The youngPI forum was created to help young PIs face their many new challenges. In most cases, no one prepared us to deal with any of these issues during the many years we spent in the classroom, on the bench, or in front of our computers. For this reason, we are lucky that, every other week around lunchtime, we have our young PI forum meetings. In these meetings, we find out that our peers share similar questions and worries. Moreover, they our peers and friends are the ones that lend us the best solutions. From each other, we learn new skills and clever ways to handle the challenging situations we encounter each day, as well as get support during these years.
What they don't teach you in grad school
Much of the know-how of experienced PIs comes through trial and error. One way to ease this process is to implement faculty-mentoring programs that foster transfer of knowledge between senior researchers and beginning scientists. As a way of complementing these efforts, early last year at the Weizmann Institute of Science, the Deans of the Faculties of Biochemistry and Biology decided to organize an orientation program. This program gave additional information on the workings of the institute as a way of supporting the new faculty members. Participants were from all departments of the institute ranging from molecular biology through astrophysics to computer science. At the end of these successful sessions a special bonus was added, a two-day lab management course that was based on the EMBO program for mentoring young scientists (http://www.embo.org/events/calendar/lab-management-training-courses.html).
The course (given by experts of the hfp consulting company) was held off-campus to ensure that people could fully immerse in the learning process. Many of us arrived quite skeptical, but we all left feeling enriched. We covered a wide range of different topics such as: what drives and motivates our students and us? How should we give feedback? How can we efficiently resolve conflicts? How do we manage our time? And how can we interview candidates and choose the most suitable people to work in our labs? By the end of these two days everyone in the group got a sense of the power and importance of thinking about these issues.
We came back to the institute boosted with new perspectives and optimism, but we knew that this kind of feeling requires constant nurturing. We therefore decided to set up a peer-support group to facilitate continuing interaction and learning between members of the group. Our first session was held two weeks after the course ended. During that meeting we talked about what each of us had tried to implement as a result of the course and how it had turned out. The two hours passed by like lightening. A range of perspectives, advice and parallel stories were shared. The session ended with a strong feeling that there would be much to be discussed in coming meetings and we met every other week since then.
How it works: Moderated group discussion
In the past year we have developed some understanding regarding what lies at the basis of a fruitful scientific peer-support group like ours. Clearly, each group is inherently different and with time will evolve its own dynamics, but here are a few guidelines that we think may serve similar groups:
-
We dedicate the first 15 minutes of each meeting for small talk over light lunch. It is in these "unstructured" times that personal discussions arise and make the following conversation more intimate.
-
There is a need for full confidentiality of the information and views shared in the sessions. Subjects can often touch on issues such as group tension, self-esteem, tenure, and students lives. These personal feelings and details should remain within the group - mutual trust is an essential part of a support group.
-
Each meeting, one member of the group volunteers to lead the following meeting. People choose to do so when they feel there is a question they want to broach or when they have some advice, story or experience they want to share with the group. Some people prefer to be observers at first, but when they see how informal and intimate it can be, they gradually join and become active.
-
It is useful to have one or two people serving as moderators of the group. They set the schedule and the relative balance between the different types of sessions (see below). They can also help guide the discussion if it gets stalled.
-
Since scientists have busy schedules we have found that not all people attend each meeting. We usually have about 10-15 people in each of the meetings. However, even meetings with as little as five people are extremely beneficial suggesting that the group need not be large to be successful. Every new PI setting up a lab in the institute is invited to join the forum. A refresher and starter management courses are planned for once a year.
-
We have found that, by and large, there seem to be two types of meetings: Those that deal with dilemmas and those that focus on teaching a skill. In both types, the presenter allows ample time for people to comment and share their views and ideas. In both types, the premise is that the group has the know how and experience that can benefit everyone when shared in the right atmosphere and context. In dilemma-based meetings, the volunteer presents the issues verbally and then provides opportunities for discussion. In skill-based meetings, presentations are often used to guide the session, however we still maintain an informal setting and foster discussions.One of the beauties of this scheme is the simplicity of leading a meeting. There is no need for prolonged preparation. It can be as simple as sharing what is on your mind or a specific subject you are worried about. Since the subject is often one that other members are grappling with too, the discussion proceeds naturally.
We set up this forum without a clear plan. We did not know exactly how many, or what subjects we should cover. A year later our experience reveals that there are more ideas for the future than ever. Every time we cover a subject, two pop up in its stead. We keep a list of the sessions that took place and resources that were presented or written based on the discussions at: www.weizmann.ac.il/youngPI. During the past year we have come to realize that most discussions fall into four major groups of skills: nurturing, managing, presenting and writing. Examples of meetings from each type and resources that may be of interest to readers can be found on this webpage.
Looking forward
Hundreds of new scientists set up a lab every year. It is often their long held and fought-for dream. Despite the fact that they have just fulfilled their passion, they often find that they are still unsatisfied much of the time. In many cases the people working with them will be affected by these feelings. We often like to blame the situation on the funding system, journals or institute bureaucracy, but perhaps with a little more preparation and support young PIs would be much more satisfied and even more productive. As young scientists we can wait for the system to change from above (when our university starts running an official mentoring scheme, or sends us on a course about "how to run a lab" ) or we can make the move ourselves and form our own support groups. The second option can happen tomorrow. We each can decide whether to make it happen.
During the past year we have seen how this forum has changed the way we mentor our students. First of all, the forum has made us all more confident and positive and our new confidence is now reflected in our daily functions in the lab. But beyond the indirect effects, many of us have taken the lessons that we have learned in the young PI forum and have created opportunities to pass them on to the emerging scientists that are our students. The bottom line is that the synthesis of ideas and approaches is trickling down and affecting much wider circles than we originally anticipated.
The meetings have also formed a platform for informal discussions and a desire to help each other in reading grants, manuscripts and discussing scientific ideas. Since our members come from diverse scientific fields, our interaction also leads to interesting cross discipline fertilization.
From our first hand experience as to how empowering such a forum can be, we feel it can serve other academic age groups. This includes graduate students facing the challenges of being starting scientists, postdocs pressured by the race to achieve an academic position while trying to balance family/life and work, and maybe even tenured scientists and department heads.
In the larger perspective we believe that this initiative is another manifestation of the process of changing the culture of science. An appreciation that even though science deals with objective truths, the pursuit of the secrets of nature is a process where feelings should be acknowledged and people should be supported. The process of scientific endeavors requires motivation, creativity and collaboration, which are all traits that are affected by our subjective personal feelings. It is these feelings that flourish in a nurturing environment. The power of learning from peers and the ability to share our feelings of confusion can enable us to better confront the mysteries of nature, and be proud of how we do it.
