tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post1531628961716617845..comments2024-03-27T21:23:40.339-04:00Comments on Chemjobber: “Keep Your Job, Ken!” Part 3: ManagementChemjobberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15932113680515602275noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-59681721979895381892020-04-08T08:12:43.363-04:002020-04-08T08:12:43.363-04:00I don't fully understand this comment. Taken a...I don't fully understand this comment. Taken at face value it suggests that a project either works or it doesn't and those around you (grad, postdoc, PI) have no influence on that outcome. If that is what you mean then I fundamentally disagree. I don't think I have ever observed a project that just "worked." There is always something to troubleshoot, an alternative way to make or measure something, or a different way to attack or think about the problem. But you don't have to do it alone. Having the right person in the room that is aware of your problem is sometimes all it take to hear that suggestion that "makes it work." I fully agree that luck is in involved and there is a pedigree bias in our community, but the diverse perspective, creativity, work ethic, of you coworkers most certainly matters.<br /><br />Also, there are thousands of examples, even major shifts in scientific paradigms that are from projects that "didn't work." As in, their project had a particular goal but what they found was far more interesting. Even in my own publication history I have dozens of examples of this:<br /><br />1) Here is a project that failed to get a porous metal organic framework but did exhibit single crystal to single crystal conversion:<br />J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 10502<br />https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ja0474190<br /><br />2) This one was a failed attempt at near infrared emitting OLEDs but did generate a general method to predict blue or red shift on benzannulation:<br />J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2010, 132, 45, 16247<br />https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ja1075162<br /><br />3) Here is an attempt at generating a non-innocent, redox active ligand for Pt(II) that ended up being an efficient excited state proton transfer dye:<br />Org. Lett. 2011, 13, 1598<br />https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ol103106m<br /><br />4) This molecules was suppose to bind more strongly to surfaces for water oxidation solar cells but instead ended up finding a new decomposition pathway for bis-phosphonate drugs:<br />J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2012, 134, 16975<br />https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ja307987g<br /><br />5) A low ee excited state proton transfer catalyst ended up enabling a new strategy to enantiorich BINOL:<br />Chem. Commun. 2019, 55, 1263<br />https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2019/cc/c8cc07949h#!divAbstract<br /><br />Sometimes in talks people will lend insights into the discovery pathway but when the paper is written, you rarely hear about the aspects of these projects that "don't work." I did however do a few blog posts describing the process of discovery papers 2 (http://www.chemistry-blog.com/2010/11/05/the-life-cycle-of-a-north-american-research-project/) and 4 (http://www.chemistry-blog.com/2012/10/24/if-necessity-is-the-mother-of-invention-is-inventions-quirky-uncle-named-accident/) if anyone is interested in the untold story behind "failed projects" like these. <br /><br />HansonFSUhttps://www.chem.fsu.edu/~hanson/index.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-72268738032479253612020-03-25T19:30:35.684-04:002020-03-25T19:30:35.684-04:00"But, as you point out, environment is import..."But, as you point out, environment is important. I really believe a lot of people get faculty positions not so much because they were brilliant, but because they happened to be on projects as grad students or post-docs that worked, and got into high impact factor journals (often because they worked for someone famous in a "top" school)."<br /><br />This is also what soured me on academia and continuing with research (i.e. doing a postdoc) after my PhD. Even if you have the skills, intelligence, work ethic, drive, and domain expertise, a large portion of success in academic research boils down to intangible factors like the ones you mentioned that are beyond your control. Basically, you have to be lucky and get projects that actually work. Early successes on low-hanging projects can lead to a snowball effect - you get more of your advisor's attention and praise and that will help you along.Adamantanenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-47847280262004159072020-03-25T09:38:06.858-04:002020-03-25T09:38:06.858-04:00This was a big part of why I bailed out of my post...This was a big part of why I bailed out of my postdoc for a job in industry. I spent almost a year trying to make a catalyst in a certain oxidation state that my advisor wanted. Eventually I did some electrochemical experiments and determined that the compound wasn't stable. <br /><br />However, we did manage to get a publication out of it. We just had to change the narrative to fit the data.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-55290735070307122972020-03-25T09:32:16.189-04:002020-03-25T09:32:16.189-04:00Thanks for the post (and the other ones, Dr. Hanso...Thanks for the post (and the other ones, Dr. Hanson. There's a lot of very insightful info in here. I'd strongly advise all those interested in an academic research job to bookmark this for future use.<br /><br />I "gently" booted a student after 2 years (had them graduate with an M.S.), and that indeed was one of the best decisions I've made during my independent career. The tone of the group changed dramatically - the other students became more positive and harder working in the space of about one month after that student left.<br /><br />Agree to some extent with not taking pre-professional undergrad (pre-med, pre-engineering, etc.). However, these students can act as an extra pair of often-reliable hands, so when I've had a few throwaway experiments I wanted to try (the potential seeds of new projects), I've achieved some reasonable success with giving these to pre-professional undergrads. Mostly, though, the most success I've had is with undergrads passionate about research and able to remain in the lab for 2+ years.<br /><br />@Anon 3/24 11:15 am: I don't view projects as "working" or "not working" - I think a good project is one that's designed for discovery whether the results are positive or negative. I've had countless "clunker" projects end up in good journals because we discover that a system doesn't behave as one would expect from reading the literature. I always advise my students not to seek out the "successful" result, but rather to set up and execute experiments in order to gain insight one way or another. To be clear, it's a lot easier to shape the narrative when things go smoothly from the outset, but as long as a discovery is made, a narrative to get it published can subsequently be formulated.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-80993925897744059802020-03-24T12:53:13.753-04:002020-03-24T12:53:13.753-04:00I've asked many mentors and longtime full prof...I've asked many mentors and longtime full professors for advice on picking students. The best advice on which question to ask a student to see if they're fit for research is "Tell me about a long-term project you've worked on and what you learned from it." This can really guide your thinking on how hard someone works, their stamina, and often creativity. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-3058460854829421162020-03-24T11:31:08.075-04:002020-03-24T11:31:08.075-04:00I agree with the point to kick out the destructive...I agree with the point to kick out the destructive and lazy people. I came from a PhD lab full of lazy people (some of them destructive); and then I joined a postdoc lab full of energetic and motivated people. The productivity a world of difference. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-21354666027547313892020-03-24T11:15:07.188-04:002020-03-24T11:15:07.188-04:00Interesting. I find that, being a permadoc, the mo...Interesting. I find that, being a permadoc, the most important aspect to bring about "success" in the lab (developing projects and publish) has little to do with the advisor or the student, but whether the project "works"...meaning, gives you interesting results in a narrative. I have yet to find a faculty member that could figure out how to make a project that wasn't working to work (give positive results), or how to take data and put it an interesting narrative that can be published. Beyond basic laziness, there is little that students or faculty can do to succeed (create papers), in my opinion, it just depends on the project. But, as you point out, environment is important. I really believe a lot of people get faculty positions not so much because they were brilliant, but because they happened to be on projects as grad students or post-docs that worked, and got into high impact factor journals (often because they worked for someone famous in a "top" school).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com