Daily Pump Trap: 3/22/11 edition

Good morning! Between March 17 and March 21, 87 new positions were posted on the ACS Careers database. Of these, 10 (11%) are academically connected. 1 (1%) is from our friends at Kelly Scientific Resources.

Batteries FTW: Sion Power Corporation is "the leading developer of the next high energy rechargeable battery technology." They have 3 positions open, including one for a Ph.D. polymer chemist who has 3+ years professional experience with "UV, e-beam and chemically initiated Polymerization processes", among other technologies. (Tucson, AZ)

Pretty cool: InVisage is a Bay Area company that "created a new generation of QuantumFilm based image sensors. It is based on quantum dots, semiconductors with unique light-capture properties." They're looking for a B.S. chemist to synthesize quantum dots. Schlenk line and glovebox experience a plus.

Cheese: Hilmar Cheese Company is in California's Central Valley. They're looking for a B.S./M.S. chemist to "support product development projects and QA/QC testing needs by developing, validating, and implementing analytical methods to measure composition, chemical and physical properties, and biological activities." Sounds like a good time for somebody; a basic knowledge of dairy chemistry is desired.

Mustbematureaboutthis: IRIS International is  "a leader in in vitro diagnostic urinalysis systems"; they're looking for a Ph.D. biochemist with 2 years postdoctoral experience with hemo/urinalysis-type projects. You'll be evaluating dyes for staining in flow systems; actually, that sounds pretty neat.

Not winter all the time: Segetis, outside of Minneapolis, MN, is looking for a Ph.D. analytical/physical chemist (5+ years experience) to run their analytical chemistry team and method development for their manufacturing needs.

Outsourcing corner: BMS, looking for a medchem head in Hyderabad. ShangPharma, with 6 very senior positions.

Merck: 30 positions (34%), including a nice one for a senior research biochemist. Are you a chemist? Do you like chemistry? You might want to be a MBA financial analyst or a change manager (what in the devil is this position?)

Interview: Christine Herman, Just Another Electron Pusher

Christine Herman is one half of the latest incarnation of Just Another Electron Pusher, C&EN's blog on alternative careers in chemistry. She's an aspiring science writer and (interestingly to me) a writer for her university's newspaper, The Daily Illini. She graciously agreed to a quick interview with me; this e-mail Q&A has been lightly edited by CJ and checked for accuracy by Christine.

Chemjobber: Can you tell me a little about your background? What kind of chemistry do you do right now?

Christine: I got a B.S. in chemistry from the University of Illinois at Chicago, where I did undergraduate research in natural product synthesis. In the last two years of undergrad, I took several biology and biochemistry courses, which got me really interested in the chemistry-biology interface. I applied to chemical biology programs for graduate school and am now in my 4th year at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

My research can be classified as “biointerface science”, which broadly speaking refers to tailoring surfaces and materials to be compatible with biological applications. I modify glass microscope slides with a photoactive molecule, and use light to attach proteins to the surface in gradients. I am trying to design surfaces that mimic the blood vessel, so that I can use them in experiments to better understand the process of inflammation and the way the body recruits white blood cells to a site of injury or infection. So, I make these surfaces, place them into a flow chamber, and then I flow white blood cells over the surfaces in a way that mimics blood flowing through a blood vessel. I use a microscope that has a camera attached to it to record white blood cells as they roll along the surface, and study how various parameters (i.e., amount of protein on the surface, flow rate) affect cell behavior.

Here’s a video I made for the “Dance Your Ph.D.” contest last year that explains the process of inflammation more.

CJ: What kind of science writer are you hoping to be?

Christine: At this point, it’s hard for me to say what kind of science writer I want to be. I am formally trained in chemistry and biology, so I’d love to write for a magazine that specializes in either or both of those areas. So far, I have found the variety to be one of the most enjoyable things about science writing: One day I’m interviewing a professor about her research on biofuels, the next week I’m on the phone with a company that is developing artificial retinas. It’s so awesome to talk to experts in various fields about what they do, and write it in a way that non-experts, scientists or non-scientists, could understand. I’d be happy with any job that allows me to do that!

CJ: Who do you read right now (science and non-science)? What are your inspirations?

Christine: I have been working my way through the “Best American Science Writing” books, to get a taste of lots of different writing styles. I also have started reading Rebecca Skloot’s “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks”—good stuff! I admire a journalist who invests 10 years into uncovering a story that raises more questions than it does answers and challenges people to think about the issues at hand. That’s the kind of writing I really I hope to do in the future-- maybe even write a book some day if I can find an interesting topic that I want to dive into.

CJ here again. Thanks to Christine for the fun interview and go over to JAEP and read!

Good employment news from the West Coast?

In the March 21 edition of Chemical and Engineering News, Susan Ainsworth writes on seemingly positive chemist employment news on the US' West Coast. It's worth reading in full.

Ol' Kelly Scientific: They're optimistic about overall chemistry job growth right now.

But now, the employment picture for some chemists on the West Coast may finally be brightening. Although growth in job volume for chemists was “flat to declining” last year, it is now “definitely picking up,” according to Alan E. Edwards, a senior director for the Americas Product Group in the scientific arm of Kelly Services, a staffing services company. “I would say that California is climbing back and is now well out of the trough it was in. The West Coast job market for chemists is better than that in the Southeast but still lags behind the Midwest and the Northeast,” he adds. 

As companies accelerate hiring, they are doing so cautiously, bringing in more people on a temporary or contingent basis, Edwards says. Eager to stay in step with slow improvements in the economy, companies are hiring in the skills they need for only the period of time that they need them. Changing business models dictate that many professional, highly skilled science positions will now span about 18 to 24 months, he adds.

I'm surprised to learn that the Midwest is on par with the rest of the country; that being said, I've been seeing a lot of polymer chemistry positions from the Midwest. Haven't seen a lot of positions out of the Southeast, though. An interesting set of comments, though.

No good news for medicinal chemists: Unsurprisingly, really. But still tough news to take.

On the West Coast, hiring seems to be stronger in emerging businesses such as biofuels, solar energy, and biomaterials. And some chemists are finding openings in government labs, which are benefiting from increased funding aimed at energy research and national security, for example. [snip] 

Although demand for chemists “is improving in certain job categories, demand in others remains depressed,” cautions Meredith Dow, managing partner at San Diego-based staffing consultants firm Proven. “I think it is still really tough out there for medicinal chemists,” Dow says, noting that many of the positions the company has traditionally filled have been outsourced overseas. “Although we used to be able to place medicinal chemists within just a few weeks, we now have some amazing candidates who have been looking for a job for two years.” [snip]

Breaking into the medical device or diagnostics field, however, can be difficult for some chemists with a pharma or biotech background, “who may have to completely retool their skills” to do the work required, recruiter Dow says. “Unless they are able to find a company with a combo product such as a medical device combined with a biologic such as a drug-eluting stent, they may not be able to successfully market their chemistry skills,” she says. 

Worthwhile Californian initiative?: I'm always a little skeptical about job retraining programs. But here's one that sounds pretty good, really:

Not surprisingly, many chemists are trying to build on their chemistry foundation and retrain for jobs in fields where workers are in high demand. 

To help in that effort, in July 2010 the California Labor & Workforce Development Agency awarded the San Diego region a $4 million grant to implement new workforce training programs for careers in the emerging biofuels industry. The San Diego Biofuels Initiative—a collaborative effort including CleanTECH San Diego, life sciences trade association Biocom, the Biocom Institute, the San Diego Center for Algae Biotechnology, and the San Diego Workforce Partnership—used the grant to set up the Educating & Developing Workers for the Green Economy (EDGE) Initiative. 

Beginning this month, the initiative will provide education, training, and placement services to unemployed and dislocated workers including chemists and chemical engineers within the San Diego area, according to Kristie Grover, executive director of the Biocom Institute, which links learning institutions and life sciences companies to build education initiatives. 

For those with the requisite skills, jobs seem to be plentiful in the biofuels market. 

We'll have to keep track of the biofuels retraining initiative; if it's good news, this could be a way out of this mess. Maybe.  

What's your lab superstition?

What would you do if saw this in front of your hood?
Photo credit: Flickr user AlishaV (Creative Commons)

The ever-prolific Glen Ernst wrote in the comments of last week's dishwashing post that:

Even though was we had a glass washing service at AZ I always, always, always washed my own glassware, so the good luck would no be washed off by those unskilled in the art. Are chemists superstitious? Um, maybe a little.

I have to confess that I am a little superstitious, in that I refuse to consider and/or discuss the possibility of good results before I actually perform the experiment. If you've done a reaction once or twice and it's worked great, great! We need to scale it ten times or run it with a slightly different analogue? Well, we don't know what will happen. "Don't know" means "don't know". Let's not talk about those good results until we get them, eh? I can get a little irrational about adding the word "potential" or "believed" when I want to hedge my bets, as if there was a Great Pumpkin/Scientist who dinging me for my positive assumptions.

I never had a lucky flask or a lucky stir bar or anything like that. But I do knock on wood sometimes, and once I worked in hood number 13. Did I scribble it out and write "Hood 12 + 1" on there? You bet.

The perils of industrial postdocs

A constant reader writes with questions about an industrial postdoc. There are a few concerns:

Missing the seal of approval: Let's not be coy about this: we all know that there are informal networks of  (insert famous professor's name here) Group Alumni within larger companies (especially Big Pharma). While their power and influence is probably overemphasized, I'm sure that it does skew hiring at least a little bit. Those of us (myself included) who did not do postdocs with the Blank Group are excluded from those networks. An industrial postdoc further excludes you from those networks.

Whether or not it will matter is a different story. Trouble being, of course, that if you take an industrial postdoc, your new network is within your company and will probably not extend elsewhere very far. (Unless, of course, your company is so huge and your reputation so strong that you're a star, no matter what.)

Exploitation: I think we've all heard the stories about companies that bring in postdocs basically to hire cheap labor. It happens; I have seen it.

How do you avoid it? Ask the terms of your employment as an industrial postdoctoral fellow. What is the point of your postdoc? Is it to do your own research? Is it to help other people in their research? Can you publish your findings? Are you put on a project to make money immediately or develop new science?

Are you being considered for a position within the company afterwards? In larger companies, quite often the answer is: "No, we view this as an academic experience. After your X years are up, you're expected to go elsewhere." Also, there's the question of past history: have you hired postdocs before? Did they publish? (Did you allow them to publish?) Where did they go after they left? Is this an appropriate learning experience?

Pay now or pay later?: Industrial postdocs are typically paid higher than academic postdoc salaries (10 to 35%? SWAG) I view this as a double-edged sword. As a Ph.D. chemist, you're trying to grow a ten to twenty year career. Taking a higher salary that closes off other networking and learning opportunities may not be a good idea. But if your industrial postdoc offers training that cannot be gained elsewhere, why not?

If I were to rank these concerns, I would rank the most important concern as: exploitation, then networking concerns and then pay. Good luck to all of those considering industrial postdocs; just remember to consider them carefully.

What do you want in a boss?

Oh, and did you spot that compound correctly on the TLC?
Those big spots can really smear, you know.
Photo credit: The Collared Sheep

Via the New York Times, I read recently about Google and their initiative to ask their employees what they want in a boss. Using data mining (hey, it's Google), they came up with 8 important things, in order from most important to least important:

1. Be a good coach.
2. Empower your team and don't micromanage.
3. Express interest in team members' success and personal well-being.
4. Be productive and results-oriented.
5. Be a good communicator and listen to your team.
6. Help your employees with career development.
7. Have a clear vision and strategy for the team.
8. Have key technical skills so you can help advise the team.

While I can't help but really like this list, I find it fascinating how (relatively) unimportant it is for the group leader/manager to be a technical adviser. I'm not quite sure how that works, but it's worth pointing out that Google has a reputation for hiring highly intelligent and skilled people (or, at least, they used to.) Here's their comments about the technical competence issue:

For much of its 13-year history, particularly the early years, Google has taken a pretty simple approach to management: Leave people alone. Let the engineers do their stuff. If they become stuck, they’ll ask their bosses, whose deep technical expertise propelled them into management in the first place.

But Mr. Bock’s group found that technical expertise — the ability, say, to write computer code in your sleep — ranked dead last among Google’s big eight. What employees valued most were even-keeled bosses who made time for one-on-one meetings, who helped people puzzle through problems by asking questions, not dictating answers, and who took an interest in employees’ lives and careers.

“In the Google context, we’d always believed that to be a manager, particularly on the engineering side, you need to be as deep or deeper a technical expert than the people who work for you,” Mr. Bock says. “It turns out that that’s absolutely the least important thing. It’s important, but pales in comparison. Much more important is just making that connection and being accessible.”

I really don't know how to process this; in the academic world, the professor (the boss) is usually the smartest and/or most knowledgeable person in the room. But again, the distribution of experience and talent is going to be a lot different at Google than it going to be in a typical academic chemistry group. (I suspect that the distribution of medicinal and/or process chemistry knowledge in an industrial setting is a lot closer to Google's distribution than an academic groups.)

I think Mr. Bock sells it short when tends to imply that the manager doesn't have to have the same level of technical knowledge as his subordinates. That sort of imbalance seems dangerous somehow, and I can't quite put my finger on it.

While I think that these skills are going to be difficult to grow in people (you either have skills #2, #3, #4, #5 and #7 or you don't), I certainly agree that they're very important. (Presumably, you can learn to develop your people's careers.) It will be interesting to see if anything comes out of this initiative by Google.

You asked for it, Merck.

Isn't this what you want to be selling?
This job DEMANDS your degree in chemistry.
Photo credit: hoobly.com

Of the 71 positions posted, 37 are from our friends at Merck. So, along with a smattering of science-related positions, there are some real doozies. Are you a chemist? A member of the American Chemical Society? Merck wants to know if you're interested to be:

• A nurse practitioner
• An electromechanic (what is that?!?)
• A fire and security chief
• And best yet, marketing director for Dr. Scholl's.

You know, when I got my degree in chemistry, I thought to myself: "You know, self, I really like footcare products. And when I really get good at synthetic chemistry, I'd like to become the head of the leader in footcare products, a brand that has been around for over 100 years. That would make my Mom and Dad proud of me."

Well, dreams die hard.

Daily Pump Trap: 3/17/11 edition

Good morning! Between March 15 and 16, there were 71 new positions posted on the ACS Careers website. Of these, 3 (4%) are academic positions.

Shanghai: Unilever is hiring -- in Shanghai. 11 new positions posted for there, including 5 doctoral positions. Interesting.

San Jose, CA: Cheil Industries is seeking 2 Ph.D. chemists with organosilicon and dye experience.

Vista, CA: "ColomerUSA, Inc., a full-service manufacturer & distributor of quality salon & spa products with brands that include: American Crew, CND, ROUX, ABBA, Revlon Realistic, and Crème of Nature." Oooh -- American Crew, that sounds fancy. They're looking for a B.S. chemist with 2 years of experience in polymer formulations and 3+ years in process development.

San Diego, CA: Celgene in San Diego is looking for a Ph.D. analytical chemist to do, well, everything. (Principal scientist level.)

West Chester, PA: UTC Fire and Security is "a global leader in fire and security." They're looking for a B.S./M.S. chemist with 5+ years experience in formulations. Check out this awesome qualification: "Strong hand and lab tool." Well, if you're looking for a lab tool, oh, I could find you a few...

Morrisville, PA: Gelest is looking for a B.S./M.S./Ph.D. synthetic chemist. Needs to be "able to handle more than one thing at a time." Also, this is a swing shift position -- you don't see those very often.

Interview: Glen Ernst, Just Another Electron Pusher

Glen Ernst is one half of Just Another Electron Pusher, C&EN's blog on alternative careers in chemistry. Glen has a great deal of experience from industry and he's lived through quite a few changes in the pharmaceutical world. I was terribly happy to get an interview with him. This e-mail Q&A was formatted by CJ and checked for accuracy by Glen.

Chemjobber: Can you tell me a little about your background?

Glen: How far back do you want to go? I grew up in Montana – my father was in the Air Force and that’s where he was stationed and where we settled when he decided to retire. As an undergraduate at Montana State University, I pursued a double major and received a BS in Chemical Engineering and a BA in Theatre Arts. After interviewing for typical bachelor’s level chemical engineering positions, I knew I wanted to go into research. In engineering, research positions all but required a graduate degree, at least at that time. At Montana State, I was made aware of an opportunity in the chemistry graduate program, specifically for a chemical engineer. My advisor did both organometallic and asphalt research, and wanted me for the latter, but included some organometallic projects among my choices for a research project. I chose an organometallic project, and he was fine with that. I knew early on that I was going to leave with a Master’s, and go on for my PhD elsewhere – I didn’t want to look too “inbred” by having everything accomplished at one school.

I landed a job as a synthetic chemist at ICI Americas (which became Zeneca which became AstraZeneca) at Wilmington, Delaware in 1987. I worked as a synthetic organic chemist, and found I really enjoyed both the synthetic aspect and that of designing new compounds, where I was encouraged to contribute. I was having too much fun and felt really scientifically fulfilled, so I felt leaving to return to grad school would be impractical, and a bit selfish. As it turned out, I was given a rare opportunity to transition into a PhD-level team leader position after about ten years. There were some initial struggles, but I really enjoyed to enjoy the challenges of medicinal chemistry, and began to have a fair amount of success in the role. I guess the validation of all that was being promoted to Principal Scientist back in 2007. I was very fortunate to work in that role, and I’m deeply grateful.

When AstraZeneca announced in March of last year the intent to exit several disease areas and close three major drug discovery sites, including the one in Wilmington. I don’t think anyone was truly shocked, because we knew that was certainly on the table. But there was still some element of surprise, since AZ also has its US corporate HQ in Wilmington.

Process Wednesday: filtration

Continuing on Kilomentor's list of questions for scale-up, let's face his questions on filtration:

Does the process have a filtration process step? If so:

1. Has the rate of filtration been checked?
2. Does the solid shrink in diameter size on the filter after removing solvent or does the filter cake crack?
3. Do your instructions make provision to prevent shrinking or cracking to facilitate washing?
4. Have you done a split run (reaction mixture is worked in several parts) to assess the effect of inadequate washing of the crystalline mass?
5. If the filtration uses charcoal or filter-aid- has the substrate been completely removed from the filter material? Do you have an in-process control to assess the quantity in filtrate and the quantity caught in the adsorbant?

Having confronted filtration on a not very large scale, I can't answer these questions very well for myself. The cracking of the filter cake is something that happens on a regular basis, even on small scale. I presume that this is not a good thing, as it promotes a easier channel for air and wash solvent to proceed through (rather than through the cake itself.) I'll be honest, I'm not quite sure how to prevent it -- I hope there's a reader who has more experience than I.

Question 4 is something that I note about process chemists; they want to find out what happens when something doesn't go as planned. While the protocol is written (I imagine) to ensure adequate washing, what happens if it doesn't happen and the material goes on to the next step? Planning for things to go wrong (and knowing in advance what might happen) is a good idea.

Readers, any comments on these questions?

Fukushima Daiichi: on the skyline



Best of luck, fellas. We're all pulling for you.
Photo credit: Tokyo Electric Power/AP/cbc.ca

From David Danielo's "Blood Stripes: The Grunt's View of the War In Iraq":

A problem unit is "on the skyline." This expression comes from the way Marines are trained to climb over an obstacle. They are taught to keep a low profile: being on the skyline, absent cover and concealment, is wrong and could get a person killed.

No unit wants to be on the skyline. Their commanders closely scrutinize them to decipher the exact reason behind their flawed performance...

Every Marine spends at least some time as a boot. Every unit -- from squads to regiments -- spends at least a few days on the skyline. The test of the individual Marine and unit leader comes when they are the boots or outcasts or their units are on the skyline. Can they bounce back? Can they fix themselves? Nobody asks these questions unless the unit or Marine is skylined.

This blog is more about the scientist than about the science. So it probably comes as no surprise that I find myself in extreme sympathy with the people trying to stop whatever incident may be occurring at these plants. Of course, the engineers and operators at Fukushima Daiichi are skylined through no fault of their own; they were the men and women who happened to be there (or happened to work there) when this very awful double natural disaster hit.

But the fact of the matter is that a small group of people (less than 150?) are trying desperately to stop some very dangerous things from happening. Within this group of people, there undoubtedly must be some people who have gone without sleep for days, who are on the verge of breaking but have summoned all their strength and self-discipline to carry on. Outside of this group is a small cottage industry of people who are kibitizing, Monday-morning quarterbacking and doomsaying. 'Twas always thus; if it happens to you and your group (whatever it might be), you just have to work the problem, ignore everything else and suck it up.

All I can say is: fellas, best of wishes. My thoughts and prayers are with you all.

Daily Pump Trap: 3/15/11 edition

Good morning! Between March 10 and March 14, there were 55 new positions posted on the ACS website. Of these, 9 (16%) are academically connected and 2 (4%) are from our friends at Kelly Scientific.

Well: Seems to me there are a goodly number of medium-to-large size chemical companies that are hiring people right now.

An old champ: Vertex is looking for folks (when has it not been?). 7 positions, with 3 full-time positions (including a B.S./M.S./Ph.D. formulation scientist) and 4 internships. All appear to be in the development side of the house.

An even older champ: W.L. Gore is looking for a B.S./M.S. analytical chemist with experience (5+/3+ years) in HPLC method development in Flagstaff, Arizona. A lovely town if there ever was one.

In this corner: Gilead, with 5 positions. 2 process chemistry positions in Foster City, CA and 3 in Alberta, Canada. Eh? (cheap joke)

In that corner: Northwestern's Integrated Molecular Structure Education and Research Center (a mouthful) (read: in-house analytical center) is looking for a Ph.D. mass spectrometrist.

A young upstart: Ebonite International is a company that (really) manufactures bowling balls and bowling equipment. For some unknown reason, they fail to mention this wonderful fact in their ACS ad; they're looking for a polymer research / product development chemist.  "We seek a highly motivated individual with background and experience working with polymers with the ability to propose, develop and execute strategies directed at creating innovative new products, enhance current technologies, and support our sales staff. Additional working knowledge with casting polyurethanes, epoxies and polyesters is a plus. As a part of our research team, you will be actively involved with the development of new products from concept through transfer to manufacturing."

A contendah: Akermin, Inc. is a company "developing novel cost-saving approaches to addressing carbon capture needs. Its primary focus is removing greenhouse gas emissions from large fixed-base industrial facilities." They're looking for a Ph.D. polymer chemist with experience with polymer coating methods, phase-separated polymeric materials or micellar polymers and with immobilizing enzymes.

Interview: what's it like to do chemistry in China?

I am terribly pleased to have secured an interview with Paul of China Bonding, the blog of an American chemist working in China at a chemistry CRO. Paul graciously agreed to answer some questions about his journey and his experiences so far.

This e-mail Q&A was lightly edited and formatted by Chemjobber and checked for accuracy by China Bonding.

Chemjobber: Can you describe your US-based background?

China Bonding: Before coming to China, I worked for 12 years in the US. After getting my BS on the east coast and PhD on the west coast，I spent 7 years with a large biotech, then 5 years with a big pharma. I enjoyed both of those jobs and learned a lot from having smart co-workers.

CJ: What was the catalyst for your decision to move yourself to China?

CB: A good question, and I get asked this by Chinese people all the time. ‘Why would you come here?’ is the implication. For me, it was a perfect storm of events, and I think no single one would have been enough for me to make the jump, so maybe my situation is unique. I advised my cousin, the recent undergraduate chemistry major, on how to proceed with a chemistry career. He listened attentively, then, soundly contrary to my helpful advice, took a year off to teach English in China. I was upset at first, until I realized the anger stemmed from simple jealousy. Since I had gone straight to grad school, I did not get a chance for a travel adventure of that kind and seeing such a similar version of myself engage in it, I could not help but feel an opportunity lost.

About the same time, I had a chance to give a talk in Germany and spend some time there, which I really enjoyed. I had not been outside the US for sometime, and started seriously thinking about options to live abroad. Unlike my cousin, though, I did not feel comfortable taking a year away from my career.

Given the climate in large pharma at the time, I feared for my future professional development. I wanted to explore non-traditional ways to expand my skill set. The search ultimately pointed towards China/India.

Well, that's not good news

Chart credit: Chemical and Engineering News

Yesterday, Chemical and Engineering News published its 2009 survey of new graduates. The data was collected from October 2009 until January 2010. The results are in the above chart and in the attached article by David Hanson, based on work performed by Jeffery Allum and Gareth Edwards of the ACS Department of Member Research Technology.

Factlets/analysis:

• Check out the unemployment rates for B.S./M.S./Ph.D. graduates: 15%, 19% and 9%. What happened to "new M.S. chemists are most employable?"
• The "further study" numbers for Ph.D. chemists ain't so hot, either. I figure that's where postdocs go. 
• Median starting salaries for B.S. and Ph.D. chemists dropped 5%.
• Isn't it disturbing how many of these kids are employed by academia? While I suppose that it makes sense for postdocs/academic-types, it doesn't make any sense for B.S. and/or M.S. chemists. 

Boy, this isn't pretty. (I think this is my first time covering this survey -- I'll have to go back and find previous versions of it.) 

Filter flask adapters

A list of small useful things (links):

• Cis-selective metathesis? Getting close!
• Sidechain Bob jumps in with a great post on laser pointers.
• Sam tells us what your choice of laser pointer means; I guess I'm cheap, but my red one has a lot of sentimental value behind it.
• This graphic by Sharon needs to win some sort of science communication award.
• Plastic from plants? Dude, this is neat (and weird).
• Speaking of (broken) glassware, Jyllian points out the latest from the Klapoetke lab.
• UPDATE: Joel Kelly of Infiniflux interviewed one of the authors -- check out the neat video.
• Th'Gaussling continues his awesome digressions on commercial inorganic chemistry.
• Paul Hodges says that the Baltic Dry Index shows that China may be slowing its economic growth.
• Web-based NMR analysis? The latest wizardry from Metamolecular.
• MedChemBuzz has a nice post on plasma protein binding of drugs.

Is washing your own dishes a good thing?

Maybe I'll do these tomorrow...
Photo credit: Imelda (Creative Commons)

When I was washing my own dishes in the lab yesterday, I thought of this passage. From the Anthony Bourdain travelogue "A Cook's Tour", on Thomas Keller's French Laundry:

Maybe you've heard some of the stories. That he used to make his cooks climb up into the range hoods each day to scrub out the grease personally. How he stores his fish belly-down, in the swimming position. That every fava bean in his kitchen is peeled raw (never soaked). How his mise-en-place, his station prep, is always at an absolute minimum - everything made fresh.

When I worked at a much, much larger pharmaceutical company, there was a nice young man who would take my dirty glassware away and a day or two later, he would return with them sparkling clean. While I loved it (I had just left graduate school -- getting your dishes washed is the greatest perk a young chemist could want), I always felt a little guilty, as if it was slightly decadent.

There is certainly a good negative feedback loop in washing your own dishes -- if you're a chemist who loves to use a lot of new glassware to do each operation, you're building yourself quite a pile at the end of the day. Foisting these dishes on someone else is externalizing these consequences. Of course, there is the productivity argument, too. If (relatively) high salaried chemists are spending an hour doing dishes, that's an hour they're not actually working.

I'm not quite sure that there's a moral lesson to be learned here (as Bourdain seems to be implying about Keller.) Washing your own dishes isn't great fun, but sometimes, it can be humbling.

Why the art and craft of chemistry cannot be captured on paper

Just in case you didn't know (I didn't):
Vanadium 2+, 3+, 4+ and 5+
Credit: Wikipedia

While searching for various uses of the term "chemical lore", I found a delightful passage in a book with the spellbinding title of "A manual for the chemical analysis of metals" by a Thomas R. Dulski. I'm going to present it out of order a little; if you want the whole thing, you can find it here. (Emphasis CJ's.)

Unfortunately, academic credentials are an inadequate preparation for this sort of career. The universities and colleges have de-emphasized analytical chemistry and,  in particular, classical analytical chemistry. And descriptive inorganic chemistry has largely been replaced by theory. While these changes may serve larger needs, they have hurt certain pragmatic concerns, among them, metals analysis. It is entirely possible that an individual may be awarded a Ph.D. in chemistry and have no idea of the colors of vanadium ion in aqueous solution. This observations is not meant to reflect on individual achievement, academic standards, or the quality of academic programs, but simply to illustrate that industry's perhaps parochial concerns are not being met. [This comes later than the next passage - CJ.]

Which leads us finally to the raison d'etre of this book. The last quarter of the twentieth century has witnessed a prodigious loss of classical analytical chemistry lore from the industrial workplace. I have used the word "lore" advisedly, because other aspects of this discipline - theory, good laboratory practices, and specific methods - can still be extracted from public, university and industrial libraries. But with the exception of a few long-out-of-print and somewhat dated texts, there is no sources from which to learn the thinking and manipulative skills that makes a classical analyst. "Lore" also implies a degree of art that must accompany the science -- the things that work even though their chemistry is poorly understood.* But the unfortunate fact is that most of the lore that has been lost as wet labs were closed and classical analysts were retired without replacement. As we have seen, these decisions have been short-sighted and potentially disastrous.

*The notion of lore is not new to science, nor is it antiscience. Rather, it precedes science. How many lives have been saved, for example, by drugs whose mode of action is only dimly understood?

An equally disturbing trend is the recent spread into industry laboratories of a dogma, widely held by lawyers and bureaucrats, that any human act, no matter how involved and complex, can be precisely specified in a written set of instructions. This credo is patently false, as anyone who reflects a moment on the works of man can plainly see. That is why there is only one Sistine Chapel ceiling, why all violins do not sound like a Stradivarius, and why open heart surgery is not offered as a correspondence school course. The simple fact is that no written protocol, even when the last "t" is crosses and the last "i" is dotted, can ever reduce the analyst to that hypothetical "pair of hands" -- a cheap, readily available, ultimately disposable "human resource," in the ultimate implication of that term. Well-written analytical procedures, such as ASTM standard methods are, of course, indispensable recipes, but one does not become a great chef, or even a good cook, by reading recipes.

Daily Pump Trap: 3/10/11 edition

Good morning! Between March 8 and March 9, there were 44 new positions posted on the ACS Careers website. Of these, 6 (14%) are academically connected.

Avon calling!: Yes, that Avon. They're looking for a Ph.D. program manager for acquiring new cosmetic compounds into their collection. A degree in organic, medicinal or natural products chemistry is desired (?), along with 4 years of compound evaluation experience. They want the materials to be bioactive. (Really?)

Princeton is a lovely town: Firmenich is looking for a Ph.D. organic chemist with a yen to be an analytical chemist. HPLC and LC/MS experience desired. You'll be "[a]nalyz[ing] natural and synthetic materials, fractions and extracts to identify and quantify volatile and non-volatile molecules." Sounds like fun. There's an interesting  little note at the bottom: "Open to temporarily transfer to other affiliate during career." Wanna go to Switzerland?

Now here's an opportunity: Goodyear is looking for a Ph.D. polymer chemist or materials scientist (with organic synthesis experience) to perform research into "compounding studies on the use of natural oils in tire elastomers. Experience in chemical transformation and analysis of natural oils is preferred." Also, must be " open minded, optimistic and collaborative with a sense of urgency." Yeah, that.

Tarrytown, NY: ARMGO Pharma is a "privately held biopharmaceutical company dedicated to applying original, targeted science to the discovery and development of novel small-molecule therapeutics to treat debilitating cardiac, muscular, and neurological disorders." They're looking for a M.S./Ph.D. analytical chemist to perform run their LC/MS and NMR analyses. Sounds like fun.

Lights: Cyalume is a maker of "chem-lights"; they're looking for a M.S. chemist (2+ years experience) to perform Q.C. on their processes. "Prefer experience with dye formulations, analytical instrumentation, and organic synthesis."

Merrrrrrrrrrrrrck!: 24 positions new, including a very nice intern position for some young chemical engineering student. Oh, by the way, are you a member of the American Chemical Society? Do you like chemistry? Merck wants to know if you wanna be a health economics intern or an information security intern. (Thanks to beloved commenter See Arr Oh for the reminder.)

The 7 stages of an adviser-student relationship

I'm going to sign your thesis... someday.
Photo credit: Ozone Ferd

Stage 1: (1st year, senior undergraduates) "Professor X is so smart. I'm honored to be in his presence."
Stage 2: (2nd year) "Professor X doesn't care about me."
Stage 3: (3-4 year) "Professor X hates me and only me."
Stage 4: (4-5 year) "I $#$#$#$# hate Professor X. He's a complete ^@#@#!"
Stage 5: (5 year+) "I'm so tired of Professor X. I'm so ready to be done."
Stage 6: (post-graduation) "Professor X isn't so bad. He's a lot better than Professor Y."
Stage 7: (2 years post-graduation) "You know, that Professor X, he's grown a lot since I left the group."

Process Wednesday: Scale-up questions

The Kilomentor blog is a really great and under-referenced resource in the chemistry blogosphere. He has a great list of questions for anyone looking to scale up a reaction. He asks incisive questions about difficulties that might arise during crystallization, filtration, drying and today's topic, extraction. Does the process have an extraction step(s)? If so:

1. Are the phases susceptible to emulsion formation (vigorous shaking)?
2. What provisions for promoting separation are known?
3. Are the phases very dark and hard to tell apart? What to do?
4. What about interfacial material? What should be done with it?
5. Have you reduced the size of the liquid phases as much as possible to increase throughput?

I have worked under conditions of question 3, where phases are extremely difficult to tell apart. While it's difficult, it's not too tough on 22-liter scale (especially when you can watch/hear the solution coming out of the separatory funnel.) I cannot imagine what one does when the scale is increased significantly (shudder.)

Interfacial material is another weird one. What to do with the stuff? It's both organic and aqueous. I've never found a good answer to this question. (I guess it depends on its purity; there's gotta be a lot of inorganic salts in there, but if you're short on product, you might be tempted to try to recover it.) Readers?

Thanks, NYT, for that cheering news on pharma.

You weren't looking to support me, were you?
Photo credit: missginsu.com

On Sunday, the New York Times had a sobering analysis of the problems of the pharmaceutical industry. Some key quotes follow, with my emphasis:

This is a sobering reversal for an industry that just a few years ago was the world’s most profitable business sector but is now under pressure to reinvent itself and shed its dependence on blockbuster drugs. And it casts a spotlight on the problems drug companies now face: a drought of big drug breakthroughs and research discoveries; pressure from insurers and the government to hold down prices; regulatory vigilance and government investigations; and thousands of layoffs in research and development.

[snip] The same concerns apply to drug giants in the United States. They are all struggling with research failures as they scramble to replace their cash cows, like Pfizer’s multimillion-dollar gamble on a replacement for the cholesterol-lowering drug Lipitor, which failed miserably in clinical trials. Drug companies cut 53,000 jobs last year and 61,000 in 2009, far more than most other sectors, according to the outplacement company Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

“This is panic time, this is truly panic time for the industry,” said Kenneth I. Kaitin, director of the Center for the Study of Drug Development at Tufts University in Medford, Mass. “I don’t think there’s a company out there that doesn’t realize they don’t have enough products in the pipeline or the portfolio, don’t have enough revenue to sustain their research and development.”
 
[snip] “We have to fix our innovative core,” Pfizer’s new president, Ian C. Read, said in an interview recently. To do that, the company is refocusing on smaller niches in cancer, inflammation, neuroscience and branded generics — and slashing as much as 30 percent of its own research and development spending in the next two years as its scientists work on only the most potentially profitable prospects.
 
[snip] “You don’t lay off R&D if it’s just a cycle,” says Erik Gordon, a clinical assistant professor at the University of Michigan business school who follows the pharmaceutical industry. “That kills progress.”
 
[snip] At the same time, pharmaceutical companies are being urged by managed care and government health programs to cut prices and improve reimbursement terms for their most profitable pills.That follows similar practices in Europe, where Germany and the Britain, among other countries, are all increasing pressure for lower drug prices.

“Europe is an ugly place to do business today and will be in five years’ time,” Christopher A. Viehbacher, chief executive of the French drug giant Sanofi-Aventis, said in an interview. In the United States, Mr. Viehbacher said generic drugs were taking over the primary care market, leaving the best growth potential in specialty markets and in emerging nations like China, Brazil and Indonesia.

Huh. Well, that's not good news.* Materials science, anyone?
 
A bold prediction: rock bottom for pharma will be sometime next year (2Q 2012?). After that, we're going to have a changed industry with pullouts, layoffs and retrenchments between now and then. And then? We'll probably have a little hiring here and there. But between now and then, there will be blood.
 
*For extra awesome, read the comments to the article. Truly a joy.

Carbohydrate/analytical chemist wanted for Southeastern US company

Our recruiting friend Lisa is looking for another chemist in the Southeastern United States.

You: a Ph.D. chemist with 0-3 years experience in "[i]ndustrial or post-doctoral research experience (0-3 years) and previous experience with modification and analysis of sugars or starches and mass spectroscopy." Project management experience a must. Will participate in research towards "developing new technologies and new products in surgical adhesives, hemostatic agents and implantable biomaterials, and supports existing products and technologies."

Sounds like fun. E-mail Lisa at lcrawford -at- appleone/dot/com.

Daily Pump Trap: 3/8/11 edition

Good morning! Between March 4 and March 7, there were 44 new positions posted on the ACS Careers database. Of these, 17 (39%) are academically connected.

Your subjects won't cry: Dow Agrosciences is looking (at the ACS conference in Anaheim) for B.S., M.S. and Ph.D. synthetic chemists. Indianapolis is a pretty nice town (really!) and Manning has a least a couple more years in him.

Uh, you could pay more, right?: Cambridge Major Laboratories is looking for a Ph.D. chemist with 5-10 years of "real-life, industrial experience preferably in an API facility." So why are you paying 60k to 80k? I mean, I'm sure that Germantown is a nice town with a low cost of living, but is it really that low? (Readers, amicrazyhere?)

Coatings: Arkema is looking for a Ph.D. polymer chemist with experience in coatings formulation; the position is in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. (You, presumably, will become the King or Queen of Coatings.)

Hey, you again!: Halcyon Molecular is looking for a M.S./Ph.D. analytical chemist with experience in gel-filtration and ion-exchange chromatography. Bay Area candidates preferred.

Pune!: Nalco is searching for a M.S. chemists with experience in oilfield chemicals; the position is in (wait for it...) Pune, India. I'll note that Nalco is the first employer to append a YouTube video with their ad -- so you got that going for you. What's the job growth difference between the developing world and the US? Well, Nalco is hiring 15 positions there. Fifteen!

So chemists are safe from the intelligent computer menace, right? Right?

Chart authors: Autor, Levy and Murname
Credit: Paul Krugman, New York Times

While super-smart computers have been beating Jeopardy champions recently, they've been putting lawyers out of work as well. This fascinating New York Times article points to computer programs that can perform "document discovery" services that used to require auditoriums (literally) of lawyers poring over documents. More neat (and or freaky) are computer programs designed to analyze e-mail for "off-the-record" conversations, i.e. the moment when you decide to stop an e-mail chain and walk down the hall and have a private conversation.

In blogposts on this issue, Paul Krugman points to a paper by economists Autor et al. that summarizes the tasks that computers can either replace or complement humans. If you see the top right section ("non routine", "analytic and interactive tasks"), it appears that chemists ("forming/testing hypotheses") are going to be safe for now from productivity gains from working with computers. It is interesting how Krugman suggests that "medical diagnoses" may ultimately move from the right to the left column. Is Watson going to put general practitioners out of work? We shall see....

An interesting contrast

Madeleine Jacobs, the CEO of the American Chemical Society, last year in her "2010 highlights" C&EN column:

We are well into 2010, and I would like to share what we are emphasizing this year. When people ask me what keeps me up at night, I tell them it is the fragile economy and high unemployment rates that our members and the U.S. in general are experiencing. I have lived through five major recessions in the U.S., and there is nothing more heart-wrenching to me than to talk with talented chemists and chemical engineers who have lost their jobs and wonder what the future holds for them. ACS will continue to focus on the needs of all our members, with a special focus on our unemployed members. In addition, we are actively pursuing opportunities to work with Congress and the Obama Administration to keep valuable jobs in the U.S. and to help our chemists start and be successful in new businesses.

Madeleine Jacobs, this year (emphasis CJ's):

We are already well into 2011—the International Year of Chemistry. I am thrilled that chemists finally have our year to celebrate, but my elation is tempered by the continued sluggishness of the economy. Many sectors of the economy are improving, and the chemical industry is showing substantial profits, but we are still not seeing hiring of chemists at a fast enough pace. I have lived through five recessions in the chemical industry, and, until this last recession, we always experienced a reasonable recovery that involved adding back jobs that were lost in R&D. In this recession, everyone in the chemistry enterprise suffered, but unlike previous recessions, many people agree that we have experienced a paradigm shift and that jobs in R&D will not be substantially recovered in this country. 

We will continue, therefore, to coordinate, prioritize, and enhance ACS services to help members succeed in this rapidly changing and globalizing workplace. Efforts will likely include offering an integrated package of prioritized career development services, disseminating enhanced market intelligence to members on workplace trends, improving member awareness of services, and exploring new efforts to facilitate chemistry-related job creation via small-business and start-up innovation. 

As always, I am interested in hearing from you. What do you think ACS should be doing to help our members and the chemistry enterprise thrive? Please write me at m_jacobs@acs.org.

While I could offer snarky comments, I won't. I'll just say that I am glad that Ms. Jacobs is seeming to face the music that her members have been dancing to for about 2 years now.  I also await (with eagerness) the changes that are to come to ACS' member services with regards to solving the employment problem. See you (on this subject) this time next year.  

Blue label tape

A collection of small useful things (links):

• Excimer is now Dr. Excimer! Congrats to the end of a (doubtless) fruitful journey. 
• Welcome to Ms. Mastermind, who's thinking about her choice of degree. (Full disclosure: I contribute a little.)
• High oil prices? No good, sez Paul Hodges.
• Th'Gaussling sits through a bad seminar.
• Sam has a funny interruption during his seminar.  
• Let's play "What's Wrong With This Picture?" over at ChemBark!
• Chiral Jones likes bottle openers -- I prefer refrigerator magnets as tchotchkes.
• Liberal Arts Chemistry is thawing a little.

Staff scientists in academia?

I'm guessing that most chemblogosphere denizens have read Dr. Jennifer Rohn's piece suggesting the formation of professionalized staff scientists in labs rather than itinerant postdocs. Derek Lowe has an interesting and (more direct than usual) response to Rohn, which I'm sure most have read as well. A few thoughts of my own:

Why no reference to Benderly? On this blog, we've been through discussions of staff scientists / professional postdocs before, during our discussion of Beryl Lieff Benderly's article "The Real Science Gap." Rohn's argument is quite similar to Benderly's -- I'm surprised that there wasn't a note about it. (Similar enough that Benderly dryly notes that it's nice to hear a new voice say the same things.)

For that matter, Rohn's (IMO correct) assertion that a tournament model is working in the academic labor market was also covered by Benderly in November. (It should be noted that the tournament concept is most attributable to economist Prof. Richard Freeman.)

What is the state of the industrial biology job market? The surfeit of academic postdocs is clearly the result of the mountains of NIH funding -- in particular, for biomedical research. It appears that, in contrast to chemistry, there is less of an industrial escape valve in the biomedical sciences to take up the surplus of workers; Lowe's final comment seems to indicate as such. This comment on In the Pipeline suggests that, in pharmacology, that industry has adapted to the new reality by requiring more and longer postdoctoral stints of their candidates. Terrifying.

At the same time, the number of medical scientists is expected to grow significantly (see slide 11), according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. 39.3%, to be exact, between 2008-2018. One wonders where they're all going to come from and where they're going to work.

A negative feedback loop: Dr. Rohn's core idea is expressed in the following paragraph:

An alternative career structure within science that professionalizes mature postdocs would be better. Permanent research staff positions could be generated and filled with talented and experienced postdocs who do not want to, or cannot, lead a research team — a job that, after all, requires a different skill set. Every academic lab could employ a few of these staff along with a reduced number of trainees. Although the permanent staff would cost more, there would be fewer needed: a researcher with 10–20 years experience is probably at least twice as efficient as a green trainee. Academic labs could thus become smaller, streamlined and more efficient. The slightly fewer trainees in the pool would work in the knowledge that their career prospects are brighter, and that the system that trains them wants to nurture them, not suck them dry and spit them out.

So far as I can tell, this is a negative feedback loop. As more staff scientists are hired, there will be less funding available for postdoctoral fellows and graduate students. I believe that Dr. Rohn sees this as a feature, not a bug. Most current scientists would agree, I suspect.

But here's the thing: society, through the government, wants lots of scientists. They don't care about scientist unemployment -- they care about curing diseases and getting more for their taxpayer dollar. That un(der)employed scientists are the negative externality of massive NIH funding is not their concern -- we're just the grist. I suspect our cries will fall on deaf ears. 

This is just to say...

A poem, by Chemjobber:

This is just to say
that I had a busy morning
and I was not able to blog today
Forgive me
The hours are short
And real work is plentiful

with apologies to William Carlos Williams.

(back tomorrow AM with today's posts -- I promise)

BREAKING: Unemployment rate down to 8.9%, from January's 9.0%

Fresh (not so fresh) electrons from BLS. The unemployment rate is at 8.9%, down from January's 9.0%. U6 unemployment also slightly down to 15.9%, from January's 16.1%. More later. 

What is the most common personality trait of leaders in chemistry organizations?

Don't you remember? I was captain of the team.
Photo credit: latinoreview.com

If you spend any amount of time in chemistry, it doesn't take long before you realize the different personality types that populate the laboratory jungle. Most of us, for one reason or another, aren't particularly extroverted. Sure, there are our moments when we pop out of our shells or that we decide that here, now, we're going to make our stand on some issue. But that's the exception, rather than the rule. The vast majority of chemists in any gathering or organization will keep their mouths shut, even in the face of the most angering statements or the most heartfelt pleas for feedback.

At the same time, you do see people who have a certain amount of personal force*, who are assertive in their speech and confident in their actions. Oddly (or perhaps not), they're the folks who always seem to end up in industry management and leadership.

In my experience, this personality trait is not limited to Casper Van Diem's (see right) gender. I have worked for a few women in my time in industry; they were just as self-confident as any man might be.

So here's my lab postulate of the week: in any gathering or organization of chemists, the agenda is most likely to be set not by the most productive or competent person, but by the most outspoken or extroverted person present.

Readers, what do you think? Am I right or wrong?

*To borrow a phrase from "The Godfather."

Daily Pump Trap: 3/3/11 edition

Good morning! Between March 1 and March 3, there were 20 new positions posted on the ACS Careers website. Of these, 1 (5%) is academically connected.

Wanna live in Houston?: Celanese is a Fortune 500 polymer company. They've posted 11 positions, all interviewing at ACS Anaheim later this month. Chemists (with experience), chemical engineers, it's all there. Good luck!

Or Connecticut?: ITW Trident is (apparently) a company that works on inkjet products. They'd like a M.S./Ph.D. chemist with experience in ink formulation to "help formulate and develop inks and fluid products for new and existing printing systems as determined by customer and market requirements from feasibility phase to product launch." Is the salary a little skimpy for CT? Magic 8-Ball says "Signs point to yes."

How about D.C.? Or maybe Davis, CA?: TSG is a regulatory compliance consulting firm; they're looking for a Ph.D. chemist for work on "[s]tudy design and review, especially for FIFRA and FDA." Experience with GMP/GLP and FIFRA (what's that?) and PMRA (among others) a plus.

How about Palmdale -- it's a nice town (?): ERC is the contractor for the Air Force Research Laboratory at Edwards Air Force Base. It's a lot of desert out there, lemme tell ya. They're looking for a B.S. chemist. "Specific experience in polymer nanocomposites is desired. A strong candidate would have organic or inorganic synthesis experience and the desire to learn monomer/polymer characterization techniques including GPC, TGA, DSC, NMR, SEM, AFM, as well as the use of analytical lab equipment. Experience with nanoparticle and/or polymer synthesis would also be beneficial. Competitive salary offered. Applicant MUST be a U.S. citizen." This is good stuff, and there's cheap housing! (heh)

Welcome to...: ChemistryWorldJobs, which seems to focus on UK chemistry jobs. Best of luck to them, and all of us.

Reader poll results: predictions for the 2011 job market

Well, there it is, folks. I'm guessing that more "much worse" votes came in as news of the Pfizer layoffs (and others) arrived. 

Process Wednesday: "Ruggedness"

In the process chemistry literature, there are many words that are liked, e.g. 'simple', 'efficient'. But our mentor-by-literature Neal Anderson (and others) seem to prize the word 'rugged' or 'robust' more than most. In his book "Practical Process Research and Development", Dr. Anderson describes a rugged process as such:

A rugged or robust process must included 3 qualities: high-quality product must be prepared within the expected time cycle; the process must accommodate relatively broad purity ranges for the inputs, whether prepared or purchased; and the process must operate within parameter ranges, e.g. temperature and pH, which are readily obtainable during the expected process time-cycle. Unless the process is rugged, additional time is incurred, and the quality of the drug substances may be jeopardized. Appropriate in-process controls (IPC) are necessary to maintain low operating costs. Processes must be as simple as possible, but superficially simple (simplistic) processes may be eventually prone to errors. 

In his recent review*, the R-words pop up again:

An "edge of failure", or the conditions at which process failure will result, lies at the limits of the PAR (proven acceptable range) or beyond them at some undetermined point. After appropriate optimization a robust manufacturing process will "tolerate the expected variability of raw materials, operating conditions, process equipment, environmental conditions, and human factors."**  

In general, rugged processes operate comfortable far from the edge of failure. 

Interestingly, (completely underappreciated blog) Kilomentor has a bittersweet answer as to 'why' ruggedness may be prized in our modern times:

The Kilomentor approach to process development is geared towards the simple, rugged and dependable process step and avoids the technically demanding step, which uses sophisticated and expensive equipment. This keeps with the tenor of the times wherein so much process work is being moved to the developing economies where at least for now labour is plentiful, so long as the work process is rugged.

*Anderson, N.G.; Burdick, D.C.; Reeve, M.M. "Current Practices of Process Validation for Drug Substances and Intermediates." Org. Process. Res. Dev. 2011, 15, 162-172.
**Process Robustness - A PQRI White Paper. Pharm. Eng. 2006, 26(6), 1; http://www.pqri.org/pdfs/06ND-online_Glodek-PQRI.pdf

The roots of adviser rage

What do you mean, you forgot to take the crude NMR?
Photo credit: terraspirit.com

I recently heard complaints about a faculty adviser; this adviser had taken to resorting to banging on tables and walls to get their* point across.

Obviously, this is immature and wildly inappropriate (especially in the presence of subordinates.) But it seems that most chemists have either seen or heard stories of advisers losing their temper and taking it out on either physical objects and/or (verbally) their students and postdoctoral fellows.

Such behavior is probably the result of a few of different factors: 1) the stress and pressure of a faculty career, with grants and et cetera, 2) the vulnerability and pliability of subordinates (when directed at such) and 3) the knowledge that such behavior is looked at with a blind eye and more or less tolerated by their department and/or administration.

I suspect that, unfortunately, adviser rage will always be with us; while I might be able to list 2 or 3 reasons why it might go away over time, I can think of 10 reasons why it won't. While it's awful and inexcusable, it does happen. (And sometimes, there's a legitimate reason for the adviser to be frustrated.) But it is my sincere hope that (over time) university administrations and the chemistry community will come around to the thought that it's unacceptable and needs to be frowned upon. I hope I'm right.

*Look, who am I kidding? Of course it was a dude.