions and support and to celebrate accomplishments! Since then, I have scheduled calls with friends, mentors, and colleagues on the same path, sometimes to ask for advice and others to vent. At my new institution, I have also been building a mentor and support network. Now, I have senior colleagues and fellow new PIs with whom I can reach out for scientific and career advice or go for lunch or coffee to decompress. So, although being in the office can still feel lonely at times, I do not feel alone anymore. Thank you, friends, for being there!

The dream team: Even before I started, I had a clear vision of how I wanted my team to be, how I wanted them to work together and support each other, and how key my first team members would be to building that vision. I wanted a dynamic, diverse, and inclusive lab where people felt safe. I aimed to bring together a group of motivated and enthusiastic individuals excited to learn and work together. I began advertising and recruiting months before I even moved. By interviewing many candidates for multiple positions, I developed a clearer wish list of what I wanted in the people joining my lab. I also tried to be very strategic in recruiting students. Knowing I was at a disadvantage as a new faculty member with an empty lab, I shamelessly approached potential PhD or MSc candidates who caught my attention and showed great potential. I expressed my interest in them rotating or joining the lab for a few months as research assistants, sharing with them the vision of the science and culture I aimed to cultivate. I feel very lucky to have found two wonderful individuals who are now part of my team. Finding the right postdoc candidate for the lab was extremely important, and I took it very seriously. During the hiring and recruiting process, I sought advice from peers and mentors, whose feedback was invaluable in identifying the first postdoc for the lab. I also learned the importance of calling references and asking specific questions about candidates to better evaluate their fit and gain insights into their strengths and weaknesses. I have also leveraged my past connections with Spanish Scientific Associations to bring students from a university in my hometown, Madrid, to pursue their final bachelor's thesis in my lab. The excitement, energy, and motivation these students brought have been contagious and fundamental to optimizing the tools we will use. If you have the opportunity to get involved with a program like this, I highly recommend it. It is a wonderful and rewarding experience.

Management and communication: In these few months, I have made mistakes in hiring personnel and had to give constructive feedback to the team. While I initially felt very good about my first hire, I quickly realized that this person might not be the right fit for the lab I wanted to build. I had to make a hard executive decision. When I couldn't make it work, I felt like a huge failure. However, after sharing this experience with my colleagues, I realized that this happens more often than I thought, and I made peace with myself. This was one of the toughest situations I faced, and no previous training had prepared me for it. Similarly, when things were not going as expected, I had to have conversations with team members individually. Although I felt slightly more prepared for this and had very good role models, it was still challenging. My approach was to set up expectations for each team member even before their first day in the lab and revisit them often in lab or individual meetings. This framework made it easier to discuss things that were not going according to plan. During these communications, it is also important to actively listen to what your team has to say, offer your support and help, and be willing to meet them in the middle to create a plan to make things work and move forward. Building trust and creating a safe space for your team to speak up and share their thoughts with you helps to reduce miscommunication and prevent small problems from growing bigger. However, it requires daily effort in your actions, choices, and communication, it is worth it.

Tools: Our lab manual is one of the best tools I have in the lab right now. My previous mentor had one, and a colleague, Ada Weinstock, shared hers with me before I started the lab, and I took many good ideas from them. I prepared mine while enrolled in the NIH-funded Compass program for early career faculty and received feedback from faculty. It is a living and growing document that collects all the essential information about working in our lab, our values and mission, and the expectations of each member, including myself. It also includes tips for working with me and onboarding information. It is incredibly helpful for both parties, as it provides a guide for enrolling new people and gives them an understanding of what our lab is about even before they join. We also use electronic notebooks (thanks again, Ada), and I am not going back to paper ones. They provide a very nice structure for updating notebooks daily, making sharing data and information easy, and keeping track of every lab activity. Although some people were skeptical initially, they have embraced it and are making the most of it. We have also combined it with a dry-erase physical notebook that we can scan, giving us the best of both worlds and reducing paper use.

In conclusion, my journey as a new principal investigator has been filled with unexpected challenges and rewarding experiences. Every step has been a learning opportunity, from navigating the initial loneliness and finding support among peers to assembling a dream team and implementing effective management and communication strategies. The tools and practices we have adopted have been instrumental in creating a productive and collaborative environment. I am grateful for the support and advice from my mentors, colleagues, and friends, which has been invaluable in these early stages. Moving forward, I am excited to continue growing personally and professionally, fostering a dynamic and inclusive lab, and contributing to the scientific community. Thank you to everyone who has been a part of this journey.

Kunzhe Dong, Augusta University

Lessons Learned
by Kunzhe Dong, Augusta University

My name is Kunzhe Dong and I am an Assistant Professor at the Immunology Center of Georgia, Augusta University. I earned my PhD in Animal Genetics from Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences in Beijing, China, in 2015. After a short-term postdoc training at a USDA laboratory in East Lansing, MI, I joined Dr. Jiliang Zhou’s lab at the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University in 2017. It was there that I discovered my passion for vascular biology and began my dream of establishing my own lab in the US. In 2023, I started my own lab in the newly funded Immunology Center of Georgia at Augusta University with the support of an AHA Career Development Award. While my transition physically moving from one building to another in the same campus is easier than many other new PIs who often relocate across states, the journey from a trainee to an independent researcher was no less challenging. Here are few lessons I have learned during my first year as a new PI.

Setting up the lab: 1) Start early: Get the ball rolling ASAP after accepting your job offer. You don’t have to wait until you are physically in your new lab. Start hiring lab personnel, drafting animal protocol, ordering the computers and equipment as early as you can prior to arriving in your new position. Keep in mind that the orders, especially for the large pieces of equipment, may take much longer time to arrive than expected. 2) Take advantage of the new-lab offers. Many vendors offer new-lab start-up programs for new labs that provide additional discounts on top of the university discounts. Talk to vendor reps to explore the programs; it will save you a significant amount of money. 3) Take used equipment. When I was about to start my new appointment, a lab in my neighboring center was moving and leaving behind plenty of useful items like scales, pipettes, tips, glassware, racks, and plates. I took many of these items and later on I realized they often came in handy when I urgently needed something small. It is worth asking your chairs, administrative staffs, or colleagues if there are any used items or equipment you can make use of. 4) Spend the money. Initially I was very cautious with my funds and hesitated to spend money on some expensive equipment and considered using equipment in other labs, even they are in different buildings. However, experiencing the inconvenience and inefficiency soon made me realize that it is wiser to invest than to save. So don’t be stingy when purchasing costly but essential equipment for your lab. These investments are worthwhile and will ultimately pay off.

Mentors and colleagues: 1) Mentorship: I am deeply grateful for the supportive mentors I had during my postdoc training, and I would not be where I am today as an Assistant Professor without their guidance. Luckily, my center assigns a primary mentor to each new junior faculty member, and I have also found another senior professor as my secondary mentor. We meet regularly to discuss my career, projects, and any challenges I face. I always find these interactions with my mentors incredibly beneficial. 2) Connect with peers: My center is a brand new center and recruits multiple new Assistant Professors in the first year. I have found it extremely helpful to engage with them who are at a similar career stage. We share experiences, excitement, stresses, and anxieties that come with being as a new PI, help each other to troubleshoot the issues we encounter in running the lab, and share protocols, ideas and resources. It is very helpful in easing the challenges of starting our new labs. 3) Make use of the department administrative support. Fortunately, we have a very experienced and professional administrative team in our center. They have been very helpful with my paperwork, hiring, ordering, dealing with various facilities, allowing my new lab to get up and running even when I had a lot of “unknowns”. 4) Don’t hesitate to reach out to your mentors, colleagues, and administrators for help whenever needed.

Lab personnel: My lab currently has one technician and one postdoc. Here is my personal experience with each. 1) Technician: recruiting an experienced technician is critical for expediating lab setup process. 2) Postdoc: When selecting postdoc candidates, I prioritize motivation and personality over specific background and skills. 3) Training lab personnel: I spent plenty of time working in the lab with my first postdoc to train him in almost everything like setting up and conducting experiments, cleaning up the bench, taking notes, organizing data and interpreting results. The side-by-side training helped him quickly get familiar with not just the experimental protocol, but also the background knowledge, my standards, and the lab ethics. It has proven that investing time in training the first postdoc is worthwhile, and I believe he will soon be capable of training incoming lab members.

Jennifer S. Fang, Tulane University

Lessons Learned
by Jennifer S. Fang, Tulane University

Too often as junior scientists and trainees, we focus our attention forwards; towards the next step in our career progression, the next experiment to plan, the next grant to write, the next presentation to pull together. Thus, I value this opportunity to pause, take a breath, and look backwards to reflect on how far I have come in my scientific career.

I am an Assistant Professor at Tulane University’s Department of Cell and Molecular Biology. Prior to starting my lab at Tulane two years ago, I completed two postdoctoral positions – with the second juggled alongside the equally daunting challenges of the COVID shutdown and becoming a new parent. Here are a few of the lessons I have learned in my professional journey thus far.

Be focused: For many of us, being a biomedical scientist is innately rewarding: the excitement of new scientific discovery is heady, and the work that we do holds the promise of one day benefitting patients. However, in the day-to-day work of bench science, it is also easy – especially as a junior scientist or trainee – to lose sight of why you are doing what you are doing. To combat this tunnel vision, schedule periodic breaks to take a step back from the bench and focus your attention on the bigger picture – both of your science and your own career. Regarding your science: ask yourself why your project is important to you and to the larger world? How will the studies you are doing in this moment advance your specific research question? Is your time best spent on this specific experiment, or might there be better studies that could be done to directly address your research problem? If the latter, focus your time at the bench towards the key studies that will move your project forward.

Regarding your career trajectory: Where do you see yourself in one year? Five years? Ten years? What are the skills you need to achieve that career goals, and what milestones must you reach to realize that vision of your future? Don’t let this be an abstract idea. Plan an afternoon to write down these goals, and describe to yourself (in concrete terms) how what you are doing now will get yourself there in the future. Whether at the bench or in life, time is your most valuable commodity. Focus your time on the activities that will best move you and your science forward.

Be flexible: Science is a passion; but it is sometimes also exasperating. Despite our best efforts, things rarely go exactly according to plan. Experiments fail. Hypotheses are proven wrong. Life happens. I am a rigorously organized person, and so I struggle when things go wrong, and I must adjust – or even abandon! – my best-laid plans. Nonetheless, I have learned to see value in being flexible – both at the research bench and for my work-life balance. My advice is to reflect on how you handle unexpected obstacles. Then, work on ways that can help you quickly identify the need to abandon your plans, and develop strategies for seamlessly pivoting towards a new course of action. Remember that failure is part of science, and the ability to be flexible and to adapt to changing circumstances is crucial to being a successful scientist.

Find your scientific family: My life has been immeasurably impacted by my many scientific mentors. Their advice and support have helped guide me into my current position, and have positively shaped the scientist I am today. Regardless of where you are in your career, the help of others will always be beneficial. Take time now to find and build your “science family” whom you can trust to have your back and to support you. Surround yourself with mentors, colleagues, and friends who will help you because they want to see you succeed, whether by offering feedback on your scholarship, expanding your professional network, or even just lending a listening ear when things get difficult. Don’t be afraid to continue to reach out to your mentors for advice no matter how far you’ve progressed in this profession: I count myself lucky to have mentors that are still a source of strength and support, even after over a decade. Lastly, as you become more established, pay that mentorship forward. Be the best mentor you can be to the next generation of trainees and junior scientists.

Xiaolei Liu, Temple University

Lessons Learned
by Xiaolei Liu, Temple University

Hi NAVBO family, I am Xiaolei Liu, and I am an Assistant Professor in the Lemole Center for Integrated Lymphatics Research at Temple University. I received my Master’s degree with Dr. Deling Kong in China in the field of cardiovascular research, and then came to the US in Dr. Hong Chen’s lab where I got trained in lymphatic development and built up a strong passion in the field of lymphatic research during my PhD studies. After that, I received postdoc training with Dr. Guillermo Oliver, a world known developmental biologist and one of the pioneers in the lymphatic field. Looking back, I am beyond grateful for all the incredible support from all my mentors, colleagues, and collaborators. I am still benefiting from all their support. In 2022, I relocated to Temple University and started my independent research group. Although I have been in this position not long, I want to share some experience and challenges I have faced. Hopefully some of the tips could be very much helpful for junior faculties.

Expose yourself to the scientific communities: I put this as the first because I think it is important for the postdoc at the transition stages looking for faculty positions. As I prepared to apply for faculty positions, I realized the importance of actively engaging with scientific communities. In my case, the unexpected COVID pandemic made the job markets extremely hard. At the end, all my successful interviews came through referrals from mentors, collaborators, or people I’d crossed paths with at conferences. So, establishing a visible presence could foster connection during critical career transitions and for future career development. In fact, NAVBO provides a great platform for trainees and early career faculties at different levels that I benefit a lot from and would strongly recommend to anyone to join and connect!

Learn but not copy from your mentors: For junior faculty like me, learning from mentors is key. Most places, including my institution, have these mentor committees to guide us through the maze of academia. On top of that, I've got solid mentorship guidance from my previous mentors and collaborators. Chatting with them about the hurdles I face has been super insightful. While their experiences are gold, you can't just copy-paste them into your own situation. You need to justify according to your unique situation. In another word, think twice and follow your gut feeling.

Having a supporting group with faculty at the similar stage: What I found that can help ease my stress being a PI is to have this awesome group of peers. I am a woman faculty in the early stage, juggling work with two young kids. Luckily, when I joined Temple, I came to know a group of early-stage female faculty. We often get together for a coffee break or a dinner- I like to call those as our “therapy moments”. It’s where we vent out our worries and share our stress and suggestions. This group makes me feel like I am not alone, and it’s been a lifesaver to keep my own stress in check.

Cam McCarthy, University of South Carolina

Lessons Learned
by Cam McCarthy, University of South Carolina

Throughout my career, I have been fortunate to find supportive mentors, collaborative colleagues, and compassionate friends, all of whom have assisted me in reaching my goals and my current position as an Assistant Professor in the Cardiovascular Translational Research Center at the University of South Carolina School of Medicine-Columbia. However, I have also demonstrated a lot of hard work to get to where I am as I only found my love for vascular biology once I started my Ph.D. Originally, I pursued degrees in physical education (B.S.) and exercise science (M.S.), and while attenuation of cardiovascular diseases is a consistent theme among these areas, it took a lot of dedication during my M.S. and Ph.D. to catch up the “basic science” to get to where I am today. I am proud to be an example of someone who found their professional calling after undergrad.

Now as an independent P.I., I have made an entirely different transition. Obviously, managing a laboratory and mentoring young scientists is very different than solely dedicating yourself to an individual project, like we all did as trainees. Therefore, the one major piece of advice I wanted to share with other young PI’s is not to spread yourself too thin to start. In other words, when I started my own lab, I wanted all the people joining to have their own individual project, which they would be responsible and accountable for. This was even the case for volunteer undergrads. I quickly realized that this was not an efficient way to collect data, especially as an ESI, and that I needed to focus our projects and have people work more cohesively. Therefore, I have concentrated our lab, for the time being, on three major projects, driven by two post-docs, and myself and our lab technician (collaboratively). These projects include: (1) identifying the vasculoprotective mechanisms of autophagy, (2) investigating how O-GlcNAc post-translational modifications cause vascular damage, and (3) determining how ANGPTL3- and ANGPTL4-lipase crosstalk contributes to vascular dysfunction. Therefore, anyone else wanting to volunteer or rotate in my lab works on specific experiments related to these projects and this has resulted in more streamlined data collection, manuscripts in preparation, and several grant submissions!

In addition to this one major piece of advice, other suggestions that have served me well over the course of my career include:

· Be open to opportunities: You never know how a collaboration, or a position on a committee, may assist your career-trajectory, and where you may end up!

· Have-work life balance: I love running and couldn’t imagine my life without it; it is my release. I have come to realize that work will always be there, but my health and wellbeing may not be. Therefore, I try to commit to exercising for at least one hour every day. (Sometimes, unintentionally, I start thinking about hypotheses and experiments during my runs and I have done some of my best “sciencing” during these moments).

· Work efficiently, not longer: This one really came into focus when I became a dad (I have a daughter, Emma, who is almost 7, and a son, Noah, who is almost 2). I learned that I really needed to maximize my time in the laboratory each day, and I couldn’t rely on working late into the long hours of the night, to catch up on my work.

· Stay organized: This helps with efficiency, and also gives me a dopamine rush when I cross items off my to-do list.

· Use social media to your advantage: While I have always been participatory in career-development programs, the use of Twitter expanded my scientific network exponentially!

· Be humble, but confident: Awareness that you are not the sole reason for your successes and acknowledging those who have helped you along the way, has always served me well throughout my career, and has never diminished my accomplishments.

In summary, I love being an independent PI where I get to ask questions, satiate my curiosities, and help others through mentorship and collaboration. And while my career path has not been streamlined (at least to start), I am finally in a place where I can still achieve my longstanding goal of combating cardiovascular diseases through my vascular physiology research program. My Twitter handle is @CamGMcCarthy, and my lab website is cammccarthylab.com, if you would like to reach out!

Zhiyu Dai, University of Arizona

Lessons Learned
by Zhiyu Dai, University of Arizona

My name is Zhiyu Dai. I am an Assistant Professor at the Department of Internal Medicine University of Arizona College of Medicine-Phoenix. I graduated from Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China. I was trained as a lung vascular biologist at the University of Illinois at Chicago and Northwestern University for 6 years. My lab started in July 2019, not far from the COVID-19 outbreak. It has been very challenging to start a new lab during the COVID-19 era. I have learned a lot from my mentors, administrative supervisors, collaborators, senior investigators, junior peer investigators including recruitment, personnel management, and grant submission, etc.

Seeking Mentorship
The transition from a postdoc researcher or young scientist to an independent principal investigator (PI) is a very exciting moment and comes with new challenges including recruitment of postdoc, research technician, and students. In addition to my previous mentor, finding mentorship in the new institute have been very valuable experience when I started my lab. I had reached out to a few colleagues in our institute who can quickly answer a lot of questions about how to handle almost every step of starting a new lab such as hire processing, budget, and different protocols. These colleagues could be your neighbors, departmental head, center director, and faculty affair director. They are your resources and are willing to help you navigate the new institute.

Applying for Funding
Securing funding is the key to running a lab. In addition to getting NIH funding, there are different levels of funding mechanisms, for example, the American Heart Association (AHA) Career Development Award (CDA), and Institute internal grants for early career investigators like me to apply. I started to apply for the AHA CDA in my first year and got funded for the first time. I also applied for multiple internal grants provided by our institute. The funding rate is pretty good. These small funds are very good for practicing purposes, and the money is also good to support a new lab and help me generate a decent amount of preliminary data for NIH R01 projects. When I was ready to submit my first R01 application, I learned that I could take advantage of the early career investigator (ESI) and submitted two applications in the same cycle, which were reviewed as ESI. My two R01 applications were both funded after resubmission.

Collaboration
In the big data era, collaboration is critical for doing research, securing funding, and publishing papers. When I started my lab, I was interested in identifying a lung vascular-specific gene. I reached out to the colleagues like Drs Joanna Kalucka and Mingxia Gu in the NAVBO community. We quickly established a collaboration and eventually published a paper together in Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology (ATVB). At the same time, I also established collaboration with faculty in my institute, neighbor institutes, and outside institutes. The collaboration has provided enormous research resources including research materials, and protocols for my lab. For example, I collaborate with Dr. Michael Fallon, who is a physician-scientist and departmental chair of Internal Medicine at University of Arizona Phoenix. Dr. Fallon is interested in a disease called hepatopulmonary syndrome. Combining our expertise in vascular biology and clinical insight, we eventually are awarded a multiple PI NIH R01 grant on this topic.

Involvement in Academic Societies
I have taken multiple approaches to increase my visibility and impact in the research community. First of all, I started to volunteer as the Treasure, President-elect and President at the Chinese-American Lung Association (CALA), a non-profit organization founded by a group of Chinese-American scientists and physicians in the field of lung biology and respiratory medicine. I have organized the bi-weekly virtual seminar series and an inaugural International Respiratory Medicine Conference 2023 in Orlando, Florida. Second, I also hosted a monthly departmental Science in the Desert Seminar series. I have the opportunity to invite many top scientists to visit us to share their research and establish collaborations. Thirdly, I was also involved in the American Thoracic Society (ATS) early career working committee and served as the co-chair this year. These opportunities have given me broader exposure and increased my research impact in the field.

Although I have learned a lot from mentors, colleagues, peers, trainees, I am still learning to be a more impactful PI. I am so grateful for the pieces of advice and enormous support from all these people during the way.

Rio Sugimura, University of Hong Kong

Lessons Learned
by Rio Sugimura, University of Hong Kong

Hello, my name is Rio Sugimura, and I have been an Assistant Professor at the University of Hong Kong since December 2020. I am grateful to NAVBO, a very supportive society, for giving me this opportunity. I run two laboratories in different institutions and study cancer immunotherapy. I will share my survival tips and of course, the struggles of starting a lab in the pandemic era. I was trained in the US and now run my labs in Asia; some tips may be helpful to PIs in the same position.

Generation pandemic
Same as many other New PIs, I started my lab during the pandemic in Hong Kong, in December 2020. I had initially set up my lab at the University of Pavia, northern Italy, which was the epicenter of the pandemic. It was a hard decision, but I took the counteroffer and moved to Hong Kong with my family. I believe the decision was right for the following reasons: A reasonable amount of start-up money, supportive admin, an R1 institution-equivalent environment for research, and most importantly, English as a common language (I do not speak Cantonese or Mandarin). Luckily, Hong Kong never encountered a complete lab shutdown during the pandemic-- unlike labs in other major cities in China or the US, we were able to continue operating our lab. There were two drawbacks though, one was the delayed order of items sometimes having to wait for 6 months or give up the experiments. But we were able to manage this by looking for different vendors, and now we do not see such delays as often. The other, more severe, was difficulty in traveling, although the rest of the world was going back to normal. This affects the international visibility of the lab, which I will talk about more in a later section.

I saw you on Twitter!
Shameless advertisement! Advertise your lab on social media platforms. Here in Hong Kong, having Ph.D. students is not as straightforward as in the US. The admission is heavily biased with their undergrad schools’ GPA and QS rank. I have to admit that I lost many great candidates due to these strict metrics. My lab was still lucky to attract a handful number of Ph.D. students with department support. Having postdocs is very challenging in Hong Kong as many talents go overseas like in the US. Still, I was lucky to have postdocs. I asked students and postdocs why they chose my lab. How did they find me? My publication record? The topic of study? No, “I saw you on Twitter and your lab website looked good”. Prior to the pandemic, I spent considerable time setting up the lab website (https://www.riosugimura.com/) and being active on Twitter (https://twitter.com/rio_sugimura). Setting up the lab's social media platform made my lab jump-start. It was crucial for my lab because I needed to fill two labs with good members.

Running two labs
I was extremely fortunate to set up two lab spaces supported by external funds in different institutions. I got this opportunity right after I came to Hong Kong, so I had to staff both labs. My main lab at the university engages in the fundamental science of human immune cells and vascular development, while the other lab is dedicated to cell therapy products for cancer immunotherapy. The two labs are connected with a 50-min ride by shuttle bus. It is such a joy to run labs of two different disciplines. Staffing with great members and guiding the development of two labs are enjoyable. The challenge is that I would often commute to both sites and encourage communications between both labs as well as deal with different structures of admin systems. The lesson I learned in the process is it is really important to encourage lab members to communicate with each other. You should staff your lab with people of different expertise. If lab culture enhances their sharing of know-how and helps each other, the work will be synergistic. If the lab becomes like a silo, things stop working. During my training in the US, I was fortunate to experience the former environment. I will talk about a potential cultural difference between the US and Asia in the later part, bringing up the importance of encouraging lab members to communicate again.

Turn right
Winding up your postdoc work, you need to have your niche. During my postdoc at Harvard Medical School, I heard often that you need to Turn right. Understandably, you cannot compete with the same pie as your postdoc advisor. Right, it is very challenging to find a spot where you can survive. I was originally trained as a hematologist and dedicated to stem cell biology, shifting myself to cell engineering at the end of my postdoc. The shift paid off. I am operating two labs now with different disciplines. One is the fundamental biology of human immune cells and vasculature, and the other is for cell therapy products. Such a leap to me, though it is joyful. Finding a supportive society is very important. I am fortunate to find that NAVBO generously supports new PIs who came from another field. The other key is networking. I recommend networking internationally. Gaining international visibility is very difficult for someone like me in Asia. That’s why I invested in my lab website, Twitter, and Slack communities. I did several interviews, one on The NODE New PIs in a global pandemic: a view from Hong Kong - the Node (biologists.com) and the others with NewPI, Cell&Dev Bio Slack https://twitter.com/NewPICellDev/status/1409470388615233536?s=20 which should be still available.

International visibility
Yes, Big FOMO! Coming from Boston, now I miss a lot of top-notch deals in real-time. I want to know more colleagues, new collaborators, and editors. What was affordable and accessible in Boston was now super costly and rare. These two years of the pandemic locked me down. I could not attend international meetings for the last two years. I just started my travel after the summer of 2022 and got to see collaborators in real life. Slack communities were my game changers. I do appreciate FuturePI Slack, NewPI Slack, and NewPICell&Dev Bio Slack communities. It was great that I was able to participate in organizing an international symposium with colleagues in NewPICell&Dev Bio Slack in the summer of 2022. It was my first Face to Face conference as a PI. My tip: organizing departmental seminar series is very important. I have been organizing them for over a year. Although it is still Zoom, it does make it easier to invite many new colleagues. Visiting them during conference trips and developing new collaborations and grant writings is a great joy.

Surviving in Asia
Running a lab in Asia is fun. Fortunately, my university HKU is well westernized and I would not see much difference in operating a lab in the US. Of course, the language is English. Students might be a bit shy, though it really depends on each person. It is my learning process to listen to them patiently and encourage them to ask questions and say opinions. Another key point I learned is to encourage each student to communicate with other members inside or outside the lab. Encourage students to ask others for help. You do not lose anything by asking others for help.

Laura Hansen, Emory University

Lessons Learned
by Laura Hansen, Emory University

Hello everyone! My name is Laura Hansen and I’m an assistant professor at Emory University in the Department of Medicine, Cardiology Division. I’m also a member of the Biomedical Engineering program faculty at Emory/Georgia and the Molecular and Systems Pharmacology graduate program at Emory and recently became the associate program director for our Basic Science Research Cardiology Fellowship at Emory. My undergraduate degree was in bioengineering at the University of Pittsburgh and my PhD was at Georgia Tech in Bioengineering. I then did a postdoctoral fellowship at Emory University in cardiology.

I started my faculty position and lab in April 2019 with the help of an AHA Career Development Award. It has been an interesting time to start a lab with the pandemic closing in-person research just as I finally felt like my lab was getting going. Despite some challenges, I feel that I’ve learned a lot and my lab is currently doing well. My advice for new faculty fits into one overall theme of finding great people to help and support you. This includes mentors, colleagues, and lab members.

Mentors: Having a great mentor has been critical to my success thus far. Areas I’ve found to be important for mentorship are science, career development, and work/life balance. I have been blessed to find a primary mentor that helps me with all three of these aspects. However, if you can’t find one person, a mentoring team is a great alternative. Along those lines, if you made a mentoring team for a career development award, make sure you actually use that team and hold annual (or bi-annual meetings). As great as my mentor was, I appreciated having a wider perspective on my science and my career a few times a year. These meetings help me make important connections and decisions on priorities for grants and hiring. For example, they pushed me get my first submission of my R01 submitted and then also advised me to wait one cycle when resubmitting to get another paper out; and their advice was successful as my first R01 started a month before my career development grant ended making a smooth transition. I’m also lucky enough that my primary mentor meets with me weekly for 15-30 minutes (as our schedules allow). As a trainee, I met that often to go over data and as a faculty member I can still benefit from weekly meetings which guide my decisions not about data but about commitments, grants, and experimental directions in real time.

Colleagues: One group of people that I feel were key to survival the first few years of a faculty position were my colleague friends in similar positions in their career. While more senior mentors give great advice, I really appreciated and benefited from having people at the same stage (or a few years ahead is even better) to run ideas by. Having recently made all these decisions themselves, young faculty were perfect to discuss strategies for how to build your lab, how quickly to grow the lab, how to get involved in committees, and how to say no to other commitments. I also had a child during those first few years and asking a colleague how they managed their lab during family leave was helpful. Because our labs are closely related, she actually helped mentor my student for those few months. I was lucky enough to have a few people in Cardiology in this position, but faculty development courses and workshops are also great places to meet new people, and lunches or coffees breaks are great ways to establish a friendship.

Lab Members: Finally, the biggest piece to being successful is finding the right people to join your lab. I found this to also be the trickiest and where I’ve made the most mistakes and had the most struggles. The strategy I would tell others to follow is to try to find the most experienced person you can afford to hire to help you start your lab (technician, staff scientist, postdoc). Having someone in your lab that you can teach a technique to and they can quickly work independently or give a protocol to and they can figure it out helped me immensely at being able to get data and move projects along, as well as freeing my time to write and work on other tasks. If this person can teach graduate students and undergraduate students as they join the lab, it will help you even more. However, finding this person can be hard and requires lots of patience. One mistake I made and caution others about is being impatient to get someone hired and not waiting for the correct person. One tip I have is to ask those people above (your mentor and colleagues) to help interview your top candidates. Then listen to them and their impression of the applicant; I’ve learned that sometimes gut impressions and personalities are just as important as skills. Once you have that one key person in your lab, you can begin to expand your lab: join graduate programs and participate in their recruitment events or consider undergraduate students that reach out to you. While students are not always very productive when they start, they will be as they learn. I’ve also found that it is a snowball effect, where once you have one student, they tell others, and more people want to join. Once you have a great team, work to keep them: treat them well and respect their ideas, promote and give raises as appropriate, and set a great example of a healthy work life balance.

Yanbo Fan, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine

Lessons Learned
by Yanbo Fan, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine

My name is Yanbo Fan. I have been an Assistant Professor of Cancer Cell Biology and Cardiovascular Health and Disease at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine since Oct 2019. Although I have learned a lot from my mentor, effective management of the lab, including recruitment, budgeting, project progress, animal protocol, manuscript writing, and grant preparation, still needs to be learned as a PI. I am grateful for the support from my mentors, colleagues, and administrators.

Recruitment is a critical factor for a new lab. The increased cost of lab expenses but limited funding would be significant issues for many new PIs who have to deal with it. When recruiting lab members, motivation is as important as the previous research experience of the researcher. The passions and dedication of a researcher create more possibilities and lead to success. Supervising the postdoc fellows and graduate students promptly and regularly could help resolve problems and facilitate the project's progress. As a PI, I learned how to assign tasks/projects to the appropriate lab members according to their experience and skills and set reasonable expectations. It is noteworthy that maintaining the lab in a positive and aspiring environment can facilitate interactions among lab members.

Expand research to a new research area. To be an independent researcher, you should logically extend your research to different areas. From my experience, initially, it is good for the PI to conduct bench work to start pilot experiments other than just leaving the new project to the new student or postdoc fellow. Based on the critical preliminary results, we can have a vision of the project and propose a hypothesis. It could save a long time to accomplish the project. After excellent training, graduate students and postdoc fellows will become the project's driving force. Always good decisions lead to excellent outcomes and potentially open a new direction.

Set short- and long-term goals. As a new PI, you may want to carry out many projects which you are very interested in and believe will be successful. However, biological studies, particularly animal experiments, are time-consuming and expensive. It is helpful to consult mentors and colleagues before ordering reagents and generating new animal models. After careful consideration, it is best to prioritize the projects to meet the short- and long-term goals. For example, choose the project most likely successful for external grant applications and publications in the next 2-3 years as a short-term project.

Collaboration is indispensable for a new PI. It is essential to fully take advantage of the resource and expertise in the department and institution and seek potential collaborations. In addition, connections in the research community help spark interest in a new research area and develop potential collaborations. Through actively attending internal, national/international meetings, the lab's work can be exposed to other researchers and get more recognition.

Finally, these are a few lessons and experiences since I opened a new lab. Everyone has different situations (advantages and limitations) and faces different problems while running a lab, so I hope what I mentioned is helpful to you. Challenges and opportunities exist concurrently. It is time to make reasonable goals and move forward.

William Polacheck, UNC Chapel Hill and NC State University

Lessons Learned
by William Polacheck, UNC Chapel Hill and NC State University

Hello from Chapel Hill! My name is Bill Polacheck, and I am an Assistant Professor in the Joint Department of Biomedical Engineering at UNC Chapel Hill and NC State University. In 2018, my wife and I moved from Boston, where we had spent the past decade, to North Carolina, so I could start my research lab at UNC. I had completed my PhD in Mechanical Engineering at MIT then crossed the river for a postdoc in a joint appointment between Harvard and BU. The move south marked the biggest transition of my life, as it does for so many junior faculty, and initially I spent too much time focusing on what I had left: New England, where I had grown up and completed my training; a city, where it seems like everyone is a scientist; large well-funded and engineering-focused labs, where I completed my PhD and postdoc; and quite honestly jobs where I understood what was required for success and how to structure my time efficiently. Leaving all of this behind to begin a job in which the complexity and demands on time seemed to grow each day was daunting, and it became immediately apparent, as it does for so many people, that a postdoc is at best inadequate training for setting up an independent laboratory and training graduate students and postdocs. However, with help from colleagues at UNC, an incredibly patient spouse, and the infinite optimism of a golden retriever puppy, I learned what this new job entailed, recruited some fantastic people, and came to realize that the gains exponentially outweighed the costs of this strange and complicated transition. Here are a few specific things I learned with the acknowledgement that in beginning my 5^th year, I’m still learning how to run a lab and manage trainees.

Keep looking forward: Many junior faculty, including myself, attempt to set up a lab in the image of the labs they trained in, but your lab is not your postdoc advisor’s lab and not your thesis advisor’s lab. The success of a lab is path-dependent and a function of the institution. Initially, I structured lab meetings and journal clubs based on how I had experienced these meetings as a PhD student and postdoc, and only later realized that what we needed to build a strong foundation for future success in a lab with all new trainees is very different from what is required to maintain a productive, established lab with a number of senior graduate students and postdocs at any given time. When our meetings really started to click was when I structured them based on what the group needs to learn now for success in the future, so journal clubs mixed in older, seminal papers to build a shared knowledge among the lab, and the focus of lab meeting presentations shifted toward how data were collected as opposed to interpretation of the data. I found this focus on what is needed now to also translate to projects at the bench – we needed to establish internal protocols, standards, and processes for what seem like simple activities in a large lab before we could move to more ambitious, innovative projects. This focus on the future also helps break out of the avalanche of negative feedback that greets any junior faculty member, from first grants to papers to teaching reviews – these are all data points to inform better future approaches.

Enjoy the classroom: So often teaching is only discussed among research faculty as a distraction from the research program. It’s true that teaching takes an enormous amount of time and effort, particularly when putting together classes for the first time, and that your grants will be reviewed alongside faculty who don’t have these demands on their time. However, it is a privilege to be able to stand in front of a room of brilliant young students and to have the opportunity to help them achieve their goals and aspirations, even if it’s only a slight nudge, and even if there’s some students in the classroom who just don’t like the class, the content, or you as the professor. Now that it’s been a few years of teaching for me, I’m starting to get updates from students who have moved on to careers in science and engineering, and hearing that even the tiniest bit of content from a class I taught is helping them progress professionally is one of the most rewarding aspects of the job.

Don’t just clear your desk: There’s an expression I read about a prominent figure in US history that said he ‘cleared his desk every day but never got anything accomplished.’ One of the biggest challenges of learning to establish and run a research and teaching program is to figure out what is worth your time. There is simply too much to do in a day, especially if you’re trying to establish a healthy work-life balance. In the first few years, I found that it was too easy to approach the infinite workload by focusing on things that could be easily checked off a list, such as responding to emails, attending miscellaneous meetings, ordering and lab maintenance, etc. However, I started to realize that I wasn’t engaging in my students’ projects with enough depth, I wasn’t reading enough papers, and all of my grants seemed to be prepared at the last minute. It was only after auditing my time for several weeks that I realized I had to be judicious and treat my time as a valuable commodity that was best invested rather than simply spent. Different systems work for different people in different research areas, but I have found that auditing my own time for at least a week annually is critical to ensure I’m not getting bogged down in the little things without sufficient investment of my time in the deeper activities that form the real basis for the functioning of the lab.

We are very lucky and privileged to have careers that are, at the core, focused on continual learning. On that note, I’ll end with one more suggestion… read the other ‘Lessons Learned’ on the NAVBO site. They’re awesome and inspirational, and it’s a great resource for seeing how other individuals from varying backgrounds and training approach the shared problem of starting a research laboratory from scratch.

Tirthadipa Pradhan-Sundd, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine

Lessons Learned
by Tirthadipa Pradhan-Sundd, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine

Lessons Learned:
Did you ever have a sense of awe and gratefulness while writing about your work experience with a nearly trembling hand? Did you also feel like a complete imposter trying to fit in continuously in a field of star-studded individuals and talents? Science continues to give me very opposite feelings simultaneously. It provides me joy and fear in the same cup. While I am thankful to NAVBO for giving me this opportunity to share my experience as an assistant professor (read junior-most faculty), I am also confident these lessons will keep accumulating every day as my journey continues. Over the last two years I have learned a few lessons or should I say ‘survival hacks for dummies’ which I am happy to share with you all.

Major points:
Imagination, imagination, imagination: If you are like me and can’t keep up with all the fantastic publications that come out virtually every hour of the day, just one thing can still save you. That is your imagination. I recall my grandmother loved to tell tales, and she did it so wonderfully that there always was some audience. I learned that Science is also somewhat like that. If we learn to tell a story early in our career it can be really helpful. You might also get an audience who would love to read your papers. I think imagination can also be developed over time like our scientific knowledge. And the things that help me to develop or reinvent mine was to work with extremely creative people (like my husband) and be inspired by just watching them. I also gather inspiration from a list of my favorite scientists across the globe and a few talented artistic friends I had a chance to share my lab space with during my training period. Finally, I occasionally take mental notes on how to make a story or a figure by just binge-watching movies and going through children’s books made by very creative people.

Temperament, temperament, temperament: Another attribute that I learned early in my faculty career that is almost as important as imagination is temperament. I know I am sounding like a cricket coach here. You can blame my Indian ethnicity and extreme family pressure to watch as many cricket matches as your eyes can stand. By temperament, I mean the ability to wait indefinitely for an experiment to work, grants to be submitted, hiring paperwork to be completed, a talented postdoc to apply to your lab (still waiting for this one), and the stamina to prepare your manuscript for publication in two weeks while managing a kindergartener and a puppy. I took a very long time to realize that this is a ‘years long test match’ and all you have to focus on is 1 or 2 tasks per day and be happy if you are able to complete them. The same will also apply to people working under and for you. A Buddhist philosophy of “everything in moderation“might go a long way.

More major points:
Less is more: One sure recipe for failure or reduced productivity for me was when I tried to manage more than two to three projects and the associated planning and experiments. It made me anxious at the end of the day and week that I made very little progress and it also hampered my creativity. Thus, I learned the hard way that focusing on one or two projects on a weekly or monthly basis is more productive and fun in the long run.

Humor can save you: There will be days in the beginning of your career which will try your patience. In those days it helps me to make fun of myself. My family and friends really enjoy it and, in the end, there is nothing that humor can’t make better.

Meaningless networking won’t save you but some networks will: No! you don’t need to know everyone who ever came across to love science in this continent and follow them on social media. Remember our brain has limited capacity and so does our time. Learning to say ‘No’ to a lot of things might save you. At the same time, I think the people in your direct field need to know your work. I always start panicking when it is time to network and become very aware of my “Indian accent” and all the not so charming qualities of mine. For me focusing on their work and how relevant it is and talking about that really helps. This is something where I need to do a lot of work, and I am aware of it.

It’s a star world: There will always be people with 400 publications (whereas during grad school I already planned that if I can have 100s on my name I will then try for Moksha), 4 R01s, all high impact papers and patents and you will also realize they did it all by themselves. Its really good to recognize that we are extremely fortunate to share space with a lot of stars, but we should not put unnecessary pressure on ourselves or have unrealistic expectations of excellence. It will not only make you restless, sad and anxious, you will not be able to enjoy the little things of science like getting a fantastic image on confocal microscopy or proving a small part of your hypothesis just by thinking over it. Enjoy being with your peers without the peer-pressure.

Have a 24/7 support system: Once I read in a magazine that an ‘international post doc’ is the second-most stressful job to do in the United States whereas the first is an air traffic controller. As a post doc, I was then happy to find solace and would refer that article to my parents if they ever were worried about my stress level. Now, I continuously wonder did they mean post docs who became faculty in the past 2-3 years? I know you will agree with me. To deal with this stress we need a very strong support system. Be it family, friends or colleagues or other mom/dad/single friends, we should recognize them and stick with them.

You can’t do it alone: My scientific interest has changed considerably over the last few years and while having a new project is extremely refreshing and interesting it also means you know almost nothing about many parts of your projects now. I had to learn from experts of this field and also learned that I can’t do it alone. Having a strong group of collaborators both global and local can be a game changer.

At times tremendous willpower will be needed: There will be days when you have to do it all by yourself. Be it at the bench when all your students and post docs were on leave or when kids are home quarantining (which happened numerous times over the last two years). Having control over the day will not be possible on those days and, on those moments, I realized that one needs a very strong willpower (read bulldog tenacity) almost on a daily basis to continue a career in science.

Let’s talk about money and its management: Everybody has a blind spot and money management or the very thinking of it makes me nervous. As a junior faculty, I had to be very careful with my money management. Having a budget limit and going through the budget almost every two weeks was helpful. Another thing which I learned was to wait a day or two to order a reagent you already decided to order to double check if you really need it. Money management is extremely crucial and I wish we had some training as junior PIs how to do it well by other super stars in the field.

You have to be unique: Finally, you have to be shamelessly unique and continue it to your grave. Someone once said to me that “in science everyone has a different kind of personality”. Now I realize it was used to mean uniqueness of scientists. I also realized over time that there is no need to be shy from who you really are. If you are someone who likes to pray to elephant god Ganesha before starting your work, so be it. Continue being yourself shamelessly and enjoy being you.

I will end this with the hope that somewhere some post-doctoral fellows will find it useful and interesting while making their biggest career jump to a junior faculty. Although I made a list of ‘lessons learned’ I am still learning each of them everyday and many more. May this journey of yours be thrilling and full of new adventures.

Erich Kushner, University of Denver

Lessons Learned
by Erich Kushner, University of Denver

Hi, my name is Erich Kushner, and I have been an Assistant Professor at the University of Denver for 6 years. With no qualifications, I can say that running a lab has been a tremendous learning curve with both peaks and valleys. Now sitting on the opposite side of the desk, not providing the data, but being the one to scrutinize it, make difficult decisions, encourage, sometimes having to discourage, and providing personnel feedback, was something I was not prepared for. Although, I believe I have learned a lot over these ensuing years, I know there is a literal universe of tips that would prove to be helpful, many of which having nothing to do with producing rigorous science. Hopefully, new(er) faculty will find the two anecdotes below helpful to subvert the personal and professional flogging I subjected myself to in the early years of starting a lab.

Killing my inner postdoc
Looking at my empty lab space on my first day as an Assistant Professor was glorious. The research, the training, the avenues we could explore were all tantalizing. This was a moment for which I had been preparing for over a decade, and now it was here, in front of me, in the form of a seemingly ransacked 900sq/ft room--but it was my room, my space, my future. Walking through that room, running my fingers over dried western blot residue left behind by the previous occupant, I was still a postdoc, with postdoc wonder, narrowly strategizing how to start my lab’s first big research project. Up until that point, and some time after, my general mantra was, “if you do the science, the money will come.” My postdoc enthusiasm, drive to produce big science, as well as a heaping dollop of blinding pride, obscured many new realities I would soon encounter.

The first few years, I focused my students on larger projects, ever adding data, never fragmenting the research into smaller publications. Postdoc me was uncompromising in pursuing comprehensive studies--the type we’ve all fawned over in lab meetings or enthusiastically chatted about with our former PIs. However, in my situation, at an R2 school, with a high teaching load, this was an exceedingly poor choice. In my case, when I started the lab, all my students were very green. As a result, there was a multi-year training curve to reach the required technical expertise. At year four, we accumulated a mountain of data, but now had a 2-year publication gap. There seems to be an unspoken 3-year grace period for new PIs at NIH, and once that line is crossed, grant critiques are laser focused on productivity, or lack thereof (in my case). With start-up and R00 funds dwindling, it was obvious I made a massive tactical error in my publication approach. Not only how and when to publish, but my naïve postdoc framework of ‘go big or go home’ was at odds with the realities of timing, training, student abilities, my schedule, and many other factors.

The lesson learned was I needed to surrender my mindset of only trying to produce splashier stories but settle on a more Zen approach of being ok with publishing smaller units when applicable. By not silo-ing my research into only substantial projects, it has allowed me to strike a better balance of triaging and publishing projects earlier than I would have done prior, as well as keeping a grant funding-oriented view on productivity metrics. This is not to say we don’t chase after the bigger stories like a rabid honey badger, but killing my monolithic view on what constitutes a publishable unit has permitted me to go after bigger fish in the funding pond. Many grant submissions and chicken-blood sacrifices later, our lab is thriving.

Leader, not a friend
In retrospect, one of the major contributing factors for me pursuing this career path was lab culture. As an undergraduate, graduate and postdoc I have always adored the feverish lab environment. Down to the smell of bacterial cultures (no joke), I just love the ordered chaos of many ‘cooks’ in the kitchen of a lab, the buzz of overlapping experimentation, and most of all, the forging of lasting friendships. For me, there is a deep comradery that is formed when two people have mutually dedicated themselves to be stewards of science. Multiply this with the shared hardships and breakthroughs, the sheer volume of common worktime, parallel interests, and many beers later, you can cement some special life-long friendships.

Starting my lab, I craved this bond that indelibly marked so many of my previous career stages. Perhaps selfishly, I wanted to help shepherd these bourgeoning scientists down this path. Unconsciously, I took a more friendship-based mentoring approach, akin to my days as a postdoc. A lesson learned was that inevitably, a hard conversation will arise and not taking a more concrete leadership role, but more of that of an older brother has several major drawbacks. First, when on a more peer-to-peer footing with your students I found that joking around can go horribly wrong. I’m sure any boilerplate managerial text will flag this behavior, but in my experience, even kind-hearted banter can be misinterpreted when coming from someone in a supervisory role. Fighting against my naturally sarcastic personality, I learned that practicing clear and concise language, although dry, promotes a generalized sense of security and a more equitable relationship amongst the labyrinth of personalities in my lab. Second, a cordial, but direct, interaction with a leader will always carry more weight than a recommendation from a friend. Lastly, a leader unifies and motivates. A question I like to ask myself is why would anyone want to work hard for me? As a supervisor, it is easy to default to the idea that someone is not intrinsically motivated if productivity metrics are lagging. However, it is tougher to ask, have I provided the best possible environment and cognitive framework to justify working hard? Are the incentives in place? If you are not viewed as a leader that can provide the incentives or effectively structure a path to them, it will be hard to motivate your crew.

Thoughts
I try on an annual basis to impress upon my group both the beauty and responsibility of being a scientist in efforts to foster a common goal. I also attempt to construct a bird’s eye view of our research to help render a less granular picture of where our brand of science is situated within the broader field. Together these concepts provide a professional GPS coordinate for students who sometimes cannot see the forest for the trees. With regard to leadership, my personal definition of a group leader is a fair person who cherishes a trainee’s progression, someone who prioritizes a legacy of scientists, not publications, someone who is not afraid to admit flaws or mistakes, someone who strives to do rigorous science, someone willing to help match a trainee’s work ethic and enthusiasm, someone who fosters a trainee’s career path, academic or otherwise, and someone who always provides brutally honest feedback, sometimes at the discomfort of both parties. In challenging myself to be that person described above, it has led to enormous personal growth and on some level is starting to convince me I could wear those shoes someday. The beauty of our position as group leaders is that I don’t foresee a time in which we cannot learn to be a better person on countless levels; if we willfully embrace that challenge, then we are truly lucky to be in this profession.

May your publications be plentiful, and grants prioritized!

“Live long and prosper”.

-Spock

Jenny Munson, Virginia Tech

Lessons Learned
by Jenny Munson, Virginia Tech

Hi Everyone! I’m Jenny Munson and I’m an Associate Professor at the Fralin Biomedical Research Institute at Virginia Tech and in the Department of Biomedical Engineering & Mechanics at Virginia Tech. I’m originally from Marietta, GA and then went to Tulane University and majored in Chemical Engineering and Neuroscience. I worked at Genentech for a year before going to graduate school for Bioengineering at Georgia Tech followed by a postdoc at EPFL in Switzerland. I started my independent faculty career at the University of Virginia in Biomedical Engineering and then moved to Virginia Tech where I received tenure in 2020. My laboratory is housed at the Fralin Biomedical Research Institute at the Health Sciences Campus of Virginia Tech.

I’ve been a principal investigator running my own lab in academia for seven years and it’s a great job. I get to work with smart, motivated people, indulge my curiosity, and challenge myself to learn something new everyday. I will say I am by no means an expert on the transition from trainee to independent researcher and much of my advice is passed down from those more experienced than me. Hopefully you will find it helpful.

Follow the students: When I started my faculty position, I didn’t know anything about the place where I now was tasked with setting up a lab and establishing a research program. It was a bit intimidating, and I was still struggling to not feel intimidated by colleagues in the department, having been a “trainee” only one month beforehand. I had many valuable mentors, but I found that established graduate students helped me most to hit the ground running. These were students from other laboratories since I didn’t yet have any students of my own. They stopped by and said hello, they told me about the fun places to go or things to do, they showed me where the ice maker was, who to contact about protocols and resources, and they could give me insight I could use to help recruit my own students. They were absolutely essential to my early success and happiness in the department.

Once a few graduate students joined my group, there’s an initial feeling that everyone needs their own project and you should define these early, creating pillars within the lab. This is something that I think as trainees we are conditioned to feel as we want a sense of ownership over our projects. One piece of advice that was given to me by my PhD mentor was to lean into the strengths of the individuals to work towards common goals (i.e. papers, grants, etc.) and then the individual projects will grow from there. I think this is great advice because you will have individuals join your lab who naturally become interested in and/or show strengths in certain techniques, scientific trajectories, or collaborations and following their lead on these things can really benefit your greater scientific program. It not only offers a diversity of perspectives to your work but it also increases the morale and buy-in of everyone in the lab. My first graduate students had very different strengths and by listening to them and learning what they were best at or took the most joy from really helped to create a strong team dynamic that helped to establish my research program. And in the end, they all had individual projects with separate goals and theses.

Grow where you’re planted: When I first started my faculty position I had very strong ideas about what I was going to do in my lab. I definitely adhered to this as much as possible, but also talked to everyone about what was going on at the university. When you interview you are asked about who you might collaborate with and much of this information has to be gleaned from often outdated websites and papers on work that was happening 5 years ago. An interesting thing that I’ve also learned since becoming a faculty, and sitting on hiring committees is that the individuals that you meet with may see connections that you haven’t made yet. They know their colleagues the best and can often point out interesting connections and new trajectories that you may be unaware of. Therefore, I think it’s great to explore and meet and talk, go to seminars and think about how your central tools or techniques or questions may overlap. These may result in simply interesting conversations or full-fledged funding and publications. Most importantly, this allows you to make the most of where you begin your career so be flexible. With this in mind, though I’ve maintained some core interests in my research program, I’ve found that it has shifted and changed since I was first starting my faculty career in only positive ways.

Get used to rejection: It is so hard to do this, but it will happen. This job is filled with rejections, and during your traineeship you will see this over and over, but once I had my own lab, and was putting my ideas out there, it really stung. Some things I have done to manage it: 1) Talk to colleagues. Every single person around you has been rejected. Share the stories, hear the worst, hear the eventual outcomes, laugh, cry, joke, it’s all ok. 2) Have a plan for the rejection notification. If you are going to check on grant scores, do it with a buddy, or with a pint of ice cream at a defined time, ideally during working hours. Getting rejections on the weekend when you are hiking, or playing with your kids can really dampen the mood (this is generally my opinion for work-life balance). 3) Get in on the other side of rejection. Reviewing grants and papers has made me more aware of how the process works and understanding of the reviewers. Doing it myself has made me much better at understanding the feedback that I get and also thinking of reviewers as people and not all knowing beings. 4) Fight it. I’m still working on this one, but sometimes things are not fair and in those scenarios, asking for clarification, self-promoting and pushing can be helpful. Talking with colleagues about this and learning more about the reviewing process can really aid in understanding the complexities of rejection and determining the fairness of the process specific to your circumstances.

Set boundaries: This is something that I still struggle with and work on everyday. An academic career is one that can totally consume you in a lot of different ways, whether its when you’re prepping a class, working on a presentation, editing a grant, responding to emails, or reading papers, every element of this job can take all of your time. However, you have the ability to define that time, and I recommend embracing it and trying out different strategies to find what might work best for you. The flexibility of the job affords many luxuries in how you can integrate the work with your personal schedule and is a huge advantage, but it also can creep into your personal life. Setting boundaries both within the work that I do and in how my work intersects with my life has been an important part of enjoying what I do while getting better at it. Specifically, things like having assigned times and locations to check email (i.e. on my computer during work hours), setting mutual expectations with mentees and colleagues about availability and communication, and scheduling defined finite times to work on given tasks have helped me to better balance my work. I won’t say that I am an expert at this by any means, but I look back at my efficiency at the start compared to now and it is so much higher, and this is in large part due to my ability to set limits on the things that seemed illimitable in the beginning.

Enjoy it! Since starting my lab in 2014, I have moved my lab two times. When I have done this, I think back so fondly on when I was first starting and hope to recapture a little of that magic again. It is the first time that you get to define everything about the research that you want to do. You get to pursue the question you want to answer with the people you want to work with in the setting and with the lab equipment and techniques that you want to use. It’s so incredibly fun and though it seems and is stressful, it is true scientific freedom, so take advantage of it and revel in the joy as much as possible. Remember that you are discovering something no one has ever discovered before and you are defining how you want to do that.

Published May 5, 2022 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Monica Lee, University of Illinois at Chicago

Lessons Learned
by Monica Lee, University of Illinois at Chicago

My name is Monica Lee and I have been an Assistant Professor in the Department of Physiology & Biophysics at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) since February 2019. I relocated to Chicago after a memorable postdoctoral experience in the lab of Dr. William Sessa at Yale University. My training did not cover how to direct science in the event of a pandemic – I doubt that topic was ever considered for anyone. Rather, our training prepares us to deal with challenges, where COVID-19 is an extreme example of the uncontrollable variables that can arise when starting a lab. They say that with experience comes insight. So, with that said, I offer here a few of my own ‘lessons learned’ to those that are now transitioning toward independence.

Research is a team effort. One of the most difficult decisions as a new PI is putting together your initial team. Starting a new lab comes with the opportunity to set a culture that will be determined by the group composition. I have been extremely lucky and fortunate enough to have selected a talented and motivated set of team players in my lab. Not only have they maintained a high scientific standard, but they have created an energetic and supportive research environment – even at a 6ft distance. 😉

You will never know the answer to everything. I had this false sense as a graduate student that once I obtained a doctorate degree, everything would become clearer. If anything, it was the complete opposite. As I progressed into my postdoctoral training, it made me realize the limitless constraints of science. The transition to independence was even more daunting, as many questions will not have an absolute correct answer. Regardless of the challenge at hand, our training provides the skillsets to find a solution. Keep asking the right questions and the information gathered will help guide your path.

It is okay to be scientifically uncomfortable. One of my former mentors told me that if I was ever too comfortable with my research, then I was likely doing something wrong. Another mentor had a general rule of “doing one thing you know, and one thing you don’t.” I think the overall takeaway is that venturing into what you don’t know is the core of this career path. The goal of any research project is to discover an unknown that will often require venturing into new topics and techniques. In many ways, I identify as a super senior graduate student. There is a constant learning and evolving that comes with science that may initially feel daunting, but I have learned to embrace that anxiety as excitement.

There is more than one way to crack an egg. Growing up in elementary school, I remember playing the “24 Game Challenge,” a tournament-style competition where you are given four numbers (whole numbers between 1 and 9) to make 24 using any of the four operations (addition, subtraction, multiplication, division). Most of the game cards have more than one solution. While this seemingly simple arithmetic game assisted in number pattern discovery toward 24, this concept holds strong in scientific discovery. So, when an obstacle arises, just remember that there is usually always more than one way to approach a scientific question. Just like the “24 Game Challenge.”

It is what it is. This phrase has been with me since graduate school and continues to persist. We are often disappointed when an experiment does not work, or a tested hypothesis does not pan out in the expected direction. In these moments of frustration, I constantly remind myself and my team that “it is what it is.” While things may not have ‘worked,’ the ‘negative outcome’ can often direct the course toward success by providing an improvement for the next iteration. It is what it is.

Trust your gut. As much as scientists would like to quantify every event, some things are left to your intuition. The scientific career is more than deciding what disease to study or what antibody to purchase for your current assay. As research scientists, we become dedicated to a path that involves time-intensive training in interdisciplinary topics that usually includes some sacrifices. The transition to independence and starting a lab also involves major subjective decisions (e.g., Where to relocate? First-hire of your lab? etc.…). Hence, everyone will have a unique set of priorities where often the ‘correct’ answer is what is best for you. Just as a shift in degrees can change the course of a ship, your decisions are your own journey --as long as you are the captain of that ship.

And don’t forget to enjoy the process. It can take a while to build a research lab and we may always be looking ahead. But remember to pause and take a moment. Those snapshots are unique to you and will be part of your own venture toward independence.

Published March 10, 2022 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Miranda Good, Tufts Medical Center

Lessons Learned
by Miranda Good, Tufts Medical Center

My name is Miranda Good, and I am an Assistant Professor of Medicine at the Molecular Cardiology Research Institute at Tufts Medical Center in Boston. I started out at the University of Arizona where I completed both my undergraduate and PhD in the laboratory of Dr. Janis Burt, PhD. I began my post-doctoral work in Dr. Brant Isakson’s laboratory at the University of Virginia where I received an F32 and then a K99/R00. I transitioned to the R00 and started my own laboratory in January 2020 here at Tufts Medical Center.

Here are a few lessons that I’ve learned along the way:

1. Go with the flow! One of the lessons I’ve learned multiple times along my training and career is that you can think you know exactly what you want, but sometimes life takes you a different direction. As a sophomore at the University of Arizona I started looking for research opportunities to boost my CV to apply for medical school, which had been my dream since I was 9 years old. I joined a research lab and had such a great time learning science, doing experiments and building friendships that I switched to getting a PhD. Then during my PhD, I said to everyone that I didn’t want to run my own laboratory and writing grants day in and day out sounded horrible. Well…that changed too! I wrote my first fellowship grant halfway through my PhD and realized that I liked to see the ideas written out and organized. I still love doing the actual experiments, especially microvascular surgery. I still love writing grants! It’s important to be prepared, but adaptable as you gain new life experiences.

2. Problem solving. My best example of how I learned this lesson is the Covid-19 pandemic. I moved to a new city where I knew one person and was even further away from my family. I started my laboratory in January of 2020, which I soon found out was a bit of a crazy time to start a lab! I hired two team members, the first started on March 2 and second started March 16. On March 16 all non-essential operations (including labs) were shut down for the next four months. We got to perform exactly one experiment in the lab before we started quarantine-- One! To say the least, this was not the plan. But we made it through because we found a way around all our issues that popped up. We borrowed supplies from other labs, we found a way to get our animal facility to start breeding our mice during the quarantine so that we’d have mice when we got back to the lab, and we created training videos and detailed protocols for everything so that we were ready to hit the ground running. Problem solving is probably one of the best life skills that you learn during a scientific career. Sometimes life throws you punches, but we can punch back. Find the alternative solution to the problem and don’t let the hard times keep you from moving forward.

3. Scientific environment is more important than scientific topic. If you are working in a laboratory where you don’t like the people around you, you are going to find it hard to like doing science. It is of the utmost importance to find a mentor that supports you as a person and as a scientist. When choosing my post-doctoral laboratory, what ended up playing the biggest role in my decision making was the communication between myself, my PI, and my lab mates. While I knew I wanted to stay in cardiovascular physiology, it wasn’t the most important thing. Everyone does cool and exciting work, but not everyone is going to be a good fit as your mentor. You want to find mentors that are supportive of your goals, who make their expectations clear, and can openly communicate with you in both good and bad times. In addition to the mentor, the laboratory team and department are also important, where positive support and encouragement are indispensable. Having people to celebrate your and their successes but also vent out the frustrations that come with science (and we all know there are a lot of those!) helps keep you going. You want a group to build everyone up and not put anyone down because science is a team sport and this is important at every step of the way, whether it is as an incoming PhD student or starting your own laboratory group.

4. Science is not 24/7. Last, but not least, the most important lesson I’ve learned along the way is to prioritize mental health. Your mental health is the most important thing and finding the balance of work and life and down time is a challenge, but something all of us need to focus on. Take your vacation time and take your weekends (or normal days off). And when you go on vacation, try and make it a real separation from the lab. This is often easier said than done, but having that time away from lab allows your brain to reset and when you get back your fresh mind and body will be more creative and ready to hit the ground running. While our schedules are often not 9-5, I try to encourage myself and my team to find the balance. Sometimes an experiment will take 12 hours, in which case, leave early on Friday or come in later the following day. Are there experiments that require you to come in both days on the weekend? Then take a day off during the week. I have found it vital that I check in with myself and team members and make sure that we aren’t pushing too hard and that we take some time when we need it because a well-rested and healthy lab member is far more beneficial and effective than one who isn’t.

These are just a few lessons l have learned and I’m sure there will be many more to come. Our journeys are all different, and I hope we can continue embracing all our different paths and encourage each other to keep doing amazing science!

Keep calm and science on!

Published January 13, 2022 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Morgan Salmon, University of Michigan

Lessons Learned
by Morgan Salmon, University of Michigan

For most scientists, there are defining moments throughout our careers that drive our passion, intellectual drive, and keep us motivated and continuing to pursue such a difficult, life-consuming career. For some, it is that paper in a top-tier journal or that major grant that really sets the stage for career advancement and success. For myself, my defining moments have centered around meeting key people that have influenced the course of my career by driving my love for science and the scientific process. I can still remember 20 years later rotating in the lab of my doctoral mentor and just falling in love with science and the scientific process. It was everything from systematically trouble-shooting laboratory issues, her demonstration of a technique I had never performed before, to having coffee in the afternoons with the lab and discussing projects. There is no question to me that she was a pivotal person in my career because she helped me to fall in love with science and the scientific process. I think it’s important to first remember as scientists that we do research because we love science-- the process of science, the working through issues, and the small successes-- they all make up the whole of what makes science truly amazing, difficult, but yet one of the most fulfilling things a person could do. There have been times throughout my career that I struggle with that love, but remembering my mentor and her influence definitely helps me to keep my eyes on the prize so to speak.

A second key lesson from her that I try to remember is that part of my job as I move through academic research is that I want to influence younger scientists to be as passionate about science as I am. Like most high school students who loved science growing up, I had originally imagined being a medical doctor. I had no idea, for various reasons, that a career in science was actually better suited for my thought processes and personality. It’s easy to forget in the whole pandemonium of academic science, the grants, papers, meetings, and conferences, that one of the most important things we do as scientists is to motivate and inspire younger scientists to be better than ourselves. I have been an Assistant Professor first in the Department of Surgery at the University of Virginia and now at the University of Michigan in the Department of Cardiac Surgery, and one of the most important tasks I do daily is mentoring the next generation of researchers. I feel that it is important, especially given the easy access scientists have now to technology, that we continue to teach how to critically think and work through a given scientific problem to find a solution. Now that solution might not be the one we ideally envisioned, but as a young scientist it is important to be able to think through the next steps in the process or troubleshoot to come up with a viable solution given failure. Critical thinking is not a process that can come from technology, and it was something my various mentors helped me to develop over years of research. That is why I believe it is important to promote mentorship at all stages of academic development. I know even as an Assistant Professor, I still need great mentors to help me as I begin to develop my new laboratory at the University of Michigan. In exchange, I feel it is important for me to promote and develop young scientists, so they excel in their chosen scientific pursuits.

I also feel it is important to interact and promote scientific careers at the high school level because you never know whether a student you mentor could choose a career as a scientist. It is exciting to me to think that an amazing project I judged at a high school science fair could one day turn into the next great scientific researcher. However, with that kind of interaction or in any mentoring relationship, it is important to pay attention to how to correctly bring out the best in your mentees. It is important to both guide and edify mentees to build them up as scientists with the hopes that they will want to continue the academic tradition one day. I want to promote and lift up my mentees scientifically, so that they also fall in love with science the way I did during graduate school.

While I continue to pursue academic research, my path toward independence has been unconventional and uncommon but has been great for me as a scientist. After graduate school, I had the opportunity to postdoc with an amazing laboratory at the University of Virginia. During that time, my current long-term collaborator, who is a cardiac surgeon, was looking for a scientist who he could have a partnership with and someone to help run his lab. While it’s not conventional to have these kinds of partnerships or long-term collaborations, it has offered me many great opportunities to publish and work in a field I would have otherwise not chosen. Therefore, in science it is important to be open to possibilities, to be flexible, and to remember that not everyone needs to follow pathways that have been the norm. For myself, I have benefitted from the collaboration by receiving mentorship and gaining access to materials I would have had a difficult time obtaining otherwise. In return, I run both my lab, my projects, and his lab as well. Yes, it is unconventional, but it works well for us, and we both benefit from the relationship. This unconventional path also brought both of us to the University of Michigan in the middle of Covid. It was definitely harder than normal to move in the middle of a global pandemic, but the labs have been offered really amazing opportunities from the move because we have been flexible and were willing to move at an unconventional time. These possibilities include new collaborations from the move that we might not have had if we had stayed at our current institution. I definitely did not imagine after living in the South my whole life that I would be moving to Michigan, but I did move and it’s been amazing for both myself and my collaborator. All of these great possibilities came from being flexible career wise.

My final suggestion is to always be writing-- write papers, write grants, write reviews, just write! It is easier to keep your “grant writing” skills going if you are constantly thinking about that skill and working to master it. I feel like these skills are also constantly changing and that to be the best at writing science, whether it be papers or grants, one needs to be constantly working at it. It’s hard to do, believe me I know from experience, but scientific writing is best when it is constantly maintained and perfected as the requirements change with the needs of a journal or granting agency.

To end on a metaphor, I see a career in science to be like a rose bush, with beautiful, amazing end products that everyone admires but that take time and effort to bring to fruition. Meanwhile, it’s also important to watch out for the thorns that can draw blood along the way. Science is not productive without “blood, sweat, and tears” but I think it’s also truly amazing and a passion-filled way to work for a living. Thank you for allowing me to share some of my wisdom.

Published September 9, 2021 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Mary Wallingford, Tufts University School of Medicine

Lessons Learned
by Mary Wallingford, Tufts University School of Medicine

Dear Colleagues,

Thank you for this opportunity to share some of the lessons that I’ve learned as a new PI and Assistant Professor at Tufts Medical Center (TMC). My lab pursues questions related to the vascular biology of pregnancy. Much of our work focuses specifically on the placenta, which is a highly vascularized organ that forms de novo with each pregnancy and mediates the transport of nutrients, oxygen, and waste between the maternal and fetal circulations. Normal placental vascular development is essential for fetal growth and development, as well as maternal cardiovascular health during pregnancy.

My lab is located in the Mother Infant Research Institute (MIRI) at TMC. The MIRI is a truly unique department which brings together basic, translational, and clinical scientists who study all aspects of pregnancy health and pregnancy outcomes, ranging from prepregnancy maternal metabolism in Dr. Patrick Catalano’s Lab to neonatal salivary diagnostics in Dr. Jill Maron’s Lab. Within the wider Tufts Health Sciences Campus community, I’m also a member of the Molecular Cardiology Research Institute (MCRI), the Cell, Molecular and Developmental Biology graduate program, the Pharmaceutics and Drug Design graduate program, and Tufts University School of Medicine Ob/Gyn. If you want to learn more about any of these programs, please reach out – I would be happy to hear from you!

In order to reflect on lessons that I’ve learned in my first three years as a PI, I think we first need to acknowledge that this last year of laboratory start-up coincided with the global SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. The World Health Organization officially declared the global COVID-19 pandemic on March 11th of 2020. As we enter the summer of 2021, pandemic-related crises and related safety measures are still underway in many countries around the world. With respect to scientific research, the pandemic necessitated widespread laboratory shutdowns. Many of us quickly adapted to previously unthinkable changes in the workplace, home, and academic environments. In the US over 580,000 lives have been lost. If you have lost a loved one to the pandemic, or are dealing with or caring for someone who is struggling with the long-term sequelae, I sincerely wish you continued strength.

Leading a lab during the pandemic has been an unprecedented and uniquely challenging experience. So, what lessons have I learned in these first three years?

First, I’ve learned that my lab members, colleagues, and collaborators are amazing individuals who are capable of braving unimaginable adversity and persisting. TMC does a high volume of human subjects research and many of our PIs are physician scientists. These investigators not only managed to transition their labs to remote research, but they also served essential roles in the pandemic by providing medical care and helping the hospitals adapt to the ever-changing needs of the pandemic. I think there was (is) also an important personal and social element to workplace relationships during the pandemic. Although providing medical care and advancing research were and continue to be paramount at TMC as we emerge from this crisis, I am equally impressed by the kindness, sympathy, and support that my colleagues and collaborators have demonstrated to each other. The main take away lesson is that when choosing a department to call your home, the people and their character may be one of the most important things to consider.

Second, I’ve learned that mentors who are truly inspired by science and driven to support others are absolutely priceless. My doctoral training was in mammalian embryology in the Mager Lab at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, in the Veterinary and Animal Science Department (VASCI). I worked in the lab of Dr. Jesse Mager and was mentored by Jesse as well as Dr. Kimberly Tremblay with whom we had joint lab meetings. During my last year of PhD research, Jesse gave me the freedom and support needed to perform a study later published in Developmental Dynamics (Wallingford et al 2013), which greatly influenced the course of my career. We produced a schematic of in utero peri-implantation mouse development that revealed several intriguing aspects of implantation, and ultimately solidified my interest in studying pregnancy. I then decided to obtain postdoctoral training in vascular development and disease, aiming to eventually apply this perspective to pregnancy and placenta research in my own independent lab.

I joined the lab of Dr. Cecilia Giachelli in the Department of Bioengineering at the University of Washington in 2012, and again was extremely fortunate to find a supportive mentor who encouraged my training and independence. We focused on a fundamental question at first: how does phosphorus, an essential element, get to the developing baby? Several years later Ceci’s generosity and support led to a successful K99 application, and I transitioned my R00 award to TMC in 2018. In addition to Ceci, many people at the University of Washington contributed to a successful and enjoyable postdoc experience. It is an absolutely fantastic place to do a postdoctoral fellowship in cardiovascular research. I was so fortunate to be able to learn from many great minds in addition to Ceci through training grants and local events, such as Dr. David Dichek who co-mentored me through an appointment on his training grant, Dr. Michael Chin, Dr. Mark Majesky, Dr. Chuck Murray, Dr. Ying Zheng, and of course the late Dr. Stephen M. Schwartz. I can’t tell you how many times during this last year I thought back to Steve’s encouraging and inspirational words. Steve supported my research vision and lauded my creativity and commitment; I will forever be grateful for his encouragement, as well as ALL of the seemingly random intriguing scientific questions that he would pose through an impromptu phone call, philosophical questions at a student seminar, or even at local political activism events. The main lesson here is twofold: to trainees I recommend that you ask many questions and try to listen with clarity. Years later you might find unexpected utility in advice given to you long ago. Conversely, PIs should remind ourselves to take time to reflect on the unique and expansive impact that our words can have.

Finally, I’ve learned that each person’s perspective and personal journey is unique. This has been especially evident over the last year as people have dealt with highly varied and asynchronous challenges. Even beyond the pandemic, this has become increasingly obvious to me as I participate in multiple different academic programs/departments and contribute to many collaborative teams. In this career we aim to become increasingly specialized. I’ve found that the most successful grants are those with a strong team in which people with multiple diverse areas of expertise work together. Communicating across disciplines is an essential and important challenge. In addition to differences among the fundamental knowledge, preconceptions, and perspectives harbored by individuals, groups of people also have unique sets of academic norms. One department may be run democratically with equal voice among faculty, others may be run with a more hierarchical structure. A fundamental research premise in one department which is so well accepted that it’s no longer acknowledged, may in turn be a completely foreign concept in another. I think the overarching lesson here is that communicating with colleagues, sharing your knowledge and ideas, and listening with an open mind is likely to support innovative, successful research programs. I can’t say that I’ve figured out HOW to do this yet, but I can say that I’ve begun to recognize the importance and I’m fully committed to moving forward.

Sincerely,

Mary Wallingford

Published July 1, 2021 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Carmen Halabi, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis

Lessons Learned
by Carmen Halabi, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis

My name is Carmen Halabi. I have been an Assistant Professor of Pediatrics at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis since July 2018. I am very grateful to NAVBO for giving me the opportunity to share some of the lessons I’ve learned since starting my independent lab as a physician-scientist. Having said that, I consider myself only beginning to embark on this journey and I have yet a lot to learn.

I would like to start off by saying that despite 18+ years of higher education (undergraduate, MD/PhD, residency, fellowship/postdoc), starting a laboratory has been one of the most challenging things I have done. No amount of training fully prepares you for what running a lab entails (having trainees, hiring/firing, budgeting, writing manuscripts/grants, taking care of a broken freezer or microscope and on and on…). Although a lot of it is learning by fire, I have been very fortunate to have had a lot of support and guidance from mentors, colleagues and administrators. Here are a few lessons I have learned along the way.

A supportive environment is of paramount importance. Whether you stay at the same institution or move institutions for your first faculty position, it’s important that you feel at home. One way this is accomplished, especially if you’re the only one working in a particular field in your division/department, is for your colleagues and chief/chair to recognize the value of and believe in what you’re doing. In addition, it’s important to have a group of allies, people who want to see you succeed because there will certainly be days when you question whether you can do this. This leads me to another point, which is to make sure to ask for help when you need it. People won’t know that you need something unless you ask for it and I have yet to encounter an individual not willing to help. Finally, support comes in many forms, in addition to having supportive mentors and colleagues, one point that pertains especially to physician-scientists is support from a time-protection standpoint. When negotiating a faculty position, make sure to ask not only what percent clinical vs. research time the position involves (25% vs. 75% or 20% vs. 80%, etc.), but also what that looks like. 25% clinical effort varies significantly from one institution to another.

Motivation is more important than skill when hiring people. This is rather simple, you can teach someone how to do a western or dissect a vessel, but it is very difficult to get them motivated if they don’t have an inner drive. Unfortunately, I have found it difficult to gauge motivation from an interview.

Learn to delegate when possible in an effort to use time more efficiently. A common advice I receive is to be at the bench doing experiments for as long as possible. While this is sound advice because you’re probably the most efficient member of the lab when starting out, it’s also important to not want to do everything yourself because as you get established you will have additional responsibilities (reviewing manuscripts, being on committees, etc.), which will distract you from a very important aspect of your career and the topic of my next lesson, writing.

Write. Write. Write. I’m stressing this point especially for myself With growing daily tasks, it’s easier or you feel more productive checking several little things off your to-do list (such as responding to an email, taking care of an animal protocol, etc.) than one big thing that will not get done in one sitting such as writing a manuscript or a grant. However, it’s crucial to carve out specific time to write because that’s what’s going to get you ahead in the end.

Don’t compare yourself to others (too much); this is a marathon, not a sprint. Finally, we all need a frame of reference to gauge how we’re doing. In fact, when reviewing candidates for any position, we look at their CV’s and consider what they’ve accomplished or where “they should be” at this stage of their career, however, it’s important to remember that every person’s “life” situation is different. Being stressed about falling “behind” may only decrease your enthusiasm and negatively affect your productivity rather than help you move forward. Keep your eye on the prize and set specific goals.

These are only a few of the lessons I have learned. There is a lot of advice out there. Just remember that what works for others may not work for you. Take the time to know yourself and move forward. There’s no question that having a lab is hard work and follows a bumpy road with many rejections and disappointments but remember why you’re doing this in the first place; the rewards are many!!

An additional resource to consult as a postdoc/junior faculty is: Making the Right Moves: A Practical Guide to Scientific Management for Postdocs and New Faculty, Second Edition https://www.hhmi.org/science-education/programs/making-right-moves

Published May 6, 2021 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Yi Fan, University of Pennsylvania

Lessons Learned
by Yi Fan, University of Pennsylvania

I appreciate the opportunity offered by NAVBO for me to share a reflection of my lessons learned. I am currently an Associate Professor at the University of Pennsylvania. Through my experience in the last 7 years as a faculty member, I have learned how to manage myself to be an independent scientist, a laboratory head, and a teacher. My advice to new faculty can be summarized in four themes: 1) make a practical plan toward your ultimate goal, 2) overcome frustrations, 3) build a nutritious environment for mentoring, and 4) keep learning.

Think something big, and do something small. Don’t be fooled by Tom Brokaw with his quote “It's easy to make a buck. It's a lot tougher to make a difference.” Considering the current funding situation, it is hard for anyone to make a buck, particularly for new faculty members. While you can keep pursuing something big to make a difference, you may need to do something small to make sure you can complete some projects, publish decent papers, and secure several grants in a timely manner. This will help you establish a track record you much need at this stage, which can serve as a foundation for your future success. I would suggest you to prioritize all of your research projects, to analyze the strengths of everyone in your group, and to leverage your available resources to draft a practical plan, by which you focus efforts to publish your first papers and get your initial grants from federal or private funding agencies that have small start-up funds for young investigators.

Always too early to give up. The most common word that could characterize the academic lives of most faculty members at their early stage, unfortunately, is “rejection”. The earlier you realize this truth, the easier you could handle the frustration it causes. Rejection could frequently happen to papers and grant proposals you first submit, largely due to potentially underdeveloped nature of these submissions and the unestablished reputation of your own laboratory. If you are not well prepared, the repeated rejections will be a source of a large amount of frustration and eventually damage your confidence despite your earlier success as a trainee. I have witnessed several talented junior faculty members who suffered from unsuccessful funding issues in their first three years and finally they gave up the projects and quit their academic career. I think it is always too early to give up a project or a career. There are no secrets in academic success, but just keep improving and trying. From a retrospective point of view, I recognize that I benefited a lot from the rejection rather than acceptance in my early career, which helped me identify the flaws of my initial research concepts, experimental designs, and scientific directions. In fact, the criticizing comments from peer review contributed significantly to the improvement of my initial projects, avoiding a potential bigger failure at the later stage. When you get a rejection, just take a deep breath, give up your give-up ideas, get the constructive criticisms, and move on.

Act as a mentorly boss. A faculty member has dual CEO roles in a laboratory, as a chief executive officer and a chief education officer, and the latter really matters. The fundamental task for a new faculty member is to build a research team with a nutritious environment for mentoring trainees. An encouraging, mildly stimulative environment is essential for all trainees to obtain expertise, complete work, and develop their career, which mutually promotes the success of the laboratory. Ever since I was a junior faculty, I have set goals to train promising postdoctoral fellows toward their independency. I am particularly proud that several of my former trainees, whose work had laid solid foundation for our future research, have now become tenure-track assistant professors. This patrimony may root from my previous laboratory led by my PhD advisor Dr. Paul Fox, a visionary scientist who always encourages and promotes his trainees. The essential lesson I would like to share in this part is that the success of your laboratory heavily depends on the success of your trainees’ science and career through a mentoring niche.

Stay hungry for knowledge and wisdom. Postdoc-to-faculty transition does not necessarily mean the end of training, and, from my view, rather suggests a start of a new era of self-driven education. As a new faculty member, you will need to acquire a knowledge base covering all research directions you want to explore, and more importantly, to learn wisdoms for laboratory management, science development, and trainee education. To achieve this, one of most feasible approaches is through close interaction with some senior, well-established scientists who are willing to share their research philosophy with you. For example, when I started my independent laboratory, I had joint laboratory meetings with Dr. Celeste Simon and Dr. Robert Vonderheide who are pioneers in cancer biology and immunology research and provided incredible suggestions to my academic development. The key thing is to treat yourself always as a student rather than a teacher, and staying humble and hungry will keep you accumulating knowledge and wisdom.

The most fascinating part of scientific research is the amazing journey of exploration and discovery, which is full of uncertainties that can cause the unexpected and anxiety in a scientist’s career. I hope that new faculty members can quickly develop practical skills to facilitate career progression and would then fully enjoy the journey!

Published March 11, 2021 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Song Hu, Washington University in St. Louis

LESSONS LEARNED
BY SONG HU, WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN ST. LOUIS

First, I want to thank the NAVBO Education Committee for inviting me to contribute to the Lessons Learned series, which gives me an opportunity to reflect on my professional development in the past few years during this unusual holiday season.

I started my own research program at the University of Virginia in 2013 and was recently recruited back to my alma mater, Washington University in St. Louis. I am an imaging scientist and biomedical engineer by training, and I am thankful to my mentors, collaborators, and colleagues at Washington University and the University of Virginia, who introduced me to cerebrovascular and cardiovascular research and have helped me leverage the impact of our imaging technologies in these exciting fields.

Making the transition from a trainee in a well-established lab to a junior PI who was expected to build a new research program from scratch is probably one of the biggest challenges I have ever faced in my career. Looking back, I have made some right moves but also many mistakes. I would like to take this opportunity to share some of them with those who are expecting or in the process of this transition.

Establish your own niche as early as possible. One question that you might have been repeatedly asked during faculty interviews is how you will distinguish yourself from your mentors (and peers). Indeed, identifying and establishing your own niche early in your career is key to a successful transition to an independent PI. One important piece of advice I have received is that you want to work on something that only you can do or you can do best.

Be focused but open-minded when starting your research program. As a new PI, you are likely to have access to very limited resources. Thus, be selective in your initial projects and focus on those that can best help establish your own niche. That said, be open-minded and listen to others. A core technology of our lab, which led to our first publication and helped me identify myself in the field, was inspired by my long-term collaborator, Shayn Peirce-Cottler. Through our discussions, it became clear to me that in vascular research, different technologies have been applied to assess different aspects of the microcirculation. The discrepancy in spatiotemporal resolution and contrast mechanism makes it a real challenge to integrate them to form a comprehensive view. Focusing our efforts to address this unmet challenge led to the development of multi-parametric photoacoustic microscopy (PAM) and broad applications in brain and cardiovascular diseases.

Do not let money sway your hiring decision. As repeatedly mentioned in this series, hiring is often a big challenge for new PIs. So, if you see talents, go for them without hesitation. Limited funding might be a constraint for many of us, but do not let it sway your decision. You can always find a way to support them, and your investment will be paid off!

Find the right balance between hands-on and hands-off mentoring. Different PIs have different mentoring styles, and there is no one-size-fits-all strategy. One thing that I feel important is to find a proper balance between hands-on and hands-off mentoring. Getting more involved in the initial stage can help trainees quickly adapt to a new research environment/direction and pick up necessary research skills. Gradually backing off will give them more room to experiment their own ideas, learn how to be independent, and take initiative.

Be strategic when expanding your research program. Once you pass the “surviving stage”, the next step is to thrive and transform. Be strategic when making the next moves. Always remind yourself of the big picture—where you see your lab in 5 to 10 years—and invest your efforts accordingly and wisely.

Let application drive technology development. Working at the interface of imaging and biomedicine, I would also like to share some of my own thoughts with those who aim to advance biomedicine through technology development. To date, some of the best technologies developed in our lab have been driven by important biomedical questions—the multi-parametric PAM for comprehensive characterization of the microvasculature, the head-restrained PAM for functional-metabolic imaging of the awake behaving brain, and the integrated fluorescence and photoacoustic microscopy for mechanistic understanding of the neurovascular unit. Make time out of your busy schedule to read literature, attend conferences and seminars, and exchange ideas with your collaborators, colleagues, and trainees. Identify questions that you are excited about and uniquely positioned to tackle, and make a difference using your technologies!

I hope that you find some of the lessons I learned over the years helpful, as I did when reading this series. Getting through the pandemic, we have faced unprecedented challenges, both professionally and personally. I hope you have found a way to maintain the work-life balance. Wish you a healthy and prosperous Year 2021!

Published January 14, 2021 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Teresa Sanchez, Weill Cornell Medicine

LESSONS LEARNED
BY TERESA SANCHEZ, WEILL CORNELL MEDICINE

My name is Teresa Sanchez and I am an Assistant Professor of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, with a secondary appointment at the Feil Family Brain and Mind Research Institute at Weill Cornell Medicine. I obtained my first independent position and established my laboratory initially at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School. Subsequently, for family reasons, I had to relocate to New York City, and I moved my laboratory to Weill Cornell Medicine. I am very privileged to have had the opportunity to establish my research program in two outstanding institutions and I am happy to share my experience transitioning from trainee to faculty, setting up my lab and moving my research program from Harvard Medical School to Weill Cornell Medicine.

1. Transitioning from trainee to independent investigator. Establishing and leading a laboratory requires a complex set of skills, which go beyond the ability to conduct rigorous science. As junior faculty, we continue heavily involved in data generation and analysis as well as manuscript preparation. In addition, we take on further responsibilities, such as securing extramural funding, managing and leading the laboratory, as well as teaching, and mentoring. During my PhD and Postdoctoral training, I had the opportunity to acquire a solid background in science and strong technical expertise, even lab management experience. While these skills are very important, I soon realized that they were not sufficient to successfully establish my research program and direct the laboratory. Other personal skills, such as having good strategies for efficient time management, effective communication, negotiation, conflict resolution, as well as learning to build resilience and to face and overcome obstacles, are equally important. In particular, I found that learning to efficiently manage and protect my time was pivotal in order to dedicate enough time to write and obtain grants to be able to develop my independent lines of investigation and effectively lead the team.

My advice to new principal investigators would be to, early on, dedicate time to reflect on the importance of these aspects of your personality and how they affect your work. Becoming aware of your own strengths and weaknesses is the first step to work towards improvement. I found that being able to reach out to colleagues and senior mentors to seek advice as well as participating in leadership courses in my institutions was very helpful to identify and strengthen some of my personal areas for improvement.

2. Building a team. When building the research team, I found it is very important to recruit scientists with distinct and complementary expertise and from different countries and ethnic backgrounds. As team leader, a top priority should be to foster a culture of rigor, integrity, transparency, collaboration, equity, diversity, inclusivity and a sense of community in the laboratory. In my opinion, that is the ideal environment for professional and personal growth of the individuals and the team as a whole. Useful strategies to establish these values in the laboratory are to lead by example and to emphasize early on (e.g. at the moment of the interview of the candidates) what is the mission of our laboratory, how this mission is aligned with the goals of the individual members and how critical this culture is to achieve our mission.

Having laboratory group meetings and individual meetings regularly is very important for the progression and timely completion of the projects and to assure good communication. In the laboratory meetings, it is important to encourage critical thinking, transparency and constructive criticism, always in a relaxed and friendly atmosphere. Overall, I find very important to focus on the positive aspects of our work to motivate the team and help promote resilience and perseverance.

When conflicts arise, the principal investigator, as an objective and neutral observer, plays a critical role in resolving the issues and building consensus. I found helpful to talk first, individually with the persons involved and then, discuss the issue openly altogether and agree on future actions.

In summary, my advice is to spare no effort to foster creativity, innovation, scientific rigor, interdisciplinary research, perseverance, resilience, a sense of community and a culture of diversity and inclusion in the lab. I have learned that these are good strategies to build a strong, motivated and productive team.

3. Balancing personal life and work. I found this aspect particularly challenging as my family was growing and I continued taking on new responsibilities at work. For instance, on a personal note, relocating my family to New York City and moving the laboratory to Weill Cornell Medicine shortly after the birth of our second child and in the midst of my first R01 renewal was especially demanding. More recently, due to the COVID19 pandemic, we have all faced and are currently facing unprecedented challenges in our professional and personal lives. While the pandemic has affected all of us in many different ways, the negative impact on the career growth of junior scientists with young children is becoming very evident. The current limited options for childcare and education are hindering junior faculty and it is disproportionally affecting female trainees and faculty, accentuating gender disparities in academic growth.

My advice to young faculty with young children scrambling to maintain their productivity during this pandemic (or other unexpected circumstances in the future) would be to encourage them to keep their perspective and not to be intimidated by the faster career progress of other scientists who may not have children. In addition, it is important for faculty to petition academic institutions to find ways to help the career growth of junior faculty with young children during this pandemic. We can make very unique and important contributions to science by mentoring and helping the next generation of young female professionals in biomedical research, which is critical to maintain a diverse and vibrant scientific community. If no action is taken, we are at high risk of losing the progress made in the last few decades to increase equity and diversity in academia.

Overall, at times during my career, it has been challenging to reconcile my professional and family responsibilities. However, I firmly believe that being a mother has given me greater perspective and has helped me to be a better scientist, mentor and team leader. My message to other female faculty establishing their labs is to keep the perspective and focus on the positive impact that raising children have on our ability to make unique and significant contributions to science.

4. Moving the laboratory. Sooner or later in our careers you will likely consider moving the lab due to professional or personal reasons. When considering other offers, look for opportunities to expand your research program and your network of collaborators. Also, make sure that there is institutional commitment and that resources to grow your career are at your disposal. When negotiating with your current and future institutions, it is important to be flexible but also to remember that you are your best advocate. Having gone through this process once, I have learned that it is critical to plan to give yourself enough time to move in order to finish pending projects and submit pending grants. If possible, negotiate with both institutions having a co-appointment to facilitate the transition.

5. Concluding remarks. I hope that sharing some of the lessons that I learned establishing my laboratory is helpful to other scientists. I always found it very enriching to learn from other people’s experience and I appreciated the honest advice that I received from my colleagues and senior mentors. However, I personally find that it is also very important to be creative and genuine when crafting our careers and not to feel intimidated if our career path has not been conventional according to pre-set standards. As the Spanish poet, Antonio Machado wrote in 1912: “Caminante no hay camino, se hace camino al andar. Caminante, son tus huellas el camino y nada más”; “Traveler, there is no path, the path is made by walking. Traveler, your footprints create the path, your footprints and nothing else.”

Published November 5, 2020 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Bhama Ramkhelawon, New York University Langone Medical Center

LESSONS LEARNED
BY BHAMA RAMKHELAWON, NEW YORK UNIVERSITY LANGONE MEDICAL CENTER

I am thankful to NAVBO for giving me the opportunity to share my experience with you in this column. I invite early career fellows to read theses sections from all the past contributors. They are REAL lesson learned. I feel it is worth mentioning that I write these words in August 2020 during the unfortunate COVID-19 pandemic that struck us with a pounding weight and burdened us with many uncertainties for the future. There have been may lessons learned from this pandemic. Decisions were made based on observation and data collected during the initial wave of infections. As we gathered more evidence, we became more familiar with the mode of infection and contamination of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. We were then able to refine treatment of patients and make more informed decision to the general public.

This scenario will most likely portray the journey of a junior to a senior scientist. There will be many first times seasoned with complex choices, round-about, painful moments, rejections, but as hard as all these seem to be in the beginning, with careful observation, patience and resilience, you will eventually have “Veni, Vidi, Vici” as your motto. My colleagues have all provided valuable insights into measures to adopt to trace a successful trajectory as an independent investigator. I would like to take this space to share new perspectives in this spectrum of initiatives that provide guidance and encourage opportunities. I emphasize on these specific points below:

“Professional personality” etiquette. As my colleagues have rightly depicted, networking is one of the important pieces of the puzzle in becoming a successful principal investigator. However, successful meet and greet seem to be facilitated for individuals with outgoing/extrovert personality traits. Personality becomes an important factor. We all evolve in a spectrum of characters-from the most introverts and shy to the exuberant extroverts. We have to recognize our personality and develop a “professional personality” if we fall more in the introvert zones. You will spend a lot of time asking, requesting and criticizing. To editors, collaborators, students, fellows, mentors. Develop this professional personality trait. Practice at asking and questioning. Practice at demonstrating excitement about your research. Practice in your daily routine exercises for example when you order coffee, try to ask for something additional or question how, where coffee is made. Watch and learn. Like what we did with COVID-19. When you leave the lab, you can drop the professional coat. As human beings we tend to reciprocate previous situations and experiences. For those who unfortunately were unlucky and experienced bad mentorship during their training, we sometimes tend to reciprocate these in our lab. Take the opportunity to take a new direction and Recreate instead of reciprocating. We take the best from our past but we should also drop the worse. Make this become your professional trait.

Be organized. Organization is the holy grail of optimal time management. This might seem obvious for individuals with management training but just within couple of years in your scientific leadership role, you will be faced with piles of information to collect- scientific results, dossiers on personnel, finance records, the tenth version of the manuscript or grant proposal… keeping track is important. We will forget and spend hours screening your emails for important information. Take good habit of recording and tracking everything properly and your team will follow.

Trust your results. In our work, we build on what others have discovered. But if we go back in time, these were first time discoveries for these scientists. Some of which you might consider groundbreaking and sometimes appear surprising to you. Details matter. Trust your results and don’t be afraid if your findings seem a bit provocative. With the era of powerful new tools available for in-depth analysis, you might indeed expose new findings that will change the way scientists thought in your field. These are the most exciting moments. Keep exploring.

Be thankful. Express gratitude. Mentors will take time to advise, guide, provide feedback etc. It is important to be thankful not just out of curtesy but it also reflects on the importance of what they did for you. And you will take this time to give to others, your students and fellows. Be thankful to yourself, this journey is tough with many ups and downs. Celebrate the ups, fight the downs. Watch, learn and succeed.

Published September 3, 2020 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Julie Phillippi, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine

LESSONS LEARNED
BY JULIE PHILLIPPI, UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE

I’m grateful to the NAVBO Education Committee for the invitation to write and share a reflection of my lessons learned. I have been a faculty member at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine for almost 13 years. In that time, I have learned how to embrace several challenges. In time, perceived disadvantages became strengths that I learned to own and celebrate openly with a sense of pride. After taking inventory of my lessons learned, my message to new faculty can be summarized in four themes: 1) Tune in to what gives you energy, 2) Proactively seek situations that favor serendipity, 3) Don’t shy away from non-linear career paths, and 4) Prioritize relationships.

Take notice of what brings you energy and invest yourself there. Experiencing joy can go hand in hand with energy, and both can emerge when one or a group works in “flow.” The emerging concept of flow can be described as a balance between high challenge and high skill. While in flow, focus and productivity are high, and enjoyment is derived from the work. A unique energy is palpable. The mind is open and poised for active growth. Though flow can be achieved with intentional practice, commitment to a shared purpose can conjure flow organically. There can be joy in little moments that renew energy. Perhaps it’s making the acquaintance of potential new collaborator. A smile from a colleague who is usually serious. Moments of silence when working side by side. Where one draws energy has a lot to do with personality. Make a mental note of these joyful experiences and recall them as needed to draw energy.

Create opportunities that favor serendipity. Most of us have a story about an experience of serendipity. An event or occurrence that transpired seemingly by chance, with no other logical explanation. Recalling a serendipitous event invokes a positive feeling. Perhaps it was that first chance encounter with a now close collaborator, a “right place at the right time” kind of interaction. Maybe an unexpected experimental outcome led to a key observation that opened up an entirely new line of inquiry. Serendipity can bring forth joy into your work. How can one move about a career in such a way that increases opportunities to experience serendipity?

One idea is simply be actively open to new experiences and be willing to step out of a comfort zone. One example from my own experience is when I chose to meet with a guest seminar speaker somewhat as a favor and service to my Institute. My perspective is that saying “yes” can foster collegiality. (Side note: gracefully saying “no” is also important for professional development and shaping healthy working relationships.) On this particular occasion, the guest speaker held a role as Editor-in-Chief for a high impact journal. I approached the meeting with a simple intention to chat about the publishing field. By the end of the meeting, I had a recommendation to become an Associate Editor at a new sister journal. That simple 30-minute meeting led to an entire new opportunity for professional growth. My advice is to be open, meet with guest speakers, and attend seminars outside of your home Department. It need not always be a calculated pre-conceived strategy. You never really know who might reveal or open the next door for you.

Be open to non-linear academic career paths. This next opinion may be controversial, but I think academia places too much importance on pure independence in the overall value of a scientist and as a basis for advancement. When I first joined the faculty, it was as Research Assistant Professor in the non-tenure stream. I functioned initially in a lab manager role tasked with helping to establish a new research program with an early career surgeon-scientist. In this role, I was also afforded substantial latitude to develop independent research projects. These early efforts in the background led to a transition to the tenure stream and writing proposals as a PI. At the same time, I was collaboratively designing experiments and co-writing proposals together with the surgeon as PI. This symbiotic arrangement evolved into a highly efficient and productive multi-PI group with my surgeon partner and I each landing multiple NIH awards. Though some may have viewed this arrangement as too “dependent,” the partnership was fulfilling, prolific, and compatible with career advancement. Importantly, it was best for the science we were working together to understand. Individual ideas and creativity are undeniably important in establishing oneself academically. One should also develop and practice self-reliance because an opportunity that challenges you to function more independently may arise. However, I think clinically impactful research is a team contact sport. To me this means that when one’s ideas are extended and shared with trusted colleagues, they touch and blend with others’ ideas and perspectives. Breakthroughs are made, partnerships are nurtured, and multiple lives are positively impacted. I believe there is room in one’s career to grow individually and be a part of a something bigger than yourself. It requires a specific chemistry of personalities, selflessness at times, and importantly, trust.

Partnerships depend on building and maintaining trust. Finally, I have lesson learned about partnerships. Academia requires strategy but one need not play games. It is a fact that honesty and transparency are key ingredients of trust. What I have learned is how essential upholding these values truly are for maintaining partnerships. I encourage you to practice gratitude when others display trust in you. When broken, trust is difficult if not impossible to repair. Trust can waver without breaking and, with a renewal of honesty and transparency, can emerge stronger and deepen, thus enabling a partnership to evolve. When you find trust with a person, protect it, continually nurture it, and let them know you treasure it, because you have something precious and irreplaceable.

Published May 14, 2020 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Amber Stratman, Washington University School of Medicine

LESSONS LEARNED
BY AMBER STRATMAN, WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE

My name is Amber Stratman, and I have been an Assistant Professor at Washington University School of Medicine since December 2018. Time has flown by, and while I’m still learning to navigate many aspects of being a new PI, I’m happy to share some of my ‘Lessons Learned’ about accepting a job, the importance of community, and myself. So, with that in mind…

Congrats! You’re on the job market! My number one piece of advice when choosing your new position is to understand the expectations of the job you are taking and the community of people you are joining. This might seem like obvious advice, and one might think that the definition of ‘success’ is fairly ubiquitous in science, but it’s not. There are so many different types of institutions, positions, job descriptions, departmental cultures, and expectations it’s almost overwhelming. Ask questions, even if you think they are silly. Start the position you chose with your eyes open to as many aspects of your future home as you can. As part of this process, reach out to future colleagues, other recent faculty hires (even if you don’t know them well), and senior mentors to get answers to questions you have. Do the research on your potential new home, and remember to ask for what you need to succeed.

That said, no one can fully prepare you for what it is going to be like to run a lab. It’s hard. Very few people are trained as managers before you’re thrust into a position where you have trainees… and budgets… and teaching… and grants to write… and the list goes on, and on, and on! … Accept now that you are going to make mistakes. You’re going to hire the wrong person and have to fire them; you’re going to follow an unproductive idea, have a bad day, have to say no; you’re going to be sick, have to prioritize your time in tough situations, and let people down; you’re going to have a lot of days with rejections, days you aren’t sure what you’re doing, and possibly even days you want to quit.

BUT you’ll also have successes, and find you have allies, both expected and unexpected; you’ll have ideas that take off, trainees that succeed, and hard-fought battles you’ve won; you’ll have days that make the difficult one’s worth it and remind you why you chose science in the first place. The important thing through all of this, is not being afraid to ask for help. Go to a management or a mentoring workshop, take a grant writing course, seek advice from your support network. Spend time building the culture and community of people around you, both near and far. These are the people who will not only help you navigate the hard decisions and days, but who will give you genuine advice and celebrate your success. And do the same for them.

Because—one of the hardest things about this job is the feeling that you are behind (even if you aren’t!). That success will never happen, that you’re not going to finish that paper or get funding; that your research is moving too slowly or that you just can’t pull your ideas together to submit that grant. The emails never stop. The deadlines never stop. The requests for your time never stop.

BUT sometimes you have to. It’s ok to take time off. It’s ok to spend time with family or friends away from work—there are always more deadlines, and emails can wait. We all know this job takes hard work and commitment, but it is also okay to have a life outside of running your lab—when needed rest, reset, and come back recharged.

During the first few years of your lab, you are going to get a lot of advice—some good, some bad, some well-meaning but possibly out of touch, and a lot that is completely unsolicited. But I will let you in on a secret—no one has it all figured out. Everyone only knows what works for themselves. There are as many different paths to success as there are different types of people. Follow your own internal compass. You know your work, your strengths, your novelty, and your limits. Trust yourself.

This brings me to my final point—and for me this is the most important—don’t let imposter syndrome rule you and your decisions. Follow your ideas, do your controls, think boldly, and don’t second guess your seat at the table.

Some additional resources outside of NAVBO:
https://futurepislack.wordpress.com
https://newpislack.wordpress.com
https://grants.nih.gov/grants/about_grants.htm
https://www.nsf.gov/funding/azindex.jsp
http://lab-management.embo.org/dates

Published March 5, 2020 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Sara Nunes Vasconcelos, University of Toronto

LESSONS LEARNED
BY SARA NUNES VASCONCELOS, UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO

My name is Sara Nunes Vasconcelos and I have been an Assistant Professor at the University of Toronto since 2014 and a Scientist at the Toronto General Hospital Research Institute since 2012. It has been an amazing journey and I have learned a lot.

In reading the Lessons learned from other PIs I found that a number of ‘lessons’ really resonated with me, like the value of choosing the right place, seeking out mentoring, making time to write, and finding out which resources are available at your institution, etc. I’d like to add a few things that I learned that may be of value to others as well.

Seek advice but only follow what makes sense to you. When I first started and shared my grant with more seasoned PIs who also sat on committee meeting panels (known as study section in the US) I was taken aback by the somewhat contradictory feedback I received. It was very confusing! When I expressed this to my colleague (and fellow NAVBO member) Myron Cybulsky I heard: “Sara, there are many ways to skin a cat, you have to find out what works for you.” And I have been following that advice ever since - thanks, Myron! This is true not just for grants, but for hiring, presenting, teaching, etc. Just because someone has been doing something successfully for a long time does not mean that the same approach will necessarily work for you. In other words, there are no formulas!

Celebrate every achievement. This job can be challenging and is replete with rejections (grants, manuscripts, awards). Do not let these obscure your view of the big picture! I find it helps to celebrate every accomplishment, especially those of your trainees.

Expand your research. I realized I was often limited in my day-to-day interactions in terms of the people that I sought feedback from and that this gave me a limited (and perhaps field-specific) perspective on things. So, recently I decided to join Twitter. I was initially skeptical but decided to give it a try anyway. I have met so many researchers from different countries and also from Toronto because of Twitter. I have also engaged in advocacy related to the state of research in Canada and I feel that I am a more integrated part of the community now. Yes, you can interact with a lot of people at scientific meetings and other venues but I found social media (Twitter, Slack) let you have those interactions every day without having to go anywhere. Because of my social media presence, I have also been able to contribute to the communications committees of different Societies – including that of NAVBO.

Find out what the metrics for success are for your institution but do not allow yourself to be limited by them. Yes, we all aim to get grants, mentor, publish high impact papers, serve on grant review panels, become recognized by our peers, and receive awards… But is there anything else that matters to you? I found that I am also passionate about supporting underrepresented groups in science. So, I have dedicated more of my time to accomplishing this - by joining Women Leadership committees and mentoring at-risk girls that show interest in science - instead of saying yes to another type of committee that does not appeal as much to me. I have also tried to come up with other small ways that I could contribute, such as agreeing to have high school placements in my lab on the condition that the student is part of a minority group. We have a limited amount of time, we might as well prioritize what we are passionate about.

Ask. I loved Cynthia St. Hilaire’s advice about saying YES to things. I would add that you should not only say YES but also volunteer your time. Ask to be involved in anything that is important to you and that you feel you could add value to, such as organizing a conference, creating a workshop on a topic that is important to you or chairing a session at a meeting you are going to anyway, etc. Most often than not there are too many things to be done and very few people willing to help and those are great opportunities to meet new people, bring a fresh perspective and change the way that things are done.

Published January 9, 2020 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Patrick A. Murphy, University of Connecticut Health Center

LESSONS LEARNED
BY PATRICK A. MURPHY, UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT HEALTH CENTER

There is no doubt that there is a yawning gap between the postdoctoral position and the faculty position, and finding that faculty position takes foresight, determination, and also a bit of luck.

The foresight should be in finding a research trajectory that is ready to expand through some new techniques or approaches, and a PI that is able to support you in that. For those who are looking at postdoctoral positions, make sure that you talk with all of the members of the lab before you join, not just the ones the PI trots out. I chose my post-doctoral lab because the people in the lab were all happy. That is not chance. That comes from setting up a lab environment where each post-doc or student project is well separated, and being sensitive to conflicts that arise and dealing with them quickly. The ideal lab will host a variety of backgrounds and skill sets that complement each other and a PI that supports that through clear project demarcations. Your ideal PI will be able to provide you with top notch collaborators that respect your work and enhance it. So, seek someone willing to fight for you.

Once you have settled on your lab environment, you will need to be determined. My graduate PI told me once that many people have the intelligence to be a PI, but few have the grit – and I think she was absolutely right. Put in the work and start writing grants. In addition to providing focus for your science, winning grants will give you autonomy in lab that is hard to achieve in any other way. Simply put, each lab must pay the bills, and if you are paying your part, you will have a much larger say in how your part of the lab is run. I heard during my interviews and conversations afterwards, that a history of funding is a compelling case for future funding and a productive researcher, making these awards an important part of your faculty transition.

Finally, landing that faculty position will take luck. As scientists, we don’t believe much in luck, but luck is another way of saying chance. The more chances you give yourself, the more likelihood you will have the outcome you seek. When I applied to faculty positions, I had an excel sheet of my contacts with institutes I thought could be a good fit. That included both open positions and cold calls. I pulled all of the strings I had, every contact I thought might be helpful, and let them know I was on the market. Even with all of that, it took two full seasons to get it right. But I did get offers, and they were from the places I felt would be the best fit for me. Luck, or chance, means you find the group of researchers you complement well, but you can put yourself in that position by working hard to find that fit. You want to hear about the position before it opens and to have put in the groundwork to know how to sell yourself as the best candidate for it.

Ok, you’ve made it. Suddenly there are so many open doors and research directions to follow, how do you choose? For me, it began with taking stock of my new environment, meeting as many people as possible and thinking hard about my long-term goals. Through this searching, I discovered two things that have shaped my first few years here.

First, through the foresight of my chair Linda Shapiro, I was connected to a developing project program grant (PPG) group led by Dr. Annabelle Rodriquez-Oquendo. This group brought immunologists together with human geneticists and lipid researchers. I was able to contribute as a researcher focused on endothelial cell functions and with expertise in the low flow models that drive plaque. This group has helped to bring new perspectives and lots of brain power to my own grant and paper preparations, and has resulted in the establishment of some exciting new models to assess T cell functions in the plaque microenvironment with Dr. Tony Vella, which we recently published with a review in the American Journal of Physiology. This is one of the early publications which can be so helpful for later grant applications, and would have been hard to get going so quickly without his help. The moral in this for me is that it is worth the time to find the groups in which you can have mutually beneficial relationships, and put time into those relationships. The experience of the senior researchers you meet through these interactions will be invaluable.

Second, I found we have amazing resources in flow-cytometry, single cell analysis, and sequencing. The ability to quickly get onto a sorter within minutes of deciding to run an experiment, and with the help of very talented technical assistance, allowed me to run a large set of CRISPR screens I would have otherwise hesitated to take on. This investment ultimately led to a successful AHA Innovative Project award, and is providing a basis for two NIH R01 grant submissions, and several manuscripts underway. These resources and the amount of time I have had in these cores gathering these data would have been hard to come by in many other institutes where these resources are less accessible. Find what works well near you, what gives you an edge, and take full advantage of that.

For everyone that sees this entire process as incredibly daunting and painful, it is. I hope you are as fortunate as I am to have a spouse who understands, and at least is willing to tolerate this lifestyle. It is often hard to explain that our job is also our hobby. My wife Catherine deserves more credit than I can give her here. However, for those that would be put off by the long hours and low pay through the early stages of this career, I can tell you the joy and excitement of discovering a new way to look at things, and to develop the next generation scientists, is an amazing feeling. I feel very lucky to have met the people I have in science, and to see many of them a few times a year at meetings. I’ve had many long conversations on the philosophy of science with my graduate mentor, Rong Wang, often at odd hours and on late night drives home. She has been incredibly helpful throughout my major career decisions, well beyond my time in her lab. I have also seen the beautiful camaraderie among the former trainees of Richard Hynes, and the respect and science ethos he has instilled in the “Hynsonians”. Both are inspirations for me in establishing the type of lab that continues far beyond the walls of the institute.

Published September 5, 2019 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Ngan Huang, Stanford University

LESSONS LEARNED
BY NGAN HUANG, STANFORD UNIVERSITY

My name is Ngan F. Huang, PhD, and I have been an Assistant Professor in the department Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery at Stanford University since 2013. Many people consider the milestones of a successful Assistant Professor to include: publishing high impact papers, receiving grants, getting top teaching evaluations, serving on grant review panels, becoming nationally recognized by peers, obtaining leadership positions in service organizations, becoming journal editors, and receiving achievement awards. However, these milestones can be challenging and even overwhelming. I remember feeling lost as a brand new faculty member, not knowing how I would eventually be able to reach these milestones towards securing tenure. Now, six years later, I would like to share some of the progressive steps I took towards reaching these milestones.

Years 1 & 2: Setting up the laboratory and developing thick skin for rejection. I consider the first two years as being simultaneously the easiest as well as most challenging years of being an Assistant Professor. The reason for being the easiest is because new faculty would already know that the initial tasks are to establish your laboratory, purchase any necessary equipment that cannot be borrowed, hire your first trainees, and start teaching. Although the process of doing these tasks can be daunting, at least every new faculty already knows these initial responsibilities. On the other hand, the most challenging aspect of the first two years is in getting that first grant without leaning on the shoulders of your former mentor.

Writing a fundable grant requires first and foremost good ideas, and getting that first grant is to affirm your ability to develop novel ideas and to build self-confidence. Therefore, the first two years are like a testing ground to get feedback from reviewers about your ideas. Some ideas might be met with enthusiasm, and other ideas will be harshly criticized. This seemingly endless cycle of writing grants and then learning of the funding outcome is like a filtration process—separating the non-fundable ideas from those that stand a chance. Although these rejections can provide some constructive feedback on potential improvements to your ideas, it may feel very disappointing at times. In times of receiving rejection, my advice for new faculty is to persevere and not give up. When facing rejection, take a break to seek support from colleagues who have gone through the same experience. At a later point, revisit the reviewer comments to identify ways to improve the quality of the proposal, or possibly to approach the same question from a different angle. As an example, I once took the well-received elements of a non-funded R01 grant and submitted it as a R21 grant, which was later funded. Also consider alternative funding agencies that might be more receptive to your ideas. Being able to grow from writing non-funded grants is a necessary aspect of academia. Keep writing and refining your ideas. Do not be afraid of rejection, as your skin will adapt with time by thickening.

Years 3 & 4: Becoming visible in your field and getting that elusive major grant. Most new faculty members already have training in writing manuscripts and grants, but many people have never learned about becoming visible in the research community. I used to think that publishing high impact papers was the only way to get invited as a speaker at conferences or to become an editor of a journal. I realized a few years into my faculty position that taking an active role to becoming visible in the field is more effective and more fun. Whereas in the first two years I was predominantly focused on attending research conferences, by the third year I began to actively organize conference sessions, volunteer for service committees, and distribute my CV to program officers for consideration as a grant reviewer. Becoming actively involved in societies or service organizations is helpful towards becoming recognized for both research and service in the research community. In the process of organizing conference sessions, you will meet other colleagues, some of which whom may one day be a reviewer on your manuscripts or grants. Social media is also emerging as a highly effective way to meet colleagues and publicize your latest research findings.

By now you have already have gained ample experience in writing grants and perhaps have successfully received some small grants. However, getting that first major grant, such as an R01 grant, is another stepping stone for junior faculty. Some senior faculty suggest waiting a few years until you have a strong proposal with plenty of preliminary data, while others suggest submitting early on to test the waters of how well the idea will be received. I know of colleagues who waited until their third or fourth year to submit their first R01 grant application, only to find out that reviewers were not enthusiastic about their idea, leading them to start over in another research direction in their fourth year. Personally, I found the latter advice more helpful. I submitted three R01 in the first three years, and then focused my efforts in resubmitting the R01 grant with the best chance of funding. Besides having a good idea and supportive preliminary data, a fundable R01 requires clear grantsmanship and a strong team of collaborators. For this reason, carefully planning and timing are needed to craft a well-written and well-designed proposal. Enlisting the support of colleagues to critique your proposal is an excellent way to gauge the response of reviewers.

Years 5 & 6: Reaching for high-impact papers and expert status. Research productivity in the form of publications is an essential component of the tenure promotion process. However, it can be challenging to publish a high-impact publication, especially without knowing from the beginning whether the hypothesis will be proven true or not. In some fields of research, publishing in top tier journals may not even be relevant. However, most faculty members would like to have at least one high-impact factor publication as part of the tenure promotion process. My senior colleagues advise me that high-impact factor publications do not emerge accidentally, but are instead carefully crafted starting from a transformational idea. Since these projects may require extra financial resources, long periods of time, and unwavering dedication by the primary researcher, it may not be feasible for starting faculty to reach for this kind of publication initially. However, by the fifth or sixth year, faculty members who have the financial resources and time may be able to wager on a highly transformational idea for a chance in getting a high-impact factor publication.

By this time you probably have published a number of papers as the senior corresponding author and are becoming known by research peers and leaders in the field. Now is the time to congratulate yourself for becoming an expert in your field. Do not be shy to regard yourself as an expert—you earned it after all these years of hard work. If you have not yet, you can start nominating yourself for leadership positions in societies or as an invited seminar speaker at other institutions. If tenure is around the corner for you, continue to develop friendships with colleagues, including senior faculty who might one day review your tenure application.

Published July 11 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Cynthia St. Hilaire, University of Pittsburgh

LESSONS LEARNED
BY CINDY ST. HILAIRE, THE UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH

My name is Cindy St. Hilaire, and I’m an Assistant Professor in the Departments of Medicine and Bioengineering at the University of Pittsburgh, and a member of the Pittsburgh Heart, Lung, and Blood Vascular Medicine Institute. My lab was established in July 2015 after my postdoctoral fellowship at the NHLBI, and these last 3.5 years have been both the most rewarding as well as the most challenging of my professional life; starting your lab is an exciting yet surreal experience. You’ll be called upon to develop and master skills that have little relation to your previous training, and in the first few years resolving that main conundrum will reveal many of your hidden character strengths and weaknesses. I hope sharing my experiences thus far can help a fellow new PI.

Picking the right place— You really need to define for yourself what circumstances will create your ideal environment, what circumstances are less than ideal but workable, and what conditions constitute a deal-breaker. Obviously, having the tools, cores, and resources that you need to conduct your research are essential, but those alone will not guarantee your scientific success or happiness. Consider the one-on-one meetings during interviews as a two-way street; yes, they are interviewing you, but you need to interview them as well. Do not be afraid to ask questions that will help you determine if the institution is a right fit for you. Ask about life outside the lab, where do people live? What do they do outside of work? How good/bad is the commute? Besides talking about science, can you see yourself having coffee or lunch with the people in your department? Or doing social activities? Do them seem enthusiastic or stressed? Competitive or collaborative? Very important: does the department have a solid history of fostering young PIs through to tenure, or is there a suspiciously high failure rate? Are people smiling in the hallways or do they stare at their feet as they walk by? Academic departments and institutes have pretty defined cultures, and they can vary widely from school to school, make sure the one you join is a culture that suits you.

Setting up shop—Start your lab in as organized a way as possible. I moved into new space on a freshly renovated floor, so my first month was a frenzy of purchasing. I quickly realized a more accurate job title for my new career was “small business owner.”. I needed to meticulously keep track of what I had ordered, what had arrived, cost, etc., so I set up an excel sheet of all my purchases. We still use this sheet; literally everything I have bought for the lab is on it. Not only do I know exactly how much remains on all my accounts, but when it is time to write grants, I know exactly how much we spend on reagents, consumables, etc., so can budget accordingly. Similarly, as you write up protocols, receive reagents, chemicals, antibodies, etc., start an electronic database that everyone has access to and can update. I use Lab Guru, but there are several types of software available. Take the time to write a lab manual. Put in writing all of your expectations for your employees – I outlined how I want lab notebooks kept, how electronic data should be named and filed, cleaning and organizing procedures (e.g., lab space, reagents, freezer boxes), safety, data analysis and ethics, attendance (e.g., for lab, meetings, seminars), sick and vacation time, and general advice for conducting experiments. It is immensely helpful when onboarding new members; they start with a clear view of your expectations for their conduct, and it helps maintain some continuity of your overall lab culture. I also have everyone start with the same experiment: grow human cells, and run a qPCR, western blot, and immunofluorescent stain. With this you can very quickly assess their skillset, they learn how and whom to ask for help, and also learn where everything is in the lab and how to operate the major equipment.

Staff & Students— Hiring is so hard when you are new. Most likely, you will have some sort of personnel disaster and it will make you questions every decision you have made in your nascent career. Do not worry! Literally every new PI I have spoken with has some horror story, and we all get through it. There is no perfect way to learn, on the fly, a management style that makes your employees happy and productive and loyal and satisfied. You’ll mess up as you figure this out. I’ve found that there is an amazing community of new PIs on Twitter and on the Slack platform (https://newpislack.wordpress.com/), who can offer advice, support, and lots of laughs. To help in recruiting, spend time making a sleek website for your lab, and set up a Twitter account to help in your advertising. Save costs by sharing advertising space in journals with a few colleagues. When it comes to the hiring interview, make an agenda for the day and have the candidate meet with a few faculty that have a bit more experience at this than you. Pay for the candidate to go to lunch with 2-3 other people at their level (other techs, other postdocs, etc.), and be sure to get feedback about your candidate from them – it is amazing what you will learn! I have made a list of ~30 questions that I now ask every person I interview. This helps to keep me calm during the process and also allows me to more easily compare candidates. If you are interviewing a postdoc, have several colleagues join you for their talk and do not be afraid to ask tough, but fair, questions. If you have any hesitations go with that feeling – you are probably not wrong.

Saying YES– I feel like a lot of people will tell you that you should say “NO” to everything, so as not to be overwhelmed with commitments; I do not fully agree with this. It’s true that the opportunities for service to your department, your university, your journal affiliations, etc., will be essentially limitless, and you’ll need to triage. Some useful guidelines: As a brand-new faculty member, you first need the people in your department and school to get to know you, and importantly, like and trust you — ; your CV got you in the door, now your attitude, character, and actions will influence how they see you. Say “YES” to the higher profile things that others will take notice of. Offer to take on responsibilities but only if you can be sure to complete the task on time and in order. You want people to know your name and, that you are dependable, knowledgeable, and a team player. Similarly, go to as many conferences as possible to network. For tenure you will need 15-30 letters written by colleagues who do not directly work or collaborate with you. Start making these connections now. Identify and meet the people who sit on the study sections that you plan on submitting your grants to. While you are not allowed to talk specifics, you can certainly ask about whether your research is suited for a particular study section, if the models/tools/techniques you are planning to use in your R01 are appropriate, etc. Some of the best feedback I have gotten has been at poster sessions where I was presenting the foundations of what became my first R01.

Build a support/mentoring team–Start thinking about your grant submission early. Write an Aims page 6 months in advance of the deadline and set up a meeting with colleagues who have successful grant experience. Present your Aims page to them with the data you have in hand and ask them to tear it apart. Hopefully they will, and your grant will be all the better for it. This early timeline is essential because mostly likely there are key experiments that you haven’t thought of, and probably can’t be done on too short of notice.

Figuring out what works for you–I am still trying to perfect this. Figuring out how to optimize your time is exceedingly important. For a while I would be in my office at 7AM so I could go to yoga at 5:30, but then the strictness of having to be out the door by a certain time was stressing me out, so I switched to working out in the morning so I could have afternoon flexibility. I also learned that I write better before lunch, so I’ve blocked off my schedule and don’t have any meetings before 12. I also utilize different apps and tools; I use the Pomodoro method when I have any writing tasks, this helps me to not spend too much time on small things, but also keeps me focused on longer projects. My lab uses the project management tool Trello to organize our projects. We use it to outline and assign experiments in a visual manner. We can literally watch as the experiment progresses from idea, to active experiment, to final figure for the paper. Trello helps keep me on top of everything and my team says that it helps them to see the bigger picture. Lastly, I’m a big fan of the Bullet Journal method. I never have that pit-in-the stomach feeling that I am forgetting something because all tasks big and small are listed. And I love the feeling of checking things off.

Published May 2, 2019 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Stefania Nicoli, Yale School of Medicine

THE VIEW FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DESK
BY STEFANIA NICOLI, YALE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE

My name is Stefania Nicoli, and I have been an Assistant Professor at the Yale Cardiovascular Research Center since 2012. This four-year journey in the academic world, more than any previous experience, has made me understand the importance of mentoring models for junior faculty.

Reaching the other side of the desk is what everybody dreams of during their training positions. However, during this time you are not only learning to become a boss but also a mentor. You are now in charge of efficiently communicating, motivating your employees, solving team conflicts, understanding and working with their career and life priorities, their weaknesses and reactions to stress and rejection, and ultimately, their success. Indeed, it appears that this part of the work is energy consuming and sometimes no matter what you might say or do you are wrong and for many of us this feeling, together with the continuous stress of reaching scientific excellence, is overwhelming.

Becoming a boss might be a natural process for a new faculty member, as we ourselves reached this academic status thanks to determination, self-assurance and hard work, traits typical of a leader. However, becoming a mentor is not necessarily included in our natural predispositions. Seeking direction, I asked several senior colleagues about their experiences regarding how they became mentors. Interestingly, there are various theories, all very personal, that I would like to classify into two distinct points of view: the Darwinian or Lamarckian theory of the junior faculty evolution. Essentially some faculty members believe in "natural selection" of the strongest phenotype. Others believe in the progressive learning process of more complex skills that allow successful "adaptation and survival" in any environment.

Of course, this sounds like a scientific joke, but there is some truth in both theories. Indeed, in our competitive and difficult economic climate, scientists have limited time to learn naturally from their mistakes. Therefore, learning quickly is the key to successfully "survive" and "drive." I found it crucial having someone to teach us mentoring strategies as rapidly as possible, to avoid energy dispersion while also gaining efficiency. For example, attending periodic psychology workshops or leadership courses is essential in acquiring these tools. High profile corporations invest time and considerable resources understanding strategies to make employees more efficient. Obviously, academia might not have the same capacity, but an investment toward junior faculty mentoring programs is, in the long run, important for the success of the entire institution.

Published April 14 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Sathish Srinivasan, Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation

IDENTIFYING THE IMPORTANT QUESTIONS
BY SATHISH SRINIVASAN, OKLAHOMA MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION

My name is Sathish Srinivasan, and I am an Assistant Member at Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation (OMRF), located in the vibrant downtown area of Oklahoma City. I came to OMRF in February of 2013 after an enjoyable period of postdoctoral training in the lab of Dr. Guillermo Oliver at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis. The last three years have been the most challenging of my entire life. Identifying the important questions, addressing those questions with innovative approaches, and being a motivating leader and spokesman for your team are very difficult tasks. Knowing that there is no guarantee for success makes each task all the more challenging. Here I will list a few things that I think are important for a startup lab. I hope that my experience will be helpful to others who are taking their first steps as independent investigators.

Getting the team together: As a new PI, it can be difficult to attract talented, motivated, and experienced researchers to join your team. However, setting the bar high is important both for the team and for the individual. I am very fortunate to have Xin Geng (staff scientist), Boksik Cha (post doc), and Lijuan Chen (research assistant) in my lab. They are my super heroes. Stephanie Yeager (research assistant) and Bing Liao (post doc) also made important contributions during their stay in the lab.

Plan to continue working in the lab: You will likely be the one with the most experience in your field when starting the lab. Be ready to continue working in the lab and training others. The time invested will pay off. Riaj Mahamud (graduate student), who joined my lab with little experience but with a strong motivation, is now a well-trained, important member of my lab.

Don’t hesitate to invest in your startup: Proper reagents and tools are a must to run your lab, so don’t be stingy in making that mouse model or buying that microscope. But do get a quote and make sure you will get good service.

Be generous: You got hired because other PIs in the institution thought that they could collaborate with you; be willing to share your expertise and resources to help others both within and outside of the institution. The favor will be returned to you many times over.

Choose your collaborators carefully: I am lucky to have many thoughtful collaborators. However, collaborator-on-collaborator conflict is not uncommon and could be career-ending. Make sure you are truly independent in collaborative projects. Also, verify the sincerity of a collaboration request. You don’t want your precious time and energy to be wasted on projects that the collaborators are not serious about.

Focus: When I started the lab, I wanted to simultaneously work on 10 different projects and write five R01 applications. It was an exercise in futility. Focus on the most important questions that you can address with your expertise and resources and for which you are recognized. Try to obtain small grant funding that will keep your lab moving forward. Bigger grants, such as an NIH R01 grant, need plenty of time and work before applying. The time you spend on writing those big grants can be better spent in generating the preliminary data and publications that are absolutely important in getting those larger grants funded.

Be cautious…: In this highly competitive research environment, it is important to find a balance between camaraderie and caution. Avoid presenting unpublished data until you get some traction.

…but don’t get cynical: Many papers and grants do get favorably reviewed due to the political connections of the PIs. Yours may seem to be unfairly reviewed. You will be angry and discouraged, but acknowledge the reality and your emotions and move on. Grow a thick skin, keep improving, and believe that good science will be appreciated and acknowledged sooner or later. I am fortunate to have known plenty of researchers who are genuinely curious about nature, passionate about research and kind-hearted to support others.

Improve your writing skills: It is important to have good science. It is even more important to communicate your work well. My first two R01 applications were beaten down, and rightfully so. Now my grantsmanship is a work in progress. Do everything possible to make your grants and papers easy to read and understand. Your peers deserve that respect.

Try to relax: If we are lucky, we are expected to be creative and productive for 30-40 years. It is a daunting task. When I confided my fear to Mike Davis (University of Missouri, Columbia), he gave me the best career advice that I ever got. If you are worried about everything, you are not going to do anything. Andrew McMahon likens the scientific career to running a marathon. You have to plan for the next 3-5 miles (years) and not focus on the finish line. So find your circle of supporters, spend quality time with your family, develop a hobby, read good literature and give a good fight. It ain’t over ‘til it’s over.

Published June 9, 2016 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Daniela Simona Ardelean, University of Western Ontario

REMEMBER WHY YOU ARE DOING SCIENCE
BY DANIELA SIMONA ARDELEAN, UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO

Do you remember the day when you thought that science is really cool and that this is what you want to do, no matter what? For some, it was a defined moment; for others, a longer, slow process. Some people could explain it, others just knew it. But for all, the knowledge or feeling (yes, it can be either one) that doing science is the right thing, was the same. You just knew. Remember that when you come across challenges that may seem insurmountable.

I am a pediatric rheumatologist who is doing translational research. Since I have started one year ago as a junior faculty at the Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry at University of Western Ontario in London, Ontario, Canada, I have been working towards establishing my lab and building the team. This is still work in progress.

The transition from trainee to faculty is often lengthy and difficult. On this journey, I have learned a few things that I would like to share with you:

Think early about your research program. Beyond research projects, you also need to discuss about your research program with your future collaborators, mentors and funding agencies.

What is your long-term goal? What is your vision? What do you need to get you there? It is important to define it early.

Connect with peers and scientists outside your discipline. To broaden your knowledge and to find collaborators and potential mentors, it is important to attend meetings, seminars, workshops, etc., in other disciplines.

Find out what funding opportunities are available at your institution(s). The University, affiliated Research Institutes, the Department(s) where you are appointed or cross-appointed, hospital Foundations, etc., may have their own funding and internal competitions. Find out early about these opportunities and apply to them.

We need time for reflection. We are all busy people. However, without time put aside regularly for reflection, for thinking things through and for a break, it is difficult to come up with that great idea that is worth pursuing, be creative, have balance in life, and evolve as a human being.

Writing is about telling stories that matter to you and others. There was something that motivated you in the first place to look for answers when there were very few or none. Findings how things work, deciphering the mechanisms of a process or disease, discovering new treatments for your patients. Conveying that "something" in writing increases the chance that your grant application or paper will connect with those that read it.

Despite the long path, challenges, ups and downs, we are privileged to do research. Remember why you chose science and make the most of your journey.

Published September 29, 2016 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Mete Civelek, University of Virginia

LESSONS LEARNED
BY METE CIVELEK, UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

I started my laboratory at the Center for Public Health Genomics at the University of Virginia about two years ago. I made several good decisions as well as several mistakes during this time. While everyone’s experiences will be different, I would like to share some of the lessons I learned with the hope that you will make wiser choices when you start your research group.

I immediately found a group of likeminded junior PIs who also started their labs around the same time as me at UVA. This group has been a great support both mentally and scientifically. In fact, four of us hold joint lab meetings together as we have overlapping interests. If you are just starting your lab, I highly recommend to you to be part of the New PI Slack, which is a community of about 400 junior faculty members primarily across the United States (https://newpislack.wordpress.com/). This is a group of generous and thoughtful new PIs who share many things from examples of grant applications to advice for wet lab and computational tools, funding opportunities, how to deal with diversity-related issues, and even tips for work-life balance.

One of the mistakes I made was not to have a laser-like focus on a single project that will result in a publication as soon as possible. Since publications measure our productivity, it is important for a junior PI to prove that he/she can produce results as a result of all the investment an institution makes. My advice is to focus on a publication rather than grant applications in the first one or two years. If you are going to send in grant applications, it is better to apply to organizations that provide feedback so that you can improve your application by addressing the reviewers’ comments and resubmit.

Hiring and managing people will prove to be challenging. You will not find a postdoctoral fellow or a graduate student who will be just like you. Many times, you will think “I could have done this in an hour instead of a day.” I learned to be patient as I trained the lab members and allowed them to make mistakes. It is the only way the trainees are going to master the techniques. I also learned to look out for warning signs as it is important to correct the mistakes quickly so that they don’t accumulate and become bigger problems in the future. I quickly learned that weekly one-on-one meetings where we go over even small details increased the productivity of the lab.

I am required to teach as part of my appointment. I started a new class in large-scale data analysis, and it took a considerable amount of my time in the first year. Becoming a good teacher is an iterative process, and it takes time to be a good teacher. If you have teaching duties, set aside only one day of the week to prepare for the class. We all tend to have perfectionist qualities, but you do not want teaching to consume your precious time.

Finally, science is a collective effort. Your lab will be more productive if you can create a welcoming and fun environment in the lab where diverse ideas are openly discussed.

Published September 14, 2017 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Michael Dellinger, UT Southwestern Medical Center

LESSONS LEARNED: ILL COMMUNICATION
BY MICHAEL DELLINGER, UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER

Music has always been an important part of my life. I enjoy listening to songs and trying to find the message in lyrics. When I started my lab in 2014, I was the only person in the lab for approximately two months. This was a chance for me to play my favorite albums in the lab, and I listened to “Ill Communication” by the Beastie Boys at least once every other day. As people joined my group, I discovered that I had ill communication. Sometimes I had a hard time getting my ideas across to the people in my lab. Below are a few suggestions that have helped me become a better communicator and a more efficient and effective leader.

Tailor your interactions with the members of your lab to suit their specific needs. Your lab is going to be filled with people with different backgrounds and levels of experience. Take the time to have individual meetings with the members of your lab. Over time you will discover who in your group finds verbal instructions useful and who in your group finds a combination of verbal and written instructions beneficial. Taking this time will ensure that you and the members of your lab are on the same page and that projects move in the right direction.

Listen to the people in your lab. Yogi Berra said, “You can observe a lot by just watching.” You can also hear a lot by just listening. Sometimes you will hear bad news. If a person in your lab tells you that there is a specific problem, take action. Other times, you will hear excitement over a new result. Listening to what the people in your lab say will help you customize your interactions with them. It is also a lot of fun learning about the people who are spending their days (and nights) working hard in your lab.

Regularly review lab notebooks. One way the people in your lab communicate with you is through their lab notebooks. This form of communication is critical, especially when the people are no longer in your lab. It is essential that you can easily find descriptions and details of experiments. Take a little time each week to really read lab notebooks and make sure that you understand what is written.

Take a course on grant writing. I took a course on grant writing during my first year at UT Southwestern. It was one of the best courses I have ever taken and I regularly refer to the materials I received as part of the course. If you have a chance, take a course on grant writing. This will help you communicate your ideas in a coherent manner in grants and papers. I’ve also been able to join a group at UT Southwestern that meets regularly to discuss grants. This has helped me become a better writer and reviewer.

Contact and interact with foundations and societies. In addition to being a member of the faculty of UT Southwestern, I am also the director of research of the Lymphatic Malformation Institute (www.lmiresearch.org) and I regularly interact with the Lymphangiomatosis & Gorham’s Disease Alliance (www.lgdalliance.org). I have found that foundations and societies are always looking for help to carry out their respective missions. Reach out to foundations and societies that are relevant to your area of research. Let these people know who you are and offer your assistance. This could lead to opportunities to speak to the patient community and other rewarding experiences.

It can take time to become an effective communicator. But by putting the time in to hone your communication skills, you will find it easier to realize your ideas, lead your group, and inspire the next generation of scientists in your lab.

Published November 2, 2017 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Henar Cuervo, University of Illinois at Chicago

LESSONS LEARNED
BY HENAR CUERVO, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO

I started my lab at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) about a year and a half ago. I am still finding my way through and know that there are many challenges ahead, but I am happy to share some of my lessons learned. Some of you may find it helpful; some of you may enjoy the trip down memory lane.

Get plenty of advice, and then trust that you are making the best decision you can. As scientists, we do a thorough background research before we start an experiment, we search what has been published, what techniques have been used, and then once we have all the information, we design and execute our experiment. So, I felt that I needed to do the same when making important decisions about managing/setting up my new lab. I read several books (I strongly recommend “At the Helm: Leading your laboratory” by Kathy Barker, and “Making the Right Moves” published by the HHMI), and took advantage of the great faculty mentorship at UIC. However, more frequently than not, I would hear opposing advice from similarly successful senior professors; for example: Professor A would suggest using your Start-up funds aggressively to get the best preliminary data you could to secure grant funding, while Professor B would recommend to be cautious with spending and save some of the Start-up funds for a rainy day. As it usually happens in life, nothing is black and white, and everyone has had a different story and has different circumstances, ultimately the decision has to work for you and how you like to manage your lab.

Learn to say no. This is one of the big clichés, I know, but after a year and a half I am still struggling with it. It is much easier said that done. As you start your lab you will be invited to give talks, to review papers, to review grants, to serve in multiple committees, to teach…etc. I actually find most of these activities to be exciting; they make me feel proud to be contributing to my Department/University, and to the overall scientific community—plus it is a good way to learn the lay of the land. I found that being part of the “Graduate Education Committee” in my Department allowed me, for example, to get familiar with the graduate student selection, and the thesis (and qualifying exam) rules and requirements. This experience turned out to be particularly useful when I was part of a qualifying exam committee, or when recruiting graduate students to my lab. Similarly, being a grant reviewer for the Department of Defense and seeing how that process worked was a fantastic learning experience towards crafting my own grants. However, while all this service work can be edifying and rewarding, it takes a substantial amount of time and focus, and it is easy to neglect your own research group. It is therefore critical to keep a good balance between your own research and the service to the academic/scientific community. As I mentioned, I still have not found the perfect formula (I am not even sure it exists), but I try to select talks, reviews, and other tasks that I feel I can either learn from, or that can help in the development of my career.

Be patient. The first year while setting up the lab is usually not as productive as you would like it to be. You have to spend time negotiating prices with sales representatives, preparing IRB and IACUC protocols, training students…etc. The experiments that you thought were so easy and just took you a couple of hours to get done when you were working at the end of your postdoc might take much more for your newly trained student(s). I remember feeling frustrated with how slow things were moving in the first months: I knew it would take some time to get the lab up and running, but I also wanted to be productive and get good results as soon as possible. I had to be patient, and focus on building my lab and training my students thoroughly. It took more time than I wanted, sure, but now when I see my students’ data and presentations I know it was worth it.

Published January 11, 2018 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Stryder Meadows, Tulane University

LESSONS LEARNED
BY STRYDER MEADOWS, TULANE UNIVERSITY

Greetings from New Orleans! My name is Stryder Meadows and I am an Assistant Professor at Tulane University. In 2014, I dove head first into the most challenging undertaking of my life. I uprooted my family and started my own research lab in a new state. Reflecting on the past 3 years, I would like to think I've had some professional successes while minimizing the hiccups along the way. I'm happy to have the opportunity to share my thoughts and opinions about my journey, and hope that my experiences prove useful to future independent investigators. We are all somewhat thrown into this position with no road map for establishing a thriving research program, so be proactive in seeking advice and stay ahead of the game.

Focus on the science: You already know this but it's important to keep in mind - science drives everything. So get in the lab and stay focused! If you're like myself, you will have a tendency to get interested and distracted by too many potential projects. Don't do this - work hard and place your energy on the most promising projects that will drive your lab. Make sure these projects differentiate yourself from your postdoc advisor. And don't be afraid to use your start up funds because you need the resources and man/woman power to build a solid body of work for that first big grant.

Getting funded: The obvious goal is to get big money grants, but don’t forget about all those smaller grants out there, including those from your own institute. Take advantage of grants that are designed for new investigators. Acquiring these grants will look good on your resume, help with the research finances, and give you additional writing practice for your first big grant. In terms of the obtaining your first big grant, my advice is to hold off until you have a good, solid body of work. It takes time to build a story, and very few new investigators are going to get that big grant unless they’ve built a story, started publishing, etc. Be sure to have your mentors and colleagues look at your grants. A common mistake of a new investigator is to try and put too much into that first R01. Established investigators have been through this process many times and will know how to keep your grant focused.

Setting up the lab: Don’t plan on getting to your job and being able to set up your lab uninterrupted. There are ALWAYS unexpected bumps along the way that can stall your progress. Your tenure clock usually starts on your hire date, so every day, month and experiment is valuable. Use that window of time before the job starts to be proactive in getting the lab set up. Immediately work on the IACUC protocols and transferring your mice (if you work with them). This process can take months and really delay your experiments. You can also order equipment, supplies and reagents before you get to your job. Be sure to take advantage of deals for new investigators that most companies offer. Hire someone to help; you can put out job ads and interview people before you arrive. You’ll be in much better shape the sooner you can get that first experiment started.

Make your presence felt: You are the most productive person in your lab, so get in the lab and start the experiments that are going to get you funding. Establish the culture and work ethic of your lab, and be diligent in your training of lab personnel. At some point you won’t be able to spend as much time in the lab and those people you trained will be setting an example and training future members of the lab. With that in mind….

Be picky when assembling your research team: Check every reference and try to meet lab technician and postdoc candidates in person. With rotating graduate students, be sure to be in the lab so that you can really assess their critical thinking, bench skills and interactions with lab personnel. Even if you’re desperate for a grad student, don’t bring them on board unless you’re confident they will be a good fit. I’ve turned down students even though I could have used the extra hands, and I know I’ve dodged a few bullets. If red flags pop up or something doesn’t feel right, trust your gut and move on. This is advice I’ve gotten from almost every established investigator, including several that have made this mistake.

Learn to wear multiple hats: You’re now the boss, which means you’re job description includes being a leader, mentor, manager and advisor. Sliding between these different roles can be quite difficult. Each of us is different so figure out what works for you. Stay on top of things and pay attention. Know where your money is going and learn how to budget, even if you have an administrative person that covers the finances. Be mindful of what’s going on in the lab and be sure to have open communication with your staff. Remember, not every person reacts the same way and has the same drive and passion as you. So choose your motivational tactics wisely.

Balancing research and teaching: This part is for junior faculty members like myself that are expected to teach throughout the year and simultaneously run a successful research program. This has been one of the most challenging aspects of the job. Remember, you’re competing with lots of other researchers that have minimal teaching requirements. I’ve heard different views on whether this is an advantage or disadvantage. My opinion: it’s an advantage salary wise (usually more hard money in your salary), but a disadvantage to your research program. So figure out how to balance the time and energy put into teaching versus research. Many times the biggest components for tenure are teaching/school service, publications and funding. I would suggest finding out how much each component is weighted for tenure, and use that as a way to help guide and balance your effort going forward.

Publishing is the name of the game: You already know that publishing your work is paramount to your future success, but it’s really important to come to terms with the reality that not every paper can be a Cell, Science or Nature publication. Get those least publishable units (LPUs) out the door. It will show your R01 reviewers that you have a functional lab and are progressing towards those bigger papers. Plus, every publication counts towards your tenure package and the clock is running. In my experience, most manuscript preparations take longer than you think and time is not on your side.

Develop a thick hide: Science is hard, getting funding is hard, publishing is hard, teaching is hard and running a lab is hard. Get use to the fact that your grants and papers are going to get rejected, reviewers are going to hit you hard, and sometimes you’re going to get scooped. Take a breath, sleep on it and revisit with a fresh mind. Often times you will find that everything isn’t as bad as you first thought (of course some things take more time to get over). Don’t get discouraged - fight on! Besides, what’s the alternative?

Go to meetings: Don’t forget to attend and present at meetings (hopefully you’ve already started this as a postdoc). It’s critical that you interact and network with the vascular community. After all, they’re the ones reviewing your papers and grants. In this highly competitive environment, it’s beneficial to have a reviewer that can place your name and face to the work they are critiquing. This is also a good way to form collaborations. Plus, you may need recommendations and reviews from established investigators outside of your institute for your tenure package.

Get to know your administrators: I think people often overlook the importance of a good working relationship with their administrative staff. Get acquainted with your grants people and department administrators. Your grants are important and managing your research money is important – therefore I would suggest treating those people that help you manage the grant submissions and lab finances as important. I know it’s their job to assist you, but most people like to be treated as colleagues not as personal assistants. I’ve found that if you treat your administrative staff with respect, they will go out of their way to help you. Plus they will know some of the nuances of your institute and other tricks that will be unknown to you.

Balancing work and family: This particular balancing act can be very stressful and everyone’s situation is different. In my case, I try to make my time at work efficient so that I can squeeze in as much quality time at home without feeling guilty. Newsflash: you will still fell guilty. I think this is natural but I also think it means you recognize that your family is still important, which is a good thing. Try celebrating professional accomplishments, such as getting a grant, publishing your paper or grading your last exam, with your family. This is a good way to include them into your work life, and gives your children the opportunity to see that hard work is rewarded with fun.

Published March 8, 2018 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Kazuyo Kegan, Johns Hopkins University

LESSONS LEARNED
BY KAZUYO KEGAN, JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY

My name is Kazuyo Kegan. I have been an Assistant Professor in the Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, since 2012. I recently received my first NIH R01 grant, which just started in December 2017. Our institution traditionally provides no direct salary support for non-clinical faculty. Thus, the transition from junior faculty to partial dependence on mentor-initiated funding, to a combination of mentor and independent support, to finally being fully independently funded has been extremely challenging. Before reaching this point, I had to obtain multiple small internal and external funding awards. I am still in the process of building a new lab, but I hope I can share a few ideas that might be helpful and important for writing grants and becoming an independent scientist.

It took a little while for me to understand the fundamental differences between writing a manuscript and writing a grant. When writing a manuscript, we try to describe things clearly, logically, and professionally. There is actually no room to express enthusiasm in it. On the contrary, I have learned that the key to writing a successful grant is to imbed your enthusiasm clearly into your writing. Besides making the science clear, you need to convince the reviewers that your grant is better and more novel, innovative, and feasible than any of the other applications. Here are several steps I have taken to obtain successful grants.

1. Start and plan early: In the first year after my promotion, I was advised that I should apply for an R01 grant at almost every cycle. I did try to do this during the first 2 years without success. Every 4 months, I would be at the bench for 2 months to move my research forward (I had no people to work on my project), generate preliminary data for the grant during the third month, and spend the fourth month writing and submitting a grant. With this schedule, I was not so productive in publication or in obtaining grants. Your productivity is one of the important factors the reviewers want to see for successful grants. I also learned that taking time to obtain strong preliminary data to support the overall hypothesis is the key to creating successful grants.

2. Assemble a support network: I like to finish things before the due date. I usually plan to finish my grant at least 2 weeks early. This tactic allows me to ask senior faculty members to read and evaluate the grant and our scientific editor to edit it. The comments from senior and experienced faculty members are helpful and provide the opportunity for brainstorming before submission. Nevertheless, it is important that you follow your heart and intuition when making final decisions regarding the direction of the grant if you receive multiple contrasting opinions. Also, create good relationships with the finance team and office of research administration, if your university has one. By working together to resolve issues and review the grant and budget, you will be pleasantly surprised by all that you learn about the policy behind grant management.

3. Writing is a skill not a genetic gift: It greatly helps me to allot time for writing, to schedule it into my day, and to set goals for each day and week. Keep track of your progress and reward yourself for meeting your goals. Make writing routine and mundane. I was given the suggestion to join a support writing network in which members encourage each other. As I did not have enough time to do so in person (I am a mother of 9-year-old twins), I created a support network on Social Networking Service (SNS) with scientists in academia from inside and outside of the US. When I feel alone writing grants during weekends and holidays, I can always find someone who is also working on a grant or paper, and we encourage each other. This resource has been a tremendous boost to my productivity and motivation.

4. Focus on creating Specific Aims and abstracts: I was told to dedicate a lot of time to writing, revising, and rewriting the Specific Aims page to make it perfect. A giant in our field also taught me to begin by drawing a picture. If you can draw a picture of what you want to do, then you are on the right path. In addition, the Specific Aims are critical for the peer review process because the majority of reviewers on the panel will likely read only the abstract and Specific Aims during the very short period given to judge and score the applications.

5. Resubmission: One of my biggest mistakes in the first years of working on grants was not communicating with program officer. I was too shy to pick up the phone and discuss how to revise the application. I was wrong. Many times they will help you to interpret the summary statement and offer strategic tips on how to be highly responsive to the reviewers' concerns. If you receive a “not fundable” review statement, please do not take it personally. It is easy for me to say this but very difficult to accomplish. It usually takes me at least a week to read the reviews without tears and all kinds of negative feelings. We should not stop there. Take a breath, calm down, and start reading the review with a cup of coffee (or a glass of wine works best for me!). I found that the critical review is one of the greatest aids to improving your science and application. If you think that the reviewers did not understand what you meant, you need to make more effort to convey your points clearly. If they misinterpreted your writing, then it is possible that many other people would misinterpret it same way.

What I wish I had known when I accepted my first position was that we must have so many new and different skills to transition from a junior faculty member to a successful independent investigator. I learned that we need to make decisions quickly and with conviction. Furthermore, dealing with negotiation—–we do it every day—requires disciplined communication skills, reliable persuasive strategies, the willingness to engage in conflict, and the ability to adapt to a rapidly changing environment.

Probably the most important message I have is to Be Resilient. Becoming an independent scientist in academia is hard. Science is a difficult field, no doubt. It takes years in the trenches to succeed. You may need to learn how to rise from the ashes several times in this path. Scientists who study stress and resilience say that it’s important to think of resilience as an emotional muscle that can be strengthened at any time. I always try to go back to the basics and reevaluate why I am doing this and what motivates me. I try to focus on what is fascinating and meaningful about what I do. What is important to me is the progress I am making in science and medicine, not what anybody is saying back. Then, the productivity naturally returns during difficult times. Do not hesitate to ask for help when necessary. We are more resilient when we have strong support networks to help us cope with a crisis. But we can get an even bigger resilience boost by giving support to others. By doing so, we create a positive feedback loop of helping others and being helped ourselves, This is an important way to enhance our own strength to create a life that we consider meaningful and purposeful.

Published April 5, 2018 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Elisa Boscolo, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital

LESSONS LEARNED
BY ELISA BOSCOLO, CINCINNATI CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL

It’s time to fill the empty spaces ... in the laboratory and in your personal life!

… and all of a sudden … POOF! You jumped to the other side!

You have dreamed about it all of your life (or most of it), and you just cannot believe it has really happened. While you are pinching yourself to be sure it’s not a dream, your eyes open wide and what do you see? An empty office and an empty laboratory (Well, I wouldn’t even call it a laboratory as it’s just four walls and a stack of empty shelves!). Now you really miss your old lab mates and your previous mentor.

My name is Elisa Boscolo. I did my postdoctoral training at Boston Children’s Hospital and have been an Assistant Professor at the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital since 2014. Back then it surely was frustrating to start from scratch in a new institution and in a different city.

My first suggestion is to not rush in hiring personnel to staff your lab. Choose carefully and make sure they can stay in your lab for a few years, guaranteeing continuity after the initial period. For a faster take-off, start looking for personnel before your actual move; you can contact HR at your new institution and ask them to help opening positions for your lab. Set up Skype interviews and talk to the candidate multiple times to get to know them as much as you can. Make sure to call their previous mentors and ask a lot of questions – do not rely solely on formal letters of recommendations.

Managing people is challenging – little did I know about how hard this is, as I had a wonderful relationship with my former mentor. My advice is to make your expectations clear, write them down and use that list to make sure they are respected. Also, my mistake was to think that every post-doc has the same ambitions and passion for research that I do. Make sure to communicate with your team as much as you can to understand how facilitating their success can fulfill their own life goals and ambitions.

In this empty laboratory, you may suddenly feel lonely, as you will spend most of your time enclosed in your office writing grants, IACUC and IRB protocols, etc. My second advice is to make sure you connect with the other junior faculty at your institutions and try to set up regular meetings with them. Discuss grant opportunities, new data and mentoring issues. Help each other with grant writing and collaborations. And don’t forget that from time to time, you’ll want to have a friend to get a coffee together.

To ensure funding it is crucial to show productivity early on after you set up your lab. What I regret not doing is using the early slow times (slow production of data!) to think of a short-term project that could generate a manuscript in a two-year time frame, aimed at a decent impact factor journal, but not necessarily very high to avoid being trapped in endless cycles of resubmissions.

My last suggestion, as a woman scientist, is to not neglect your personal life because of the academic pressure. I somewhat put my personal life on hold until I became a junior faculty member and waited until then to start a family. Some days it’s just you and your beloved iMac, so when you finally close the office door, it’s a joy to know you will reunite with your family at home. I often wondered if it’s possible to have a career and children. Now that I have a young daughter, I feel more productive during my time at work. When I feel frustrated after a grant or manuscript rejection, instead of healing my suffering with Italian wine, my daughter smiles, makes me forget these disappointments, and re-charges my mind for the next challenge.

Always do your best work and learn to be patient; there will be times when productivity is slower than you wish. Make the best out of this time! In few years you will see that your lab has no empty spaces left and has already produced phenomenal data – hopefully you have already published some of them!

Published May 3, 2018 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

John C. Chappell, Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute

LESSONS LEARNED
BY JOHN CHAPPELL, VIRGINIA TECH CARILION RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Maintain a work-life balance— Many careers can consume you, and a career in academic science can certainly tip the work-life balance towards working almost continuously. What started out as a passion and a curiosity to discover new things about the vascular system can quickly turn into seemingly endless grant writing, manuscript preparation, e-mail replies, and so on. I would urge new independent investigators to work hard on their science, but to also find the aspects of life that provide rest and reinvigoration outside of their science and the workplace. Striving for and maintaining that work-life balance seems to be a critical skill to help avoid burnout and sustain you through the highs and lows of grant/paper reviews and all of the other challenges you will face.

Find your place of Zen— In reading the Lessons Learned contributions from my colleagues, one theme emerges very clearly—this career path is full of many difficult challenges. Publishing, funding, managing a lab, etc. In the midst of the ups and downs, I have found that staying connected to the science and keeping my hands on the experiments has been incredibly helpful. My place of Zen is at my confocal, taking high-resolution images of biological phenomena – it has been my shelter during the storms of never-ending demands. Find the part of science that fueled your love of what you do, and fight to keep that as part of your schedule. I try to use my confocal at least once every week or two. It helps clear my mind and reinvigorates me, while also inspiring new ideas and avenues for research. I encourage you to find that quiet place of enlightenment, free from worrying about what you cannot change.

Be focused but stay curious— When I started down the path of a career in academic science, one aspect I enjoyed the most was that curiosity was encouraged. As many of my colleagues have cautioned me, staying focused is important for building a critical mass of productivity in a particular area. But I would encourage a balance. Write down your curiosities. One day you may have the personnel and funding to pursue an idea you initially thought was a tangent, but it could develop into an unexpected discovery.

Aim for clarity— Have someone outside your area of focus read your grants and papers. They will help you distill your writing down to the basic principles that must be understood by reviewers. If they can’t understand the basic concepts in the grant or manuscript, the review will not go well. I tend to overcomplicate many things in life, and this is especially true for my writing. Reviewer expertise is unlikely to coincide perfectly with your area of research, and even if it does, you will make them happier (and more likely to review favorably) if they can understand what you are describing on a very basic level. Schematics help.

Seek out mentoring— I was not connected to a formal mentor when I started my position, and I was initially reluctant to intrude into the busy schedules of my colleagues with my many questions about how to approach grant writing, setting up my lab, or anything really. I agree with a number of the other Lessons Learned authors that you have to find your own path for many decisions that must be made. Mentors can be incredibly helpful, though, in sharing things that worked or didn’t work for them, or as sounding boards for ideas that are still developing. You can glean from others specific ideas that you might want to weave together and integrate into your own approach to leading your lab, seeking funding, and doing your best science.

Don’t be afraid to be provocative— This item is fairly specific to grant writing, and I thought this insight into grant review was particularly helpful. A colleague of mine is currently serving on study section. I asked him to read one of my R01 grant proposals as he would as a study section reviewer. He graciously accepted and, when giving me his feedback, he said, “It’s a good grant, and will potentially (imagine air quotations) “fill a gap in knowledge”, but so will most of the other grants in my pile. As a reviewer with 10-12 grants in my pile, you need to wake me up. Provoke me. The worst-case scenario is that your grant lands in the bottom of my rankings, but honestly it’s no worse than being too conservative and landing in the middle. Neither the middle nor the bottom grants are funded, so why not aim for the top? Don’t give me clichés. Give me specifics and a thought-provoking question. Get my attention.” Certainly one person’s opinion, but I thought it was a helpful glimpse into the grant review process.

Published October 22, 2018 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Yun Fang, The University of Chicago

LESSONS LEARNED
BY YUN FANG, THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

I started my independent research program in the Department of Medicine, Biological Sciences Division, at The University of Chicago in November, 2012. Looking back, it is one of the most challenging, intriguing, and rewarding tasks I have ever undertaken and I would like to use this exciting opportunity to share a few lessons I learned in the past few years.

Be creative but not competitive. “Be creative but not competitive” is our motto of the lab. It is quite exciting (I feel) to live in the golden age of biomedical research since there are unprecedented advancements of new approaches and techniques which allow us to pursue questions previously unanswerable and to develop new therapies applying these new concepts. One thing I often share with my lab members is that most of the techniques routinely used in my lab nowadays such as ATAC-seq, Hi-C, CRISPR/Cas9-based gene editing, and single-cell sequencing, were not even invented when I was a postdoctoral fellow. Finding creative ways to identify new questions and novel solutions is always recommended and encouraged in my lab. Nevertheless, it is important to maintain a fine balance between being creative and focused for a junior faculty member who not only needs to move the chosen field forward but also show continuous research productivity.

Building a collegial and feedback-seeking environment for your trainees who share your scientific vision. One thing I am striving for is to create an intellectually-challenging but supportive environment for a trainee to pursue his/her (and my) scientific interests. It is tempting for a junior faculty to quickly hire personnel, but I cannot stress enough the importance to find lab members who share your scientific vision. Knowing it is difficult to recruit bright postdocs as a junior faculty member, I started actively searching for candidates via any given channels (meetings, personal connections, etc.) six months before my lab was open. I was fortunate to recruit two outstanding postdocs who were the core members of my program for the first two years. The priority for my first six months at the University of Chicago was to work closely with them in the lab, which turned out to be a very effective and productive way to establish a brand-new research program. These two postdocs then became the cornerstone of my lab to train members who joined later. Nevertheless, I learned that everyone is different and having management styles tailored to lab individuals is key for me to keep effective communication with them. When I am in the office and not on a call, my door is always open to encourage conversations. The first goal I set since the beginning is to build and cultivate a collegial and feedback-seeking/giving work place for the lab members to brainstorm research ideas and receive constructive feedback. I am very proud that my lab members now teach me as much, if not more, as I teach them through our daily conversations and weekly meetings.

Finding collaborators who have mutual interests with you and are mutually benefited from the collaboration. One thing that keeps me extremely excited about the academic work is the opportunities to work with people with different expertise to tackle problem-oriented instead of discipline-oriented questions. We are privileged to have a cohort of wonderful collaborators who unselfishly share their expertise, allowing us to explore uncharted territory related to our research questions. We found that fruitful collaborations are typically built on mutual trust, mutual interests, and mutual benefits of the collaborators. Our scientific scope has been significantly deepened and broadened by actively seeking collaborations across disciplines.

Communicating your scientific passion effectively with your family members, students, lab members, colleagues, and reviewers. I firmly believe one requisite for a productive research career is to effectively communicate with others your scientific projects of choice. My wife is not a scientist, but by speaking often to her about my research projects, she understands my passion for the work and is supportive of my career. Sharing my scientific passion to the trainees in the lab and students in the classroom may breed and foster their own enthusiasm in science. Passionate discussions on research projects, either mine or my peers’, always motivate me to revisit our scientific hypotheses and experimental approaches. Moreover, manuscript submissions and grant applications are also excellent ways to receive honest and constructive feedback from your peers, although rejections are common. I truly believe that the current review system, although not perfect, is still an effective way to exchange and stimulate candid and often time, constructive scientific discussions.

Published January 10, 2019 - NAVBO NewsBEAT

Corinne Nielsen, Ohio University

LESSONS LEARNED
BY CORINNE NIELSEN, OHIO UNIVERSITY

My name is Corinne Nielsen, and I have been Assistant Professor, in the Department of Biological Sciences, at Ohio University since 2016. I am pleased to introduce you to our lab and our research and to share some Lessons Learned, as a new independent investigator.

Embrace your new pace— One of the biggest adjustments I made was to adjust my expectations for the pace of research in a newly established lab. During my PhD and postdoctoral training, my academic life focused on lab work and very little else. Suddenly, with many more commitments – from teaching obligations to lab management to proposal writing – I spend less time in lab and acquire fewer data than I am used to. As the lab has found its footing, and as new lab members receive training and develop independence, the pace has quickened; however, this transition taught me another lesson, which is to….

Learn to give up control— Micromanaging the details of every lab protocol and daily troubleshooting is not tenable or healthy, for the long-term benefit of the lab. Give lab members the training and tools to complete an experiment, meet regularly to discuss outcomes/results, and celebrate the achievements.

Be prepared to face roadblocks— While I was setting up my lab (and especially while establishing and working with an animal colony), I naively assumed that moving from Point A to Point B would follow a straight path; rather, I often journeyed down a zigzag path, peppered with setbacks and side trips. Along the way, I realized that as long as we kept moving forward, even though more slowly than expected, we were headed in the right direction, and the only option was to tackle and overcome the roadblocks, one at a time.

Be prepared to spend money— This was much harder than I expected. Even with a detailed budget, I found it difficult to spend money on big ticket items to equip the lab fully. In fact, fretting over spending start-up funds probably dinged our overall efficiency. Make decisions on big purchases in a timely manner – the sooner you invest in your lab’s productivity and longevity, the sooner you will see returns on your investment.

Dedicate time to writing…— …and take the writing seriously. I have found a small faculty group that meets regularly – usually at a coffee shop – for uninterrupted writing sessions. By planning these sessions into our calendars, we hold each other accountable, we share an expectation that writing will move forward, and we enjoy collegial companionship. I have strengthened professional relationships and gained personal friendships, by participating in these writing groups.

Develop long-term professional goals— Perhaps this works for me, because I am very goal-oriented and relish the daily “check, check, check” of my to-do list. Outlining professional goals and understanding my department’s expectations has led me to strategize about how to achieve those goals within set periods of time. Hopefully, this will keep deadlines from popping up unexpectedly and allow goals to be met realistically.

Be a good colleague— Build your professional network at your institution and beyond. At each step along my academic trajectory – education, training, work experience – my network of colleagues, collaborators, and supporters has been paramount. My network has challenged me, critiqued me, offered opportunities to me, commiserated with me, celebrated with me, and I am committed to doing the same for others. That said, I look forward to seeing you at an upcoming NAVBO meeting!

Published March 7, 2019 - NAVBO NewsBEAT