I've been planning on writing this for quite a while! Networking does not necessarily come naturally to me, but I hope that may even be more helpful than a guide written by someone who's a natural. The biggest piece of advice I got when I was in undergrad was to "network" and I did not know what that meant or how to go about it -- so I would love to share what I've learned since, in case it helps someone. Networking 101: What Do You Mean Ideally, networking means creating connections and building relationships with people in different positions and in different places that can be sources of information, advice, and even OTHER new connections. There are many, many ways to network effectively, including in-person events, online on Twitter and LinkedIn, and even with others at your own institution. You're probably networking without even thinking about it. Have you met fellow students in another lab and learned that they have an instrument you don't and then been able to use said instrument? You did networking! Did you talk to graduate students from different groups at visiting weekend and then connect with them via e-mail? Also networking! Did you talk to a professor who came to your university after their talk? Networking! The best thing to get over when it comes to networking is hesitation. Everyone is frankly, just a guy (gender-neutral). Most people (professors and industry professionals) in the field are willing to talk, especially about science, especially to students about science. If you're a student, you're in a great place to start building your network. START NOW. It's never too early, but it can CERTAINLY be too late. Baby Steps You're probably already networking. If you're totally not, a good starting point is to practice on folks at the same level as you - what I mean is if you're a graduate student, start networking by talking to other graduate students. One of my first and most important "network connections" was with a senior graduate student in a group other than my own. He was a huge help and a neutral third party when I had questions or issues, and when he graduated and became a post-doc, I got to ask him for advice about post-doc positions. We first connected at a department picnic a few months after I started graduate school. Other fellow grad students got to know the graduate student council and built their network from there. If you're intimidated to talk to strangers alone, bring a friend with you and network together (but not more than one friend, more on this later!) The next "baby step" is to talk to professors at your institution. Even if you don't end up working for them, they have valuable advice and potentially post-doc and industry appointment connections, and it's always nice to be on good terms with and know those in your immediate department. This is easier if your university does socials or rotations to facilitate this, but you can always send an e-mail asking to chat. Here's an example. "Good morning, Professor [LastName], I'm a first year graduate student in the [Group] Lab, and I was just wondering if you had 15-30 minutes to chat anytime in the coming weeks. I have some general questions and would also love to talk about your group's research in more depth. Thank you so much! [Student]" Before you go to a chat like this, look at the professor's page on the university website, read their last several published articles, and write down some questions you have based on this and on general stuff you want to know. Bring a notebook and paper when you go -- you might want to write something down. Even if you don't, it looks good to come prepared. Conferences I cannot stress enough how important it is to go to conferences. If you can swing a conference smaller than a full ACS meeting (regional meetings, GRSs, GRCs, NOBBChE, SACNAS, etc), this is the way to go. Present your research - submit poster and/or talk abstracts at every opportunity. If you are presenting a talk, stick around after your talk - wait at least until the session you're a part of ends. Some folks may come up to talk to you after the whole session is over, and you don't want to miss that opportunity. If you're presenting a poster, stay by your poster the whole time and engage with folks. A CAVEAT - sometimes people come by and look at your poster but don't talk to you, it can be really awkward. You can offer to talk them through your poster - I like to say "Hi! Let me know if you have any questions or if you'd like the "short version" of the story!" if people are loitering. Be prepared with a long version (10 minutes) and a short version (2-5 minutes) of talking through your poster. Make a note of their name and affiliation (they'll either tell you or it'll be on their name tag. If neither is true, you can ask them) - I literally keep a note in my phone and jot down names throughout poster sessions because I have a terrible memory for names. If you had a pleasant interaction with someone, find them on LinkedIn and add them after the conference. Also, if you later contact someone you met at a conference, remind them how they know you. They probably talked to at least as many people as you did, so starting the conversation (LinkedIn message or e-mail) by saying "Hello Professor [Last Name]! We met at GRC ORP in 2024 - you asked me about my work on epoxide ring openings." is hugely helpful. Also, attend poster sessions that you're not presenting at and talk to fellow presenters. It's a really small world, and you never know who will end up where and end up being a great connection to have. I usually note down what posters I see, as well, with a brief description of content and affiliation. And then add those people on LinkedIn. If I remember. If there are social events as part of the conference, attend the social events. There is literally no better way to network because everyone knows that that is what is happening when you attend these events. Also, don't stay clumped up with people from your graduate group or institution - be brave and go alone to talk to people you find interesting. If you ARE nervous at social events, gamify it - give yourself a goal like "I will acquire 3 business cards or LinkedIn connections", and once you meet the goal, you can leave the event. I would say the maximum amount of people who are colleagues to be together in a setting like this is two - like, you can go around with one person from your group, but three is probably too many, and doing it alone is the scariest but most effective way. Also, don't pass up a conversation or a connection just because the person isn't in the exact area you want to be in. Medicinal chemists at a company probably know at least SOME process chemists, and having a diverse network is always better. You might also meet incredible people who become lifelong friends, not just professional connections. Three of my close friends became friends when we bonded during a social outing at a chemistry conference. We are certainly ALSO professional network connections to each other, but definitely primarily personal friends. Online Connections One of my favorite networking stories is from a colleague who talked with a student who was interested in working on medical devices. We're chemists and don't work on medical devices necessarily, but the student met my colleague at a conference and reached out via e-mail to set up a coffee chat to learn more about the colleague's role and the company at large. These e-mails look like this: "Hi [FirstName], We spoke at [Conference] about [Company] and [Their Role] at [event]. I really enjoyed speaking with you and was hoping you have time for a quick virtual coffee chat sometime in the coming weeks! The only days that don't work for me are Tuesdays and Wednesdays, otherwise, my schedule is open - please let me know what works for you, if you're willing. Looking forward to connecting! Warm regards, [Student]" After chatting with my (once again, 100% chemist) colleague about the company and the different roles and departments, they asked if they knew someone who'd be willing to chat with them about medical devices specifically, and the colleague - super impressed - put them in touch with what ended up being a series of folks who had more pertinent information on the career path the student was interested in. Networking! Add people on LinkedIn who you talk to at conferences, and keep track of who you met where, if you don't have a good memory (again - no shame, I personally don't). I don't really have coherent advice about Twitter. If you are on Twitter, I think the best thing to do as a student is to post cool lab tidbits and photos and re-post articles that interest you. The hashtags I see used most often within the community are #chemtwitter and #realtimechem. Find people whose content you like and engage with it, look at who they follow for inspiration on who to follow yourself, and remember that the internet is forever, so be cordial, polite, and professional. Don'ts Don't:
On the other hand, ABSOLUTELY DO reach out to your contacts when you're starting to job search. People may be able to put you in touch with hiring managers, give you information about the hiring process or the department you're applying to, slide your resume onto desks, etc. Be mindful of HOW connected you are to people, and ask them for reasonable things. It's not chill to ask someone you talked to for 30 seconds to put you in touch with a hiring manager, but it IS chill to ask them for more information about the company and if they have any insight. One last example of a LinkedIn message to a "barely met" contact: "Hi [FirstName]! We met briefly at [Conference] in 2023 and I'm actually currently applying to [Their Company]. I would really appreciate any insight into the company (and interview process!) you might have. Thanks so much for your time!" They might even OFFER to send along your CV or put you in touch with someone as a result! If they don't answer, just remember that people get super busy and they might not be checking LinkedIn or might not have bandwidth for it at the time. It's not necessarily a slight, it's just... life. And that's all I've got.
Hope this helps someone! Thanks to Srujana Lam for assistance with this write up!
0 Comments
I've been talking to grad students and one mentioned this in passing - group members referring to her as "lab mom" - and this happened to me as well, and many other women, but I thought we'd kind of, moved forward as a community. Guess not. The term "lab mom" is misoginystic and reductive. Women are scientists, technicians, group members. Your female colleagues are not there to be nurturing and caretaking, they're there to do science - the same as any male chemist. Anyone who uses the term is touting their lack of regard for the continued inequality of and unequitable attitudes towards women. Women get asked to do a disproportionate amount of group culture and administrative tasks even without this label. We get asked to plan social events (because we're just so good at it) and maintain calendars for the group and in some cases even specifically for our PI (because we're just so good at multitasking and planning!), we get invited to be on EDI and women in science panels, to take speakers out to lunches (you're just better at socializing), the list goes on. The scientific expectations do not change with these increasing asks - we still have to spend the same amount of hours at the bench, but are expected to do all the "extras" too. Using this term is inherently the same as showing a lack of respect for your female colleagues. Instead of relying on the women in your groups to do all of the planning, social activities, organizational tasks, use the opportunities to gain some soft skills that you will ABSOLUTELY need in industry/as a professor. Toxic lab culture is such a huge barrier to women going into PhD programs, and I've talked a lot with different groups of people about potential reasons for the "leaky pipeline effect". It's really hard convince women to enter a field where attitudes and language like this still exist, and we're often 1/X or 2/X in chemistry graduate groups, where in my graduate lab, the X=11. Same in post-doc. This can be intimidating at the best of times, and at the worst of times - you get called "lab mom" as a result of trying to make the lab a better place for everyone, and asked to plan a birthday party instead of doing the science you came to graduate school for. Thank you to Srujana Lam for assistance in articulating the issue.
I can't speak to other fields, obviously, so know this comes from a chemistry perspective! Why you should go: Starting salary with a B.Sc. in Chemistry is ~$40k (2018). Starting salary with a Ph.D. in Chemistry is listed as ~$68k, but I have a feeling that includes post doc salaries. Industry PhD starting salaries are usually at least $100k. Positions that require a Ph.D. are generally more intellectually involved and allow you more freedom as an individual contributor to pursue avenues that you think are effective as a lead on a project. The job types change too, and you can contribute scientifically at a higher level in the company you work for. Also, you can become a professor yourself, if that's your goal. Why you shouldn't go: Grad school is a lot of work and commitment and you barely get paid for 5 years, likely dead in the middle of your twenties. Research is not for everyone, and you have to have both the understanding of the science and what we sometimes call "the hands" (practical ability) to do research. A lot of people burn out. "Ok, I think I'm going to go. What can you tell me?"
(An accurate depiction of a prof getting an e-mail from a prospective student)
(In this metaphor, you're on the skateboard and the professor is pushing you along)
Your university will still be like:
A conference. (👩💼: companies, post-doc advisors; 🐈s: graduate students)
Ok, that's all for now! I might add more things later as they come to me. Hope this helps someone! (: Huge thanks for feedback and suggestions to Srujana Lam, Dr. Evgeniya Semenova, Dr. Stephanie Felten, Dr. Dmitry Eremin, Dr. Sebastien Laulhé, Jasper Luo, Elizabeth Jaekle, Kim Sharp, and Dr. Tom Barton (also thanks to Tom for encouraging me to write this in the first place)! I've been reformatting those ancient laboratory information PDFs everyone has and making them available open-access as both PDFs and editable docs, if you want to change them. Please distribute as widely as you want, use for whatever, generally enjoy! Screenshots of the stuff so far below! After GRC this year, a graduate student reached out asking about the different roles available to chemists in industry. I wrote a lengthy response summarizing my experience and I thought I would share!
I am actually in Operations Science & Technology which is the R&D branch of our manufacturing arm. Everything I work on has to do with the manufacturing or the planned manufacturing of active pharmaceuticals, so things that are in our commercial products. We also work on continuous improvement of existing commercial routes, making the chemistry more effective, greener, and attempting to reduce risk (both in terms of hazards and in terms of potential failures of commercial manufacturing runs). We have our own manufacturing sites, but we also do work with third party manufacturers all over the world and sometimes get to travel to sites (both our own and third party sites) for certain activities, if an expert is needed on-site. Our PRD department works more on route optimization for compounds of interest and deliveries for clinical trials. They do some work with emergent technologies. They’re more of what you would imagine as classical process chemists – taking promising molecules that have been shown to be effective by our medicinal chemists and finding better & simpler ways to synthesize them. Medicinal chemistry focuses on routes that allow for late-stage diversification of the core of the compound so they can make analogues quickly, and process focuses on finding the best route to one specific compound. A good way to think about it is that discovery chemists’ goal is to make the target compound at any cost, and process wants to make it safely, cheaply, and efficiently. Operations then takes that process and scales it even further for commercial manufacturing, eliminating any risks due to equipment/engineering/etc. We also do a lot of impurity identification and synthesis work, which is super fun, and we get to play “Discovery Chemist for a Day” because for those generally the yield/route to the impurity doesn’t really matter. There are benefits to each role in pharma – I can’t speak for oil/agriculture. Discovery can often allow you to play with new types of chemistry and not worry too much about the specifics of the route. On the other hand, they have to get really good at understanding how to read structure-activity relationship maps which I’m told can be quite tedious. And their project can get dropped at any time and they may have to pivot to something totally different if the molecule they had been pursuing doesn’t show good activity or has off-target activity. Process usually has a better grip on projects than discovery (in terms of them getting dropped), but obviously it does happen that target molecules get dropped during clinical trials. Process also gets to work with a lot of new scale-up technologies, and they have a catalysis center and new technologies groups that get to spend part of their time working broadly on research and not on specific targets. They get to present the developed routes to the company at large, which I think is pretty cool. It can be high intensity if a project is getting pushed quickly. Ops gets to TRAVEL! Which is fun for me as someone who’s husband is super busy with work himself – and I have no intention of having children, so I’m happy to go abroad for work. The impurity synthesis stuff lets us get really creative and we get to work on compounds we KNOW are actually being used in drugs, literally helping people. This can be high stress for some people, and we can have really tight deadlines for responses to various governing agencies. Also, a lot of what we do is working with engineers and analytical chemists, and it’s a totally different way of looking at problems than graduate school, which I think is fun but is also not for everyone. I keep being asked to send my resume for friends to use as a template, so I've created one that anyone can use! I did the same for my research summary. Please enjoy!
I may have been having a love affair with the convenience of my vacuum oven for the past several months while working on some impurity synthesis stuff. I thought I'd put together a list of things that I never encountered in academia but that would have been... life changing.
When I started working in industry, I often felt totally lost in meetings. From what I've heard, it's not exclusive to any one company - we all speak in what sometimes sounds like Simlish with millions of acronyms. I was lucky to start within one month of a colleague who's become a good friend, and along with a contractor in our department we created a file that is affectionately named "Alphabet Soup". We periodically all update it and share it with any new hires in our department. All it is is an alphabetized Excel sheet that I periodically dump into Word and export as a PDF. Anytime any of us hears a new acronym, we figure out what it means and add it to the file. We're currently at... 189 acronyms. Jeez.
One of our new hires has said that he keeps the Excel sheet open during every call he has - he was hired at a higher grade level than us so there are OODLES more acronyms in his calls than even ours. To summarize - make an alphabet soup. It's good soup. I just printed a copy of this for my monitor at home for WFH days - the worst thing about WFH has been that I haven't had this taped to my monitor (unlike at work). I was writing a batch record and needed ≥ and ≤ a million times and could not for the life of me keep the alt codes in my brain.
The color coding ends up looking a little bit like this: In a 500 mL RBF equipped with stir bar, added 100 mL DCM. Added 1.0 g starting material and 400 mg reagent A. Initiated stirring, then added 100 mg reagent B. Allowed to stir at RT for 3 hours. Reaction turned yellow upon addition of reagent B. Start time: 2:05 pm 10-Feb-2023 It only takes a few seconds once you get used to it, and the resulting procedures make repeating experiments or modifying them considerably less "scour the procedure for how much X I put it". As a new process chemist, I wasn't always up to date on what's considered a "No-Go" solvent and which ones are desirable for industrial processes. I work on some continuous improvement projects where this comes up and at one point, I came across this paper discussing how solvent selection should be performed. Of this paper, I have combined the most relevant tables and have them Frankensteined together hanging behind my monitors. These list the conclusions Pfizer, GSK and Sanofi have made regarding the use of these solvents. I find that these 3 tables cover most of the solvents I encounter in my day-to-day work. The last table lists issues with solvents beyond just giving them a ranking, which I've used before in discussions. These are intended for use by medicinal chemists, but these rankings largely hold even on scale up, in my experience!
The actual Frankentable I have printed is below. |
ChemistryMiscellaneous chemistry photos, updates, etc. Archives
March 2024
Categories
All
|