Bio Job Blog : Bio Jobs : Biotechnology Jobs : Biopharmaceutical Jobs : Bioscience, Biotech Jobs : Bio Job Blog : Biocareer : Bio-Business Training, Biotechnology Training : Jobs in Biology : Internships in Biology : Internships in Biotechnology

I started BioJobBlog in 2007 primarily as a means for me to express myself about life science careers and issue and challenges confronting the biotechnology, pharmaceutical and medical devices industry. That said, I never thought that BioJobBlog would ever amount to much; it was simply a vehicle for me to rant and rave about things that were important to me! It is a daunting challenge to begin a blog with no readers and then realize that 5 years later over 2.0 million unique readers have visited to read my thoughts and ideas about a wide breadth of topics.

I want to thank the readers who continue to visit BioJobBlog. And, I hope that what I have written over the past five years has either helped or induced you to think about issues in the life sciences industry. While I have no plans to stop blogging; my schedule is becoming increasingly challenging and I can no longer post articles as frequently as I have in the past. Nevertheless, I will continue do what I can to keep the content at BioJobBlog interesting, fresh and thought-provoking. 

Please feel free to contact me with ideas, thoughts or comments about the blog (or anything else for that matter). 

Thanks for supporting BioJobBlog!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

When I was a graduate student back in the dark ages, I took an advanced statistics course and then briefly worked in a laboratory where statistical analysis of data derived from animal models of disease (in this case the guinea pig model of tuberculosis) were essential. After leaving that lab, I developed an appreciation for the power of statistics (when appropriately designed according the laws of parametric statistics) and actually used statistical analyses of in vitro data for my PhD thesis. Unlike me, most of my contemporaries never understood statistics and thought that statistics can be used to manipulate data to confirm any hypothesis put forth by an investigator.

Imagine my surprise when I read in today’s NY Times that statistics are one of the hottest new career opportunities in technology and related industries. This is because billions of bytes of data (aka "big data sets")are generated daily and someone (usually a statistician or a person with knowledge of some arcane statistical analyses) is regarded to tease out trends and interpret the data. Companies like Google, Facebook, as wells as marketers, risk analysts, spies and companies that engage in competitive intelligence are desperately seeking new employees who understand applied statistic, analytics and trend analysis.

According to a recent LinkedIn survey, from 2009 to 2011 the number of new jobs with titles related to analytics grew 53%. Unfortunately, there are not enough trained or qualified persons available to fill these positions at most of these companies. Because of workforce shortages, universities like Stanford, Harvard and North Carolina State (NC State) have created graduate programs to train students in statistics and advanced analytics. 

Ninety per cent of NC State advanced analytic students (a 10 month program created in 2006) annually found jobs. The average graduate’s starting salary for an entry-level job is $73,000. Stanford and Harvard statistics department graduates head to Google, Wall Street and in many instances bioscience companies and start with salaries of over $100,000.

Not surprisingly, competition for entry to these programs is getting fierce. NC State takes only 40 new students per year in its program (185 applicants last year). Moreover, this year, Stanford received over 800 applications for 60 openings in next’ years class; nearly twice the number of applications that it received three years ago.

Like it or not “big data” and analytics are de rigueur and persons with advanced analytics training may be the new rock stars. That said if you like statistics or love to look for trends in large data sets then a career in analytics may be right for you. Now, you have to figure out where to get the training.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

My colleagues over @ onlinephd.org sent me an infographic (these things are very popular these days) explaining why there is a glut of PhDs on today's job market and how it is affecting undergraduate education in the US. 

Surprisingly, the glut is not restricted to the life sciences; it appears to be universal!  At some point, the education bubble will burst and it is certain to have a marked effect on graduate programs. While I am proud of my PhD degree, I am not sure that getting a PhD degree is a wise career path unless you truly love what you are studying and cannot see yourself doing anything else for the rest of your life. If you have any doubts, I recommend finding a job or world travel before you decide to take the PhD plunge!  

The bottom line: earning a PhD degree is a very personal decision and it does not guarantee you employment at the end of your training!!!!!!!!!!

Created by: Online PhD

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I just returned from the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists (AAPS) meeting in Washington DC where I gave three talks about biocareer development strategies. One of the talks, "Emerging Job Opportunities in the Life Sciences Industry" was reported on (see below) by a writer from Fierce Pharma.  While I don't usually "too my own horn." about my achievements, I thought a Number 2 ranking in the publications daily top 10 list was certainly worth a mention.  

 
New job opportunities emerging in Big Pharma
October 26, 2011 — 7:24am ET | By Maureen Martino

Since 2001, 300,000 pharma employees have lost their jobs, primarily in R&D and sales. That's according to Clifford Mintz, the founder of BioInsights, which develops and offers bioscience education and training. Mintz spoke at a session on new job opportunities in biotech and pharma at the annual AAPS meeting in Washington, D.C. While the losses have been steep, they're balanced by emerging, in-demand careers in the industry.

The industry's struggles are well-known: Many companies are facing loss of exclusivity on their biggest sellers but have little in the pipeline to pick up the slack. Productivity is dropping as the cost of bringing a new drug to market soars. Government and payors want more effective drugs for less money. The list goes on.

Developers are looking to new markets and new technologies to address these issues. But how do these trends play out for the pharma job seeker? Many people, particularly Ph.D.s, may have to consider getting additional training if they want to land their dream job. "Companies used to be willing to just hire smart people. But with the economic downturn and global competition, companies can no longer afford to invest in people who have promise. They need to see proven skills," Mintz explained. With the right blend of skills and experience, however, there still some pharma jobs that are in demand.

Clinical Research and Regulatory Affairs

"Clinical research is the lifeblood of the industry," Mintz said. As developers expand in emerging markets, there's a particular demand for people to manage and organize overseas clinical trials. "There's a huge need for clinical research professionals worldwide," he said, noting that most Phase I and II trials are conducted outside of the U.S.

Another one of the industry's perennial needs is regulatory affairs professionals. "Regulatory affairs experience is a skill that all companies large and small would die to get their hands on," explained Mintz. The increasingly complex and uncertain world of FDA regulation--particularly when it comes to new technology and science--means that companies are always on the prowl for individuals with solid regulatory knowledge and ability to interact with the FDA. You can read more about the demand for clinical research and regulatory affairs jobs here.

Biomanufacturing

The pharma industry's interest in biologics remains strong--just look at Sanofi's buyout of Genzyme, or Roche's purchase of Genentech. They're lured by disease-altering biologics that are less likely to face generic competition than traditional drugs. As a result, there's been increased demand for professionals who can navigate the complex world of biomanufacturing. Those with a background in upstream and downstream processes, large-scale protein purification, fermentation technology and bioengineering can make the transition to biomanufacturing.

Healthcare Information Technology

The rise of bioinformatics and genomics coupled with the push for electronic medical records has created jobs in healthcare information technology. Health informatics--the intersection of healthcare and IT--is ideal for people with expertise in genomics, bioinformatics or software that understand how to work with and manipulate large data sets and databases. The Obama administration has made EHRs a priority, and there's a need for software engineers and biologists who are comfortable working with medical information.

Medical Devices

"The medical devices industry has been experiencing explosive growth for the past decade," Mintz said. Regulatory hurdles in the medical device industry are much lower than they are for biologics or small molecules, making the industry a more stable alternative to biotech and pharma. The demand for devices, which address problems that can't be treated with medicine, will continue to grow as the population ages. Job seekers with strong backgrounds in bioinformatics, genomics, engineering and translational medicine are best suited to this field.

Medical Communications

Medical communications--which includes medical writing, editing, graphic design and science journalism--continues to boom. The demand for these jobs has risen because companies need a slew of communication materials to send to patients, physicians, researchers, investigators and the general public about their products and business.

Patent Law and Technology Transfer

Recent changes to U.S. patent laws have increased the demand for patent agents and patent attorneys in the life sciences field. Pharma's growing reliance on basic research from learning institutions means that there's a need for technology transfer experts. These experts manage the patent estate and intellectual property of universities and colleges that may engage in licensing deals with the industry. A law degree is a must to compete in this field.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Conventional wisdom has it that when economic times are tough enrollment in graduate schools tends to increase. After all, there are no jobs to be had so jobseekers go back to skill to increase their knowledge or improve their skills to be more competitive on the job market. However, according to a new report issues by the Council of Graduate Schools, enrollment of American students in US graduate programs dropped 1.2% percent from 2009to 2010 despite a 8.4% increase in applications.  This is the first drop in graduate school enrollment since 2003 and the decrease came after a 5.5% increase the previous year. 

The decrease in new graduate students was most noticeable in business (MBA) and public administration programs. Interestingly, enrollment by Hispanic student grew by roughly 5.0% while black enrollment declined by more than 8.0%. A startlingly finding of the report is that the number of new international graduate students studying in the US increased 4.7% percent since 2009 to 2010; a trend that has been taking place mainly in the sciences and engineering for the past two decades which has now crossed over into non-science fields. Finally, another troubling statistic is that while enrollment in certificate and Masters Degree programs is beginning to wane, doctoral programs are growing at a faster rate than ever before.

The reasons for the decline in domestic enrollment are tied to the poor economy. Graduate school costs are rising and employers are no longer willing to pay for graduate education of their employees. Dr. Debra W. Stewart, president of the Council of Graduate Schools issued this warning:

“The decline in domestic students is very bad news for the nation’s economic future. “Higher education and, increasingly, graduate education are what drives prosperity, and if we get to the point where only people with significant bank accounts can afford graduate education, the country is doomed.”

Some other interesting tidbits found in the report included the statistic that more than 60 percent of the 445,000 first-time graduate students were enrolled at public institutions, and about 58 percent of them were women and women earned about two-thirds of the graduate certificates awarded in 2009-10; 60 percent of the master’s degrees; and 52 percent of the doctorates.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

According to an article that appeared in the online version of The Chronicle of Higher Education website the Council of Graduate Schools and the Educational Testing Service  last Thursday that they are creating a commission to study and recommend ways to help graduate students move more easily through their training and into careers.

The commission aptly named The Commission on Pathways Through Graduate School and Into Careers, is composed of college officials and business leaders and will examine how much graduate students know about their career options once they obtain their degrees. Further it will also look into how students learn about their professional opportunities after graduation and the role of graduate programs in guiding students in their transition to a career.  The findings uncovered by the commission will likely be reported sometime next spring.

Ironically, the impetus for creating the commission was a report released in 2010 that urged the US to make it a national priority to improve graduate education and attract more students to pursue graduate degrees to prevent the country’s decline in global competitiveness. By 2018, the report estimated about 2.5 million more jobs will require graduate degrees. I am not sure what the authors of the report were smoking at the time that they prepared it, but I for one do not think we need more people with advanced degrees; especially in the life sciences. That being said, since the PhD-producing machine will not stop until tenure is abolished, the next best thing is for graduate programs to provide incoming students with a “real-life” perspective on career opportunities and the training necessary to pursue them. At present, career development programs and career counseling services are virtually non-existent at most universities and colleges. 

While formation of the commission is laudable, I am not convinced that it will accomplish anything except possibly assuage growing graduate student and postdoc discontent at many academic institutions. The reason why my expectations are low is a comment made by Patrick Osmer, the commission chair and vice provost for graduate studies and dean of the Graduate School at Ohio State University, who said

“It is important to create a dialogue with graduate students and with employers, and to listen to the students' concerns and expectations about career paths beyond academe.”

Personally, I don’t think that the lack of dialogue between graduate students and prospective employers is the problem. The real problem is the lack of care development discussions between graduate students and their advisors; many of whom don’t know or care about career options for the persons who they train. Until graduate programs recognize that career development counseling and training are in their bailiwick, then nothing is going to change regardless of findings of one or more “expert” commission run by individuals who are part of the problem!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!   

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Adam Reuben, PhD is a molecular biologist who spent seven years@ Johns Hopkins earning his degree. While not in the laboratory pouring gels and analyzing DNA sequence data, he performed a stand up routine at open mike nights at local Maryland clubs.   He crafted the The Grad Student Rap as part of his routine.

After graduating, he got a job as a scientist at a biotech company where he is currently working on a malaria vaccine.  He also wrote a book entitled "Surviving Your Stupid Stupid Decision to Go to Grad School" which is likely an enlightening read for those of you who are still struggling with your decisions.  Also, he teaches an undergraduate class at Hopkins on the stand up comic and society (talk about an alternative career path).

Anyway, check out his video....it rocks but is sadly true!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Viewing!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

For the past several years, I have been trying to convince anyone who would listen that the reason for the dismal job prospects for most PhD-trained scientists is a simple supply and demand issue. To wit, there are too many PhDs and too few jobs for them! 

While I intuitively understood that this was the case, nobody had ever substantiated the veracity of the claim and consequently I was beginning to think I was wrong. Imagine my joy after reading William Deresiewicz’s piece in this month’s edition of the The Nation magazine. In an article entitled “Faulty Towers: The Crisis in Higher Education,” Deresiewicz elegantly and aptly sums up the situation facing today’s newly minted PhDs:

"At Yale, we were overjoyed if half our graduating students found positions. That’s right—half........You’d think departments would respond to the Somme-like conditions they’re sending out their newly minted PhDs to face by cutting down the size of their graduate programs. If demand drops, supply should drop to meet it. In fact, many departments are doing the opposite, the job market be damned. More important is maintaining the flow of labor to their domestic sweatshops, the pipeline of graduate students who staff discussion sections and teach introductory and service courses like freshman composition and first-year calculus. (Professors also need dissertations to direct, or how would they justify their own existence?)

Further, he asserts:

“......the PhD glut works well for departments at both ends, since it gives them the whip hand when it comes to hiring new professors. Graduate programs occupy a highly unusual, and advantageous, market position: they are both the producers and the consumers of academic labor, but as producers, they have no financial stake in whether their product “sells”—that is, whether their graduates get jobs. Yes, a program’s prestige is related, in part, to its placement rate, but only in relative terms. In a normal industry, if no firm sells more than half of what it produces, then either everyone goes out of business or the industry consolidates. But in academia, if no one does better than 50 percent, then 50 percent is great. Programs have every incentive to keep prices low by maintaining the oversupply.”

Finally he concludes with an eye-opening but sadly accurate observation:

“How professors square their Jekyll-and-Hyde roles in the process—devoted teachers of individual students, co-managers of a system that exploits them as a group—I do not know. Denial, no doubt, along with the rationale that this is just the way it is, so what can you do?”

I am glad that somebody else perceives the problem the way that I do. At least, I now know that I am on the right track! Do any BioJobBlog readers have any suggestions, ideas or insights into how to fix this obviously broken system? 

Let me know!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A graduate student friend of mine suggested that his research project was very similar to a video entitled "The Bad Project Video (Lady Gaga Parody)."  The video based on the Lady Gaga hit song "Bad Romance" was produced by members of the Zheng Lab who study Alzheimer's disease at Baylor College of Medicine. The lab unveiled its video at their annual 2011 Molecular and Human Genetics Retreat. 

To date, the video that was posted on YouTube has already amassed over 2.7 million hits an almost unprecedented number of hits for a science video! Members of the lab posted this introduction at their YouTube site:

"Thanks everyone for your comments and words of encouragement! We had no idea this would spread like it has, but I guess some of these feelings are universal (and international!). This was all in good fun and took us only a few days to do the filming and editing. If you are caught in a bad project, best of luck and hope you can turn it around soon!"

Unfortunately, the video accurately depicts the daily lives of  many graduate students and postdoctoral scientists struggling to jump start careers in the life sciences.  In any event, it is a well produced and hilarious attempt to show graduate students and postdocs that they are not alone and that there may be light at the end of the tunnel. 

Until next time..

Good Luck and Hang In There!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

There is no doubt that it is becoming increasingly difficult for persons with PhD degrees in the life sciences to pursue traditional career paths. To that end, Anne Miller of OnlineDegree.net sent me a link to a post that offers some interesting career options that might be of interest to graduate students and postdoctoral fellows training in the life sciences. While not for everyone, some of these jobs are tangentially related to the life sciences and may be worth considering if your current job search isn’t panning out.

The jobs with asterisks connote those where a scientific background may be beneficial.

1. MMO Gold Farmer : Gold farming has little to do with gold mining, as the workers are actually responsible for sitting at a computer for hours on end playing World of Warcraft and other massive multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs) in order to amass a large amount of in-game currency to sell for the real thing.

2. Animal Insemination* : Artificially inseminating livestock is a necessary job if one wants a healthy food supply, but few will deny that it is an extremely unusual line of work.

3. Chicken Sexer* : The idea of a chicken sexer likely brings up a series of giggles and blushes, but in actuality involves deciphering the genitalia of newly-hatched birds and inventorying how many males and females crop up in the bunch.

4. Odor Judge : With strong stomachs and a much stronger olfactory system, odor judges do exactly what their job title implies. Sometimes they even have to jam their nose into a participant’s armpit to see how well their deodorant works.

5. Garbage Bin Archivist : A step up from dumpster diving, some people make money off scouring files and archives retrieved from filthy garbage bins for legal reasons.

6. Fish Liver Sorter* : They sort fish livers. Actually, the job description also entails slicing the organs out before organizing them as well as discarding any that appear sick or spoiled.

7. Organ Procurers* : Organ procurers work for organ banks, helping to seek out donors and transplants for those in need of a new kidney, liver, or other body part.

8. Vomit Collector : Some theme parks employ cleaners specifically designated to mop up puke near rides that tend to inspire motion sickness.

9. Pet Food Taster : Most people would jump at the chance to taste-test chocolate, booze, or ice cream or other snack, but it takes a special stomach, palate, and probably mind to want to nosh on gourmet dog and cat food.

10. Gumologist : Food chemist Jessee Keifer of Cadbury Schweppes is one of the only people in the world paid to develop the perfect stick of chewing gum.

11. Dice Inspector : A dice inspector’s job involves inspecting the little cubes for any flaws that may give an unfair advantage or disadvantage when gambling.

12. Fake Review Writer* : Unethical? Yup. But a weird job is still a weird job, and this one involves professionally writing fake business reviews – positive and negative alike – for consumer-driven sites like Yelp, Citysearch, and Urbanspoon in order to artificially bolster ratings and verbally slam the competition.

13. Gross Stunt Tester : Nobody would eat worms on television for money if the network feared a lawsuit. Before chomping down on a cockroach, though, gross stunt testers and chefs have to whip up the night’s challenge and make sure it is safe enough to stave off litigation.

14. Hand Model : Some models make their money off the runway, appearing in television commercials, print ads, and as movie and show stand-ins without ever even having to flaunt more than a pair of pretty phalanges. There is an entire industry built around feet as well.

15. Citrus Fruit Dryer : All fruits need washing before being shipped off restaurants and grocery stores, and somebody has to be around to towel them off.

16. Furniture Tester : One of the cushiest jobs possible, furniture testers get paid to sit and lounge about on chairs, couches, beds, and other elements of home décor to help manufacturers gauge their safety and comfort.

17. Pet Detective : Real pet detectives help scared owners find their beloved animal companions. Generally, they don’t go chasing after missing dolphins.

18. IMAX Screen Cleaner : Because without the dedicated work of these brave men and women, nobody would ever be able to see the Great Barrier Reef or Mount Everest as the filmmaker intended.

19. Crocodile Wrangler *: One of the most dangerous jobs anyone could have involves wrestling crocodiles, alligators, and other aggressive animals. A simultaneously awesome and insane line of work.

20. Light Bender : Both dangerous and creative, light benders work in extreme heat to bring people flashing neon signs for businesses and home décor (in some circles).

21. Hoof Trimmer* : Cows and horses need their hooves trimmed for their own safety and comfort – really not much different than a dog or cat owner clipping the nails of their pets.

22. Wrinkle Chaser : Anyone who buys a pair of shoes has to send a bit of thanks to wrinkle chasers, who wield their irons with the intent of keeping them smooth and attractive.

23. Worm Picker* : With lighted miner’s helmets and aluminum cans at the reader, professional worm pickers snatch up their wiggly prey from the ground and sell them to local anglers for bait.

24. Ski Resort Illustrator : Glamorous when compared to many others on the list, ski resort illustrators apply their creative talents to…um…what was it again?

25. Fart Sniffer : People actually get paid to smell gas given off by cows in order to determine their diet, hormonal balance, and overall health. There are no words.

26. Pathoecologist* : Oh sure, telling someone you’re a “pathoecologist” at a cocktail party probably sounds all impressive. But have fun watching their expressions plummet when explaining that it involves dissecting and analyzing fossilized feces for a living.

27. Golf Ball Diver : Experienced deep-sea divers sometimes take on second careers applying their talents to retrieving golf balls from the murky depths of lakes.

28. Professional Sleeper* : As amazing as sleeping for money sounds, it also serves an excellent medical purpose. Professional sleepers help scientists and doctors figure out the mysteries of insomnia and other disorders.

29. Livestock Masturbator* : Similar to the animal inseminator, individuals who masturbate cows and other barnyard animals in order to acquire the body fluids necessary for conception play an integral role in the food supply.

30. Ocularist : These specialists create custom false eyes for individuals in need of one following an accident or degenerative disease.

31. Oyster Floater* : Before finding their way to consumers, oysters need to be floated in specially attuned water in order to remove any impurities.

32. Ostrich Babysitter* : Some kibbutz workers pass their days keeping an eye on ostriches to make sure they do not wander off, get into fights, or end up stolen.

33. Gum Buster : Littering is bad and all that, but if nothing else it at least means that cities and sanitation businesses create jobs specifically for cleaning gum and gum stains off the street.

34. Snake Milker* : Chuck Norris is so 2007. Snake milkers are the real tough guys, farming venom from the poisonous, slithering reptiles to help cure people of their bites.

35. Fortune Cookie Writer : Most little blips on the fortune cookies served at Asian restaurants comes not from some wise ancient sage, but rather a man at a desk being paid to crank them out.

36. Paper Towel Sniffer : A paper towel sniffer is responsible for letting manufacturers know if their products harbor any unusual smells before, during, and after use.

37. Lipsologist : Like a cross between a handwriting and palm analyst and a fingerprint archivist, a lipsologist claims to be able to read and identify a person’s personality based on their unique lip prints.

38. Neck Skewer : In spite of sounding like a line of work disconcertingly attractive to Leatherface, neck skewers actually pin the neck meat of beef halves to keep things more compact for transport.

39. Potato Chip Inspector : This delightful job entails looking through a conveyor belt full of potato chips for burned or unappetizing specimens.

40. Safe Cracker : A couple notches below James Bond exists safe crackers, who have to bust open locked boxes using their ears and fingers as tools.

41. Knife-Thrower’s Assistant : There is no way that any insurance company would offer a policy to someone who lets people throw knives at them for a living – but it probably makes for some great stories all the same.

42. Smoke Jumper : Smoke jumpers are extensively trained professionals sent into devastating wildfires on mountains, in brush, and other wide expanses to keep the environment and humanity safe from as much harm as possible.

43. Citrus Fruit Dyer* : No relation to the citrus fruit dryer, the citrus fruit dyers pop bright colors onto lemons, limes, grapefruits, kumquats, and other delights to make them seem more appealing to consumers.

44. Stand-In Bridesmaid : Eerily obsessive brides scouring over every single petty detail of their weddings and under the impression that the day would be absolutely ruined without a certain number of attendants (spoiler alert: it won’t) can actually pay women to stand in the ceremony to fill out the ranks.

45. Professional Whistler : Professional whistlers lend their talents to television shows, movies, commercials, and other media to add delightful music to their listeners’ days.

46. Turd Burner : Everyone who’s anyone loves fire, but not everyone is cut out to maintain equipment that burns human waste for a living.

47. Hair Boiler : Animal hair gets poured into giant vats of boiling water in order to make it curl up – and somebody has to stir it. Why does that sound eerily like the opening scene of Macbeth?

48. Phone Cord Sorter : Phone cord sorters (who, thanks to the advent of cell phones, are a rare breed these days) have to root through piles upon piles of the electronic components to weed out any that appear damaged or frayed.

49. Condom Tester : Before any boys in the audience drop out of school to pursue this career path, be forewarned that it actually involves stretching the prophylactics over a machine to test their strength and durability.

50. Cheese Sprayer : The powdered cheddar (or reasonable facsimile) on popcorn and other wonderfully salty, greasy snacks that wreak havoc on the heart and waistline has to get there somehow.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (try it you may like it)!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Often times, people ask me why I decided to get a PhD degree. They mostly ask because they find it difficult to fathom why a person would choose to go to school for such a long time to obtain a degree that doesn't guarantee a job upon completion.  I have long contended that passion, not employment, is the main driver in the decision to get a PhD--but I digress.

Back in ancient times when I started graduate school, the average time it took to attain a PhD degree in my department (Bacteriology, University of Wisconsin-Madison) was about 5.5 years (this included a mandatory Masters degree). At the time, many faculty members thought that the average time to a PhD degree was too long. Consequently, they instituted an ambitious plan and mandate to reduce the time to a PhD from 5.5 to 4.0 years.  Interestingly, only one person in our class of 25 was able the complete a PhD degree in 4.0 years (he got very lucky). The time it took for the rest of us (who remained in the PhD degree program) ranged from 5.0 to 10 years. 

With this in mind, the New York Times published an article in its Education Life supplement last weekend that compared the average length of time it takes to attain a PhD in various disciplines; ranging from the life sciences to the humanities.

While it should come as no surprise that it takes longer to obtain a PhD degree in humanities as compared with other disciplines, the average length of time that it takes to get a PhD in the life sciences has ballooned to almost 7 years! 

I am certain that this increase reflects the lack of urgency to finish a PhD in the life sciences because of the growing shortages of jobs in the sector. However, I believe that keeping students in graduate school for inordinately long periods of time doesn’t do them much good with regard to long term career outcomes. This is because —as most card- carrying PhDs will tell you—the real education doesn’t truly begin until your first postdoctoral fellowship or full time job.

While graduate school may seem extremely difficult and overwhelming at times, it truly doesn’t compare with the pressures, demands and anxieties pervasive in the working world. To that end, shortening the time PhD students spend in graduate school may afford them the opportunity to begin to experience the “real world” prior to the age of 35 to 40; the current age range of most life sciences PhDs looking for the “their first real jobs.”

Alternatively, if the time it takes to obtain a life sciences PhD degree can not be shortened, then it would behoove graduate programs to begin to integrate specialized instructional programs, e.g. alternate careers, career counseling, resume writing and interviewing workshops, etc, into their  curricula to more adequately prepare students for the working world.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In case you haven’t heard by now, biotechnology is no longer one of the best kept secrets of the pharmaceutical industry. Because small molecule blockbuster drugs are few and far between, every major pharmaceutical company in the world has announced plans to increase the percentage of protein-based drugs in their development pipeline. 

As strange as this may sound, most people working at pharmaceutical companies have little or no understanding of the science behind the biotechnology industry, its products and the skill sets required to compete in the industry. I learned this while working as a contract writer at a pharmaceutical company that was trying to transition from an emphasis on small molecules to biotechnology drugs. Shortly after management publicly announced its intention, signs began appearing in the building where I worked with messages like “Are you biotech to the core” or “Got biotech.” Not surprisingly, I found myself explaining the different between small molecules and biotechnology products to large numbers of colleagues during group lunches. Their lack of understanding about biotechnology was both surprising and troubling. I mean where have these people been for the past 35 years? 

While I thought that this phenomenon was unique to the company where I was working, it turns out —based on many conversations with employees at other companies—that it is pervasive in the pharmaceutical industry! Put simply, there are large numbers of pharmaceutical employees (and aspiring students for that matter) who know little about biotechnology and must quickly learn about an industry that they are being forced to work in so that they can keep their jobs! This presents time and logistical issues for many full time pharmaceutical employees—they simply don’t have the time or where-with-all to learn about biotechnology via traditional bricks and mortar training opportunities, e.g. undergraduate, graduate or certificate programs.

Recognizing a growing need, several academic institutions now offer online biotechnology courses and degree programs for undergraduate and graduate students. While these programs may not enable participants to work as bench scientists at life sciences companies (this requires hands-on wet laboratory training), they certainly provide students with the fundamental scientific and business underpinnings of the biotechnology industry.

Below you will find descriptions of a couple of online degree biotechnology programs and links to online undergraduate and graduate level biotechnology courses.

Online Biotechnology Degree Programs

The Johns Hopkins University – a prestigious brick-and-mortar research university – offers three online degree programs in advanced biotechnology: the M.S. in Bioinformatics, the M.S. in Bioscience Regulatory Affairs, and the M.S. in Biotechnology. (The M.S. in Biotech may involve a limited amount of on-campus instruction in Baltimore.) Students have up to five years to complete their degrees, but those who enroll for full-time study typically finish in two years.

The University of Maryland University College (UMUC) is among America’s largest providers of distance education. UMUC's Biotechnology Studies Program has been designated a “Professional Science Master’s Degree Program” by the Council of Graduate Schools. The program’s three specialization areas include: bioinformatics, biotechnology management, and biosecurity/biodefense. A dual online degree option is also available: students can earn an MBA in addition to the Master’s in Biotechnology by completing just a few additional courses.

Online Biotechnology Courses

Purdue University’s Department of Continuing Education frequently features online courses in horticulture and related fields that can help students prepare for careers in biotechnology. New choices are offered every semester.

MiraCosta College, a community college in Southern California, offers a number of online courses in biotechnology. The school’s website includes a five-year projection of course offerings.

While the current list of online biotechnology offerings is short, expect the number of online courses and degree programs to continue to grow in the future. If you are aware of or participate in other online biotechnology courses and degree programs, please feel free contact me about them.

Hat tip and thanks to Chesca and her colleagues at OnlineDegreeReviews.org for research and writing of this post!

Until next time,

Good luck and Good learning!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (3)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

While this isn’t a new topic, I wanted to raise the question again because I recently received a message  from a reader that greatly troubled me. The person who posted the comment has a PhD degree in biomedical engineering and is extremely angry with the existing system because of the lack of employment opportunities in her field. Put simply, she is so frustrated with the system that she no longer believes that it is ethical to advise young people to pursue careers in the life sciences. I know that she isn’t alone and that many of you share her anger and frustration with the lies (as she put it) about employment opportunities for life sciences PhD candidates and postdoctoral fellows

From time to time, I am invited by graduate students and postdoctoral fellows to talk about alternative careers in the life sciences. I try to remain upbeat and positive during my presentation but generally I can’t control myself by the Q&A session. Invariably, I rant and rave about how dysfunctional academia has become. Interestingly, I recently was uninvited by my former graduate department where I was slated to present a seminar on alternate career choices for life scientists. As the tenured faculty member (you know how I feel about tenure) who would have sponsored my visit told me “the seminars that we offer our students are scientific in nature and much different than many of the topics that I discuss on my very interesting blog.” Consequently, he informed me that I was no longer invited to give my talk (I was previously invited by the Department Chair who happened to be a former colleague of mine who decided to move to another institution before my visit). In an e-mail response to his un-invitation, I told him that I wanted to visit the Department and give the talk because I believe that my graduate education is what enabled me to maneuver the minefield that ultimately became my career path. Also, I told him that I wanted to share my insights and career experiences with current graduate students and postdoctoral fellows because I thought that many may benefit from them. Not surprisingly, I never heard back from him. 

The point that I am trying to make is that my message about alternative careers for PhD students is diametrically opposed to the mission of most PhD programs; which is to prepare 100% of their students for academic careers. Unfortunately, as I have stated many times in the past, only about 10% of those who receive life sciences PhD degrees land academic appointments. What are the remaining 90% of the folks who toiled long and hard for their PhD degrees suppose to do with their lives? In the past, as many as 50% or more of these students were able to garner jobs as research scientists at biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies or with government agencies like the CDC, FDA, EPA and others. Unfortunately, the pharmaceutical industry has laid off over 200,000 employees in the past 3 years, funding for biotech companies has hit an all time low and we are experiencing the worst recession in almost 70 years which is causing government agencies to stop hiring! This begs the question: what are graduate students pursuing PhD degrees and postdoctoral fellows suppose to do to put food on the table to feed their families and themselves? 

While I don’t have an easy answer to that question, I can tell you that getting angry and frustrated or dropping out of the system isn’t going to change anything. I will also tell you that the system isn’t going to change by itself! To that end, it may make sense for all of you angry and frustrated graduate students and postdoctoral fellows to band together and tell your advisors and mentors that “you are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.” To show them that you are serious, I highly recommend that your offer them a plan to address your concerns about finding gainful employment (not decade long postdoctoral fellowships) following completion of your PhD degrees. For example, you may suggest that they add alternate career certificate and degree programs to their existing curricula. Or, if new programs are too costly, suggest that they offer courses that showcase alternate career options like entrepreneurship, science writing or medical communications. Finally, at the very list, insist that they work with local companies and organization to create sponsored internship opportunities and get them to commit to supporting annual career development symposia or job fairs for graduate students and postdocs.

For the past decade or more, I have struggled to convince many of my academic colleagues to consider any and all of the above suggestions. Unfortunately, my pleas for creation of new courses and programs have fallen upon deaf ears! Given my current lack of success, I suspect that it is going to take more than one person (me) to induce the academic establishment to consider systemic change. That said anybody who may be interested in joining the “cause” to improve employment opportunities for PhD life scientists, please feel free to contact me!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Organizing!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

For the past 10 years or so, I have been providing career counseling and development seminars and workshops for life scientists. In the early years, students, postdocs and a smattering of faculty members would attend to learn about industry trends, the job market and more recently, alternate careers for PhDs and postdoctoral fellows. However, over the last few years, a disturbing trend has emerged—the lack of faculty participation at these events. 

Yesterday, I was invited to participate as a panel member to moderate a career development event sponsored by the graduate student and postdoctoral associations at the University Of Rochester School Of Medicine. The event was well attended (over 85 participants) and the discussion lasted for more than 2 hours. Joining me on the panel was a PhD-trained scientist/manager from Bristol Myers Squibb and a healthcare company executive who received his PhD degree from the university about 16 years ago.

Many of the questions asked by the participants were spot on and revealed that graduate students and postdoctoral fellows are extremely anxious about their futures. The panel did its best to describe what it takes to get a job in the life sciences, the process and steps required to successfully win jobs and some ideas for alternate career options for PhD-trained scientists. Unfortunately, not a single University of Rochester medical school faculty member attended the event. In fact, I met the PI of one of the postdocs who sponsored my visit and he said with all sincerity (I think) “Thanks for coming...the students are really looking forward to your talk.” Obviously, I don’t think that it ever crossed his mind that he, like his students and postdocs, might learn and benefit from a discussion about career options and hear (probably for the first time) how anxious and fearful his and other students are about future job prospects.

The fact that faculty members are routinely eschewing career development seminars and forums is troubling and extremely disturbing for a variety of reasons. First, as I have said many times before, I believe that PIs have moral and ethical obligations to help their students determine what careers that they are best suited for. I don’t think that it is too much to ask or very labor-intensive for PIs to learn about the job market outside of academia.

Despite an ongoing lack of tenured track faculty positions and the extremely fierce competition to win them, academicians continue to exclusively train and prepare students for academic careers. This makes absolutely no sense from a “supply and demand” perspective. Second, the lack of faculty support and participation sends a clear message to graduate students and postdocs that their anxieties, fears and concerns about job prospects simply isn’t that important to their PIs.  The mantra of most academicians —“just continue to do good science and everything will be okay”— is outdated, anachronistic and self serving (for PIs) at best.  

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the failure of  tenured faculty members to actively engage and participate in discussions about career options reveals the unbridled contempt that most academicians have for scientists who work outside of academia. Most academics choose to not concern themselves with non-academic and mundane issues like jobs and careers. And why should they? Once they win tenure, their lives are set because they are guaranteed jobs and benefits for life!

We are living in very challenging and troubling times. In the past three years, over 180,000 pharmaceutical workers have  lost their jobs and national unemployment will likely hit 15%. Academic and government jobs are hard to come by and the competition for these jobs is ferocious and extremely competitive. And, sadly, current academic training programs are woefully inadequate to prepare graduate students and postdocs for alternate career opportunities in the life sciences. 

As I have stated numerous times before, life science graduate training programs are in dire need of systemic change and must be overhauled to remain relevant. Unfortunately, systemic changes are unlikely because tenured faculty members can’t be forced or induced to change their attitudes or beliefs. While a minority of life sciences faculty members realizes that the system is broken, the majority doesn’t.  To that end, if graduate students and postdoctoral fellows want change to occur, than they must band together and collectively send a message to their PIs and mentors that “We are mad as hell and we aren’t going to take it anymore!” Anything short of a widespread, massive protest will be ineffectual!

To learn how to more effectively manage employees, please check out the 360 feedback solution.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

People frequently ask me why I decided to get a PhD degree to become a scientist. For the past 30 years, I have tried to explain to people why I decided to spend seven long years of “blood, sweat and tears” to attain that elusive degree. While anyone who has earned a PhD degree understands what drove them to do it, it is difficult to explain to others that the decision has little to do with career paths and salary considerations and is largely driven by passion— and perhaps more aptly—obsession. That is why Carole and Richard Rifkin’s film “Naturally Obsessed: The Making of Scientist”—an emotional and gritty film that follows the lives of three Columbia graduate students on their quest to obtaining their PhD degrees—is resonating with scientists, students and the public.

The film, which took five years to make and was launched in March 2009, follows the progress of three X-ray crystallography graduate students, Rob, Killington (Kil) and Gabrielle, who worked in Larry Shapiro’s laboratory at Columbia University Medical Center. Work in Larry’s laboratory focuses on elucidating the X-crystallographic structure of proteins that are thought to be involved in appetite control. While Rob, Kil and Gabrielle share a common goal—getting a PhD degree—they are very different people. Rob is a rebellious, boisterous, self-assured free thinker (who was thrown out of a previous laboratory) whereas Kil is a more staid, soft spoken pragmatist from the Midwest. Gabrielle, who returned to graduate school to pursue a PhD degree after a stint as a laboratory technician at a company, loves science but isn’t certain that she has the mettle to realize her dream. Each of them understands that time is of the essence and they work feverishly and unrelentingly  to insure that their competitors don't beat them to the punch and publish first!

Despite their obvious personality differences, each is driven and obsessed with producing perfectly-formed protein crystals that are suitable for X-ray crystallography analysis. The film accurately and painstakingly depicts the inevitable emotional “ups and downs” of laboratory research, the personal struggles and the often difficult life decisions that are made when pursuing a PhD degree. In the end, Rob, Kil and Laura find their own career paths as scientists and perhaps, more importantly. come to terms with the decisions that they made during their journeys.

Carole, a documentary filmmaker, and Richard, Chairman Emeritus of the Sloan-Kettering Institute and founding Chairman of the New York Structural Biology Center, made the film to portray the “reality of doing science” and raise awareness about scientific research. The film emphasizes that science, like art, requires creativity, persistence and unyielding commitment and dedication. The Rifkinds interviewed many NYC-based academic laboratories before choosing Larry Shapiro’s laboratory as the subject of their documentary film. Larry’s laboratory was chosen because X-crystallography is visual (and lends itself to film making) and Carol had a hunch that “there was a story to be told there.”

During a recent interview with the Rifkinds, I mentioned that if I had seen the film as a high school or undergraduate student, I probably would have skipped graduate school. Carole responded and said, “Yes, the hard work and emotional challenges portrayed in the film might turn some students off but we wanted to portray scientific research the way it is and remain true to its realities.” She added, "while the film focuses on science graduate students it is also relevant and accurately reflects the trials and tribulations experienced by PhD students in the humanities and the arts.” 

One of the more troubling moments of the film for me is when Larry mentions that scientists, like artists, “represent the fringe of society.” The fact that a prominent, successful scientist views himself as different, and on the fringes of society, doesn’t bode well for the public perception of science or scientists for that matter. Another troubling aspect of the film is that Rob, Kil and Gabrielle are clearly being groomed for academic careers despite the fact that roughly only 10% of life sciences PhDs secure academic positions at the end of their training. I pointed this out to Richard and he said that he agrees that it is a troubling trend and that “alternate career options for PhDs is the subject of Carole's  and his next film.”

Since it launch in March, the film has been screened at over 60 high schools, colleges, medical schools, professional science associations, government agencies and biotechnology companies. While the film may not be “right” for everyone, it is a must see for graduate students and postdoctoral fellows and for members of the public who want a rare glimpse into the emotionally-charged and highly competitive world of scientific research. For those of you, who may be interested in arranging a screening, please visit the Naturally Obsessed: The Making of a Scientist website or contact Hayley

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

After yesterday's post about career planning for life scientists, one of my soon to be former students in the Fundamentals of Bioscience Program aptly pointed out that my readers might have benefitted more if I had, in fact, offered information about alternate career possibilities for bioscientists.  I don't want the student to get too overconfident but I had the same thought immediately after I uploaded the post.  

Rather than modify the previous post, I decided to upload the presentation that I gave to the U Penn Graduate Student Biomedical Association yesterday.  However, as many of my former (or soon to be former) students will tell you, my PowerPoint presentations, while informative, are not as complete as you might think.  To get the real skinny on alternate careers, you will have to attend one of my seminars on the topic where I provide attendees with additional pearls of wisdom and some funny stories about my own journey along an oft times circuitous career path!

Until next time.....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Yesterday, I gave a lecture entitled “Alternate Careers: Taking the Road Less Traveled” to over 100 members of the University of Pennsylvania’s Biomedical Graduate Student Association. As always, there were many good questions and comments during and after the presentation. Some of the career anecdotes offered by several of the students reminded me of a conversation that I had several weeks ago with one of my Fundamentals of Bioscience students—I teach a Product Development and Regulatory Affairs course in the program—who refreshed my memory about a typical graduate student approach to career development and job searching. “We don’t think about jobs or our careers until we begin writing our PhD theses” she said. “Until then, our advisers don’t talk about careers or jobs and only bring it up because our funding will run out” she added. Admittedly, I had forgotten this because so many years have passed since my graduate student days. That said, it forced me to consider how much the life sciences job market has changed since I was graduate student and how vitally important it is for today’s graduate students to think about and possibly explore different career options throughout the course of their graduate training.

Historically, there were very few career options for life scientists—it was either a tenure track faculty appointment or, as a poor second choice, a job at a pharmaceutical or biotechnology. Unfortunately, academics jobs are hard to come by and since 2007 over 60,000 pharmaceutical R&D scientists have lost their jobs and more cuts are expected. Also, many of these jobs are likely come back after the economy improves because many of the R&D activities performed by these scientists are being outsourced to India, China and elsewhere. This suggests that a majority of life sciences graduate students who receive their PhDs within the next few years won’t be able to secure traditional life sciences jobs. While a majority of US life sciences graduate training programs recognize and understand the implications of the changing job market, many are reluctant to discuss alternate career options with graduate students and postdoctoral fellows. Even fewer, encourage or support students or postdoctoral fellows who want to engage in “extracurricular activities” to explore alternate career options. In fact, several U Penn students told me that they have to obtain written permission from their adviser before they can take courses or participate in extra-departmental activities. As one student quipped “What I do on my own time should be my business not my boss's.”

I always conclude my alternate career talk by saying “Nobody ever guaranteed you a job after completion of your PhD or postdoctoral training.” And, “if you wanted a job after completing your education, you ought to have gone to medical school, dental school, law school or any other profession that requires licensure to practice your craft.” While this may sound harsh, I believe that the decision to get a PhD is a personal one and based on discussion with many of my colleagues, most didn’t enter graduate school expecting a job to be waiting them when they completed their training. Nevertheless, I contend that graduate departments that continue to train and prepare students for traditional academic careers —knowing that over 90% won’t find jobs (other than postdocs) after their training is finished —are being disingenuous and even deceitful. Why haven’t academician realized that there is a plethora of job opportunities for life scientists outside of academia?

Like it or not, the life sciences job market has undergone radical changes in the past decade. Unfortunately, academics continue to adhere to dogmatic and anachronistic ideas and practices that don’t prepare their students and postdoctoral fellows for jobs in “the real world.” I contend that informing and enlightening graduate students about alternate career paths and, allowing them to explore some of these opportunities will not impede or hinder laboratory research. Instead, I believe it would help to improve and expedite its progress. As one U Penn graduate student shared with me over a couple of beers “If they would just tell us the truth and give us some idea about our options, it would certainly improve morale, reduce our anxiety and allow us to focus on our research because we would know what is out there!” As the old adage goes”ignorance is bliss.” But, in my experience, knowledge is power!

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

After months of complaints by university officials and scientific organizations, the US State Department announced on Tuesday that it is taking action to speed up the delay-plagued visa process for foreign graduate students and post-doctoral researchers.

For the past few years, foreign science and engineering graduate students and postdoctoral seeking to obtain or renew visas have routinely experienced long delays sometimes taking as long as several months. The problem became so acute that students and researchers who left the US often found themselves stranded abroad, not knowing when their visas might be approved.  Not surprisingly, the delays have caused enormous problems for American universities, which heavily rely on foreign nationals to fill slots in graduate and post-doctoral science and engineering programs. Over the last year or so, visa difficulties having discouraged many scientific organizations from holding meetings in the United States. Some life sciences researchers said the apparent reluctance of the United States to accept them encouraged them to seek work in other countries.

The State Department has hired additional personal to deal with the visa backlog but will not say how long it will take to correct the problem. A state department official indicated that they hope to handle routine visa requests within a two week time frame.

While never officially acknowledged, the Bush Administration intentionally slowed the visa process for foreign researchers to “guard against proliferation of science and technical information.” In other words, the visa backlog was likely intentionally created to prevent foreign drug companies and national scientific agencies from infringing on American intellectual property and patent rights—an ongoing practice that clearly frightened many of the jingoistic officials running the Bush State Department.

However, what the Bush administration failed to understand was that a majority of foreign students who train in the US want to remain here after completion of their studies. The visa backlog and its protectionist intent forced many foreign nationals to forgo their US training and return to their home countries to seek employment. This was beginning to threaten scientific and technical innovation in US laboratories because for the past decade or longer American students have shied away from science and engineering to pursue careers in business and computer science. Ironically, the Bush Administration’s protectionist leanings may have contributed—more than they care to admit—

 to the massive job cuts that have taken place at American life sciences companies in the past few years because of availability of a US-trained work forces in countries like India and China. This provides American life sciences companies with reasonable assurances that preclinical and clinical research outsourced to these countries will be conducted according to US standards. Further, it also provides foreign companies with unbridled access to a growing cadre of US-trained scientists that will enable them to compete on a head-to-head basis with American life sciences companies.

Fortunately, the Obama Administration, unlike the previous one, delivers on its promises and appears to be willing to work hard to restore science and technology to its rightful place in American society.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (it may now be possible for many foreign students!)

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Over the past several years, I have publicly called for fundamental changes in graduate education and training for life scientists. To that end, I was delighted to read an OP-ED piece in today’s New York Times entitled “End Universities as We Know It” written by Professor Mark C. Taylor, Chairperson of the religion department at Columbia University. 

In his post, Professor Taylor recommended several fundamental and systemic changes that ought to improve the likelihood that graduate students and postdoctoral fellows find jobs at the end of their graduate education. While some of Dr. Taylor’s ideas are novel and innovative, two in particular; 1) expanding the range of career opportunities for graduate students and postdocs and 2) abolishing tenure and mandatory retirement; are ones that I have suggested many times in the past few years. Rather than paraphrase, I decided to repost what Dr Taylor said about these two very important, seminal issues.

Expand the range of professional options for graduate students

Most graduate students will never hold the kind of job for which they are being trained. It is, therefore, necessary to help them prepare for work in fields other than higher education. The exposure to new approaches and different cultures and the consideration of real-life issues will prepare students for jobs at businesses and nonprofit organizations. Moreover, the knowledge and skills they will cultivate in the new universities will enable them to adapt to a constantly changing world.

Impose mandatory retirement and abolish tenure

Initially intended to protect academic freedom, tenure has resulted in institutions with little turnover and professors impervious to change. After all, once tenure has been granted, there is no leverage to encourage a professor to continue to develop professionally or to require him or her to assume responsibilities like administration and student advising. Tenure should be replaced with seven-year contracts, which, like the programs in which faculty teach, can be terminated or renewed. This policy would enable colleges and universities to reward researchers, scholars and teachers who continue to evolve and remain productive while also making room for young people with new ideas and skills.

For many years now, I have been struggling with the moral and ethical obligations of graduate education. Recently, I came to the conclusion that it is our role as educators to selflessly impart knowledge and training to graduate students and postdoctoral fellows so that they can pursue the careers (and lives) that many have trained for a decade or more. I think Professor Taylor’s view of the role of an educator says it best: “Do not do what I do; rather, take whatever I have to offer and do with it what I could never imagine doing and then come back and tell me about it.” This is the attitude that must be by academicians if America wants to remain competitive in the life sciences.

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Unlike others, life scientists have been slow to use social media to look for jobs or network to enhance career opportunities.  Many scientists  have  Facebook accounts but view it and other social media tools like Twitter simply as a means to stay in touch with family and friends.  However, social media can be a very powerful tool for scientists who are looking for jobs or the next big career move.

To that end, I presented a seminar at Experimental Biology this past weekend in New Orleans entitled "Social Media and Career Development for Life Sciences" that offer suggestions on how to use social media to land a job or jumpstart a career in the life sciences industry.  For those of you who may be interested, I posted the presentation below:

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Did you know that the top ten pharmaceutical companies in the world spent close to $50 billion dollars last year on R&D? That sum could be used to purchase the entire US biotechnology industry except for the five largest companies—Genentech, Amgen, Gilead Genzyme and Celgene. Further, pharma’s R&D budget is about 4 times the R&D budget of all of the US biotechnology companies combined. According to a blurb in breakingviews.com, Pfizer alone spent $8 billion last year which was greater than the sum spent by biotech’s top five companies. What this tells us is that pharmaceutical companies are grossly unproductive when it comes to drug discovery and development. This would explain why nearly three-quarters of all new medicines approved for sale in the US last year originated at biotechnology companies.

It is becoming increasingly apparent that biotechnology companies are much more efficient at R&D than pharmaceutical companies. More importantly this suggests that something must change so that pharma can continue receive adequate ROI on internal discovery programs. Perhaps big pharma ought to spend a greater portion of its R&D budget on biotech mergers and acquisitions rather than continuing to invest in inefficient and failing internal R&D programs. While biotechnologynology companies are exceptional in drug discovery, they are severely lacking when it comes to clinical development of new drugs. This is largely due the high costs of conducting human clinical trials (which are required for regulatory approval of all new medicines). Most biotechnology companies are strapped for cash and don’t have sufficient funds to conduct clinical trials on their own.

Not surprisingly, given the recent financial downturn, there has been a recent spate of deals in which pharma has been willing to pay large sums of money for clinical development rights to promising new biotechnology drugs. Moreover, a majority of the almost 160,000 employees layed off by pharma companies in the past few years have been R&D scientists. This suggests that pharma is beginning to realize that its money may be better spent doing deals or buying biotech companies rather than continuing to invest large sums of money into it’s own unproductive R&D programs. Unfortunately, this paradigm shift doesn’t bode well for doctoral students and post-doctoral fellows who are training in the life sciences. This is because many entry-level biotech positions, traditionally filled by newly-minted PhDs and postdoctoral fellows will likely be filled by experienced, pharmaceutical employees who lost their jobs in the recent rounds of layoffs. As much as I hate to say this, if I were a life sciences graduate student or postdoctoral fellow considering an R&D career in industry, I would begin to explore alternative career options.

Until next time….

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

For the past five years, I have been giving career development seminars that offer graduate students and postdoctoral fellows alternate careers choices (instead of research) for life scientists. The intent of these seminars is to get students who may not be enamored with a possible life long career at the bench (I know that there a lot of you out there) to think about what they really want to do after they complete their graduate or postdoctoral training.

I recently met Jane Chin (on Twitter) who, like me, has had an unorthodox career trajectory for a life scientist. After exchanging several tweets, I learned that we both are microbiologists, Cornell University graduates, entrepreneurs and social media enthusiasts. But, the main reason I am telling you about Jane is that she crafted a fascinating PowerPoint presentation entitled “3 Lessons About Career Life From a Career Nomad” that provides insights into the decisions and choices that she made to shape her current career path. I highly recommend that you take a peek at the presentation—it may help to reduce some future career stress and angst!

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link