In theory, our system of advanced science education is designed to move students through graduate school and then postdoctoral training en route to taking their places as principal investigators (PIs) heading their own research laboratories. In reality, even in past years there were clearly more scientists being trained than there were openings for lab heads and faculty positions. To some extent this bottleneck was alleviated over the past two decades by the boom in the biotechnology industry, which has offered an outside-of-academia source of jobs for trained scientists. However, the slumping economy has hit the biotech industry just as hard as everyone else, with downsizing taking a large bite out of available industrial jobs. And now, with competition for grant funding more intense than ever and academic job opportunities increasingly scarce, postdoctoral researchers often feel that they are in a holding pattern waiting for the occasional faculty or industrial position to open up. How can postdocs deal most effectively with this situation in terms of preparing themselves to compete for rare openings?
On July 28, the Sanford-Burnham Science Network (SBSN), an organization of postdocs and graduate students, sponsored a discussion of the tricky transition from postdoc to PI. The session was chaired by SBSN leaders Dr. Caroline Kumsta and Dr. Rachel Wilkie, both postdocs at the Institute. Dr. Malene Hansen and Dr. Stefan Riedl, two young Sanford-Burnham faculty members, led the discussion by sharing their own steps leading from postdoctoral researcher to assistant professor.
Making the most of the postdoc years
Both Dr. Hansen and Dr. Riedl were in agreement that the most critical aspect of obtaining a position as a PI is not necessarily the job search itself, but instead, the success of the candidate’s postdoctoral career. Subsequent discussion of this topic focused on how one actually achieves success as a postdoc. Three key points were 1) the importance of choosing the right mentor, 2) developing the right project(s), and 3) the need to publish at least one complete story in a significant journal.
The perfect mentor would be someone with ample experience who nevertheless retains enthusiasm for working with students. He or she would provide expert guidance in the lab, but would allow the trainee a large degree of independence in choosing, developing, and writing up projects for publication. He or she would have a number of contacts in key positions and would be willing to call them on the postdoc’s behalf. However, this leads to the big question: do you work with a “big name” PI or do you join a lab led by a younger PI who’s not as well established, but considered a “rising star?” The more established PI is the one more likely to have important contacts, but less time for mentoring postdocs. On the other hand, a PI who is just starting out will be more hands-on with his or her trainees and will need to publish faster. Each individual postdoc has to choose which is more important for his or her own needs and career goals.
The perfect project, like the perfect mentor, is somewhat mythical. Nevertheless, an excellent project should have a high degree of interest in the given field, provide the chance to master a wide range of skills, have the potential to open up many new avenues of discovery, and should be challenging without being completely intractable (so that the postdoc can actually get that publication!).
Besides mentor and project, other important factors were judged to be success in obtaining a postdoctoral fellowship as a means of demonstrating one’s ability to generate funding, and establishment of a more independent identity by attending meetings, giving talks, and networking with scientists outside one’s own lab.
Dr. Hansen stressed that a postdoctoral trainee must be able to correctly judge when he or she is really ready to make the jump to PI, committing himself or herself almost full-time to the job search, being patient enough to wait out the multiple rejections that are sure to come, and showing resourcefulness in strengthening weak areas of the resume.
Dr. Riedl brought up the option of taking a second postdoc position, not necessarily as a stalling tactic, but as a means of further building one’s resume, establishing a skill set, and compiling a body of work in a research area with some “buzz.”
Applying and interviewing for faculty positions
Like others, Dr. Riedl sees a strong publication record as an essential tool for even getting a foot in the door towards an interview…the veritable sine qua non for a successful application. A superior application must also include a three-page description of proposed research plans. This proposal should demonstrate that the applicant is capable of asking important questions, that the applicant is the right person to be answering those questions, and that the questions will be significant enough to attract funding.
Once an interview is scheduled, there are several key points to be made during the visit and presentation. The “big picture” nature of the project and its importance should be stressed, rather than a wealth of details. The multifaceted nature of the project should also be emphasized, showing that there are a lot of different and interesting directions that can be taken in the future….meaning the project is open-ended rather than a dead end. The applicant needs to be excited, not only about his own work, but also about the research of the interviewers and the prospects of establishing collaborations with them. Thus, some homework is in order to discover who these people are and what they work on. The interview is also the time to investigate practical aspects of the position, including salary, lab space, shared resources, institutional support packages, opportunities for collaboration, and access to incoming graduate and postdoctoral students.
Dr. Hansen and Dr. Riedl both noted with some humor that when a faculty position is obtained, the new PI is almost always uniquely unqualified for the job. None of the experimental skills mastered as a postdoc will be at all useful in making budgets, organizing a lab from scratch, supervising students and technicians, or working with an administrative assistant (though Sanford-Burnham’s new Office of Training & Academic Services will be holding workshops that will cover these important skills).
In the end, both Dr. Hansen and Dr. Riedl agreed that it was essentially an impossible job with a steep learning curve, but one that they both continue to enjoy immensely.