This week, OPN talks with Costanza Zucca, editorial manager with the Frontiers journals, a series of open-access publications driven by researchers for researchers. Costanza obtained a Ph.D. in plasma physics from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Lausanne, in 2009. Her work on thermonuclear fusion research focused on the design of operational scenarios with high-output power for the first prototype of a fusion reactor.

After taking a sabbatical in South America, Costanza decided to pursue a different career path. She quit research and joined the Frontiers group at the end of 2009 as the main coordinator of the marketing and communication office. She became editorial manager at the end of 2010, overseeing all activities related to the current "Frontiers in" journals as well as the launch of new journals.

OPN: How did you know that publishing was your calling?

Costanza: While I sort of stumbled into it by accident, looking back it's clear that I’ve always had a genuine interest in communicating about science. Even during my student years, when I was working on a thermonuclear fusion experiment, I often volunteered to show visitors around our facilities. I enjoyed thinking of new “kitchen physics” examples that could help render complex concepts into something tangible. One of my favorites was figuring out the number of microwave ovens that was required to match the power generated by our electron-cyclotron resonance heating (over 3,000!). Now that I am working at the interface between academia and industry at an international level, there are higher stakes, but it’s still about communicating science.

OPN: How did you use your skills and expertise to start working in this field?

Costanza: It’s been a natural fit. Frontiers was started by a group of active scientists, and I instantly felt aligned with the company’s philosophy of shaping the future of scientific communication. In a way, working for a start-up is similar to research work, in that you have to be very creative in thinking of new initiatives, then pick the most promising ideas and experiment with them. Those skills were well rooted in me, since I came from a research background.

OPN: What are the most difficult and rewarding aspects of your job?

Costanza: The most rewarding part by far is having had an active role in the tremendous progression of Frontiers in just four years of existence. It definitely makes me want to be part of the team continuing to move this forward, although it’s been hard to get to this point: unlike us, many scientists did not initially feel the need for an innovative publisher such as Frontiers. But I consider myself very lucky to have joined at such an early stage.

OPN: What is your perspective on open-access journals and their place in scientific publishing?

Costanza: I am more and more convinced that an online open-access distribution model, with an emphasis on social media, is very much where scientific publishing is headed. There are still many avenues to explore regarding the related business models, so there is space for everyone to come up with new paradigm-shifting initiatives. We are witnessing a revolution in scientific publishing.

Career, Communication skills, Nontraditional science careers, Publishing Costanza Zucca, Optics and Photonics, Science Publishing, Frontiers journals

Marc Kuchner

Steve Jobs, late cofounder of Apple Computers, had a reputation as a passionate business leader and modern folk hero. In 1999, one of Jobs’s friends said, “He is single-minded, almost manic, in his pursuit of excellence.” That’s certainly a character trait we scientists can admire.

Jobs was also revered for being a first-rate salesman. While salesmanship may not be the first quality scientists aspire to, successful scientists know that they need to sell themselves in order to get jobs and win grants, especially in these tough economic times.

Part of what made Jobs so great at selling his ideas was his optimism and enthusiasm. Jobs peppered his presentations with words like “extraordinary,” “amazing,” “stunning,” “revolutionary,” and “incredible.” When he gave the opening presentation at the computer expo Macworld ’08, he began his talk with open arms, a broad grin, and the words “We’ve got some great stuff for you. There’s clearly something in the air today.” That kind of enthusiasm helped Apple sell 20,000 iPods every day.

The importance of optimism

Maybe we can’t all match Job’s flair for presentations, but his choice of words—“best,” “great,” “awesome”—provide a clue about the right attitude to have when it comes to selling our science.

Enthusiasm is not something they teach in science class. Far from it. Graduate school is all about being tough and skeptical. But as you may remember from kindergarten, everybody likes people who are positive and enthusiastic; a smile on your face addresses people’s primitive needs for friendship and belonging. A good salesperson considers optimism to be part of his or her job.

To quote Adlai Stevenson, “Pessimism in a diplomat is the equivalent of cowardice in a soldier.” Or to quote Anne Kinney, director of the Solar System Exploration Division at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, “If you have a method or idea and you believe it works, you have to be optimistic about it.”

The (negative) power of pessimism

To some degree, we can actually quantify just how important enthusiasm is. For some reason, negative expressions leave a more lasting impression on our psyche than positive ones. Specifically, negative messages are five to seven times more powerful than positive ones. Studies show that when a married couple has more than five positive interactions for every negative one, the relationship is considered healthy. But if the couple starts having fewer than five positive interactions for every negative one, divorce is probably imminent.

If you’ve ever sat on a review panel or hiring committee, you have probably noticed that if someone says something strongly negative about an applicant, it leaves a lingering stain that can’t be erased unless several people override it. For this reason it’s important to have at least five to seven members on any decision-making panel. With fewer people on the panel, a single person’s bad feelings can swamp the process, turning it into a black-balling session instead of a thoughtful discussion.

Beating the odds

The disproportionately powerful effect of negativity in review panels is a consequence of human nature that we scientists need to be aware of. For example, if you’re writing a proposal or applying for a faculty position, you might have to impress a committee with slightly fewer members than it ought to have. That means your task might be more about eliminating negatives than dazzling people.

If you find yourself using negative words often—“no,” “useless,” “doubt,” “shouldn’t,” “skeptical,”—people might start associating that kind of unpleasant feeling with you. And it might take five to seven positive interactions to make that bad feeling go away.

Steve Jobs taught us so many things, including the craft of salesmanship, a crucial tool for scientists during these hard times. On behalf of nerds everywhere—we thank you.This

This post was adapted from content originally published on the Scientific American blog.

Marc J. Kuchner (marc@marketingforscientists.com) is an astrophysicist at NASA, a country songwriter, and the author of the book Marketing for Scientists: How To Shine In Tough Times. His website can be found at http://www.marketingforscientists.com/.

Career, Communication skills, Job Search Marc Kuchner, Steve Jobs, Optimism, Careers, Optics and Photonics, Attitude

by Frank Kuo

This post is adapted from the CLEO BLOG by Frank Kuo.

Job fairs at technical conferences can be a great way to network and to learn about career opportunities—particularly for those who are interested in pursuing a career in industry. If you are headed to the CLEO:12 conference this year, you can try the online job fair to get a head start. Because some of the employers will not be involved in the online component, walking through the exhibit hall to network will be your next move.

Presenting yourself in the right way to employers at a conference is not always straightforward. For the past few years, I feel lucky to have had the opportunity to look at these job-hunting games from both sides—as a graduate student trying to impress future employers and as an employee actively working in the tradeshow. Here are some tips that I hope will help:

Familiarize yourself with the companies beforehand. Do your homework and learn the histories of your target companies, including their competitors and niche technologies. This is the “appetizer” topic for you to talk about with the people who work on the exhibition hall in your first encounter. If you intrigue them with the right motive, you’ll make an impression that lasts. Besides, by studying the companies, you will find that the photonics industry is an intricate web and that companies are related to each other in a very intimate way.

Set the right goal. Your goal is not to give your resume away. Instead, it should be to build connections and strengthen the existent ones within companies. You can achieve that objective by making a good impression with company representatives, staying in touch with them, and updating them with your research progress. You never know when there will be a vacancy. And believe me, when there is, the first thing hiring managers do is ask their colleagues if they know anyone who is qualified. You want to be the one who comes to mind.

Target those with tech backgrounds. Most of the time, the first person you bump into will be a sales representative, although there’s a chance you will meet technical sales support people, product managers, directors of divisions in the company, CTOs and marketing personnel. If you are a Ph.D. student, try to talk to people who have strong technical backgrounds such that they appreciate your effort. If you are a master’s candidate with a minor or major in marketing, you may find yourself more comfortable talking to product managers.

Of course you cannot tell a person’s job title by face. What happens if you pick the wrong person to talk with? Don’t’ worry; just ask politely for a technical person after a pleasant, warmed up conversation. People who work the floors are nice, and their duty is to help. They will not say no to you.

Never just hand someone your resume and walk away. Wrap your purpose in a delicate way! For example, start the conversation with your interest in the new lasers that the company just released. Ask technical details to show your knowledge. Then, slowly express your expertise in the field, and ask if there are any openings. If there are, try to learn more; if there aren’t, stay motivated and talk about the instruments in further depth.

Avoid rush hours. At almost all conferences, there is a time when no technical sessions are happening. I call it the rush hour. It is true that there will be more representatives working the floor at that time, but there will also be ten times more visitors. So do the math.

Get contact information. Trust me, when you start job hunting, you will need it. Asking for business cards should be a habit if you want a career in industry. You should also stay in touch with the people you meet. Ask them if they are visiting your area, if they plan to release new products and so on. One day, they might be your colleagues.

Job hunting can be overwhelming, but I want to share one of my mottos to encourage you: “When you started your graduate study, you already started your career.” Jobs are just another method we use to achieve our lifelong careers. You might feel desperate during this process, but this is just a short part of your life. Having an idea of your career path is the rudder of your professional life. It keeps you from being lost in the ocean of the diverse jobs. Best of luck!

Frank Kuo (paramountist@gmail.com) is a spectroscopist and optical engineer at Mettler-Toledo International Inc.

Career, Communication skills, Conferences, Job Search Frank Kuo, CLEO, Conference, Career, Job search, Networking, optics, photonics, Optics & Photonics News

by Ben Franta

An OSA student chapter can provide a great avenue for developing your leadership skills and cultivating professional connections, both within and outside your university. 

If you don’t have a chapter at your college or university, this post explains how you can establish one. The idea of forming a student organization from scratch can be daunting, but don’t worry. With the right approach, it can be a great experience and a lot of fun. While founding our own student chapter at Harvard, we learned how important it is to have a clear plan of action from the outset:

Gather a group of cofounders. Even if you feel you can do everything yourself, don’t! Gather a small group of students who are dedicated to the success of the project. Not only do many hands make light work, but building a leadership team early will make your chapter more resilient down the road.

Find one or more faculty advisors. Although your organization will be run by and for students, it pays dividends to find at least one faculty member who is willing to be associated with it in an official way. A faculty endorsement sends a message that your chapter represents a serious effort that is worthy of support. Furthermore, your faculty advisor can make use of official channels of communication within your university on behalf of your group.

Plan a series of events and create a budget. You need a schedule of activities to obtain funding, but it can be difficult to plan events without knowing how much funding you’ll have. Don’t get stuck here! Sit down with your group of cofounders and identify potential funding sources. These might include your school or university, your department, student activities funds or other professional societies. Estimate the amount you can reasonably request from each source, and use that budget to plan a series of events (with dates) for the coming term. Be ambitious but realistic. Remember that the best events for a young chapter are those that have wide appeal and build student membership. 

Register your chapter and open a funds account. Now it’s time to make your chapter official.  Register your group with OSA as well as with your school or department. Ask someone within your institution to help you create an account for your chapter funds, whether it’s through the university itself or an external bank. They should also help you to conform to any rules or regulations pertaining to student organizations at your university.

Make funding proposals. Propose your coming schedule of events and budget to each potential source of funding.  Clearly lay out how much you’re requesting, when the funds will be used, and what they will be used for. Work with each source to address its questions and accommodate its requests. Remember: building long-term working relationships with funding sources is more important than simply obtaining as much funding as possible right away.

Finalize your events schedule and ramp up advertising. Once you know your level of funding, modify your plan of activities and finalize your schedule. At this point, it’s essential to reach out to students and faculty to raise awareness of your chapter and its coming activities. Fire on all cylinders: email, websites, posters, word of mouth, and anything else you can think of. Your goal is to gain momentum.

Ensure sustainability. Congratulations—you’ve got your OSA student chapter up and running! But how do you ensure it lasts long after you’ve gone? If you build a deep and flexible leadership team, generate enthusiasm and involvement from student members, and work to grow your chapter into a vibrant community of friends and collaborators, your chapter will take on a life of its own.

Hopefully this article helps to demystify the process of starting your own OSA student chapter. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Good luck and have fun!

Ben Franta (bafranta@fas.harvard.edu) is a graduate student studying applied physics at Harvard University and the president of Harvard’s OSA student chapter.

Career, Communication skills, Graduate school, OSA Student Chapters Ben Franta, Optics and Photonics, OSA Student Chapter, Careers

OPN asked some of its physicist advisors and contributing editors to share the stories of their own career paths and to give their advice to current optics students and young professionals. Here we highlight our Q&A with Alex Fong, senior vice president of life sciences and instrumentation at Gooch and Housego LLC in Orlando, Fla. Alex manages OPN’s Optics Innovation column, which highlights technology transfer and optics industry trends.

He holds undergraduate and graduate degrees in experimental physics from York University in Toronto and an MBA from the University of Florida. He is also a chartered engineer. Prior to joining Gooch and Housego (formerly Optronic Laboratories Inc.), Alex held senior business and technical management positions at ITT Industries, Newport Corporation and Honeywell International. He is the current president of the Florida Photonics Cluster and the founder of Cirrus Photonics.

OPN: What is the most important skill that someone can develop in graduate school?

Alex: I have my M.Sc. and an M.B.A. The most important skill I learned in graduate school was how to use resources effectively and to work with other people to approach and answer a scientific question or problem. Being able to source information, communicate and coordinate an effort will pay tremendous dividends regardless of what you end up doing in your career.

OPN: What path did you take to get to your current position?

Alex: I started out trying to decide if I ought to be doctor or a lawyer. Then I asked myself what type of work I found both interesting and, most important, a worthwhile pursuit. The litmus test I used in for myself was the question: If I were on a deserted island, what sort of training would be most useful?

I was already fascinated by physics, so I majored in that. I just kept using the same criteria along the way. I looked at education as a toolkit. At one point I decided I needed to understand the mechanics and nomenclature of the business world, so I went to business school.

One thing I’d counsel people to avoid is following the crowd. Trends come and go, but your career lasts a long time. I remember awhile back, the television show CSI was a big deal, and all of the sudden everyone wanted to be a forensic technician.  

OPN: Is there anything that you wish you had done differently in your own education or career?

Alex: I still think I might have made a good doctor.

OPN: What one piece of advice would you give to someone just starting their career in science?

Alex: Keep everything in perspective and be practical and pragmatic. You may well save the world and become a Nobel laureate—but taking that into your decision-making process will stress you out needlessly. I had originally intended to be a particle physicist, but I wandered into a laser lab one day and that changed everything. Take everything you can from an opportunity or experience. Enjoy the ride.  

Alex Fong is senior vice president of life sciences and instrumentation at Gooch and Housego LLC in Orlando, Fla., U.S.A. He an author and lecturer on precision light measurement, life sciences imaging, remote sensing, applied optics and lasers. He is also an active member of the American Physical Society, The Optical Society, SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering, the International Commission on Illumination, the Council for Optical Radiation Measurement and the Institute of Physics.

Academic careers, Career, Engineering, Graduate school, Job Search Optics and Photonics, Career Advice, Alex Fong

by Carlos López-Mariscal and Julio Gutierrez-Vega

As a young scientist, when you publish your first papers in prestigious peer-reviewed journals, you announce your presence to the scientific community. In this way, you are in the process of becoming a recognized expert of your field. Eventually, you will also receive requests from journal editors to review manuscripts submitted by other scientists. These invitations are both a privilege and a responsibility.

Taking part in the review process is critical to developing a scientific career. It helps you build relationships with journal editors; it improves your critical thinking abilities; it gives you a better understanding of the state of the art in your field; and it enhances your writing skills so you can better present your scientific ideas. In addition, good reviewing is recognized and rewarded by colleagues and scientific societies.

As you start reviewing others’ work, the fundamental principle to keep in mind is the notion of reciprocity. Follow this golden rule: You should review a manuscript in the same way that you would want your manuscript to be reviewed. Here are some other best practices to keep in mind:

Respond promptly to requests. This is quite important—whether or not you accept the invitation to review. One of the worst things you could do is ignore a request for review, along with accepting it and then not honoring the request. If you are unable or unwilling to accept, it only takes a couple of minutes to notify the editor of your decision. The editor will appreciate it if you can suggest other potential reviewers.

Complete the review on time. This point is crucial to guarantee the timeline of the journal. It is unfair to authors (and editors) to be delayed by tardy reviewers. If you need extra time, contact the editor as soon as you can. Most are flexible and will agree to give you additional time in exchange for a good review.

Do not review a manuscript whose topic is unfamiliar to you. Stick to topics that you know well in order for your reviews to be the most credible and useful.

Enumerate your comments and suggestions. Again, think about how you would want someone to review your own paper. Organize your thoughts in a way that will be easy for someone to absorb and follow up on.

Read the journal’s review criteria. Make sure you spend time on the journal and/or publisher’s website so you understand what is expected of both authors and reviewers. This will help to ensure that your review is aligned with the publisher’s expectations.

Be specific. Indicate as precisely as you can what the problems are and how they may be overcome.

Focus on the science.Avoid effortless reviews that comment only on minor grammatical errors, typos or language problems. However, if a manuscript is written in language so poor that it is difficult to understand, point this out to the editor.

Follow up. If you are reviewing a revised manuscript, make sure the authors actually made the appropriate changes in the manuscript as recommended in the first review.

Be discreet and complete. Always maintain confidentiality and notify editors of any potential conflict of interest or suspicions of plagiarism that you may have.

If you are interested in reviewing, let your academic advisor know. He or she probably gets requests regularly and will be grateful for your initiative. You can also contact the topical editors of the journals you have published in—or introduce yourself to them at a conference. Researchers are often invited to review manuscripts as a direct result of their own published work.

Good reviewers are not as easy to come across as you might think, so don’t be shy. Take the initiative and get involved.

Carlos López-Mariscal and Julio Gutierrez-Vega are both experienced reviewers and members of the Optics & Photonics News Editorial Advisory Committee. Gutierrez-Vega is also an associate editor for OSA’s peer-reviewed open-access journal Optics Express.  

Career, Publishing publication, STM publishing, career, science, peer review, review, publishing, journals, peer-review journals, editing, OSA, Carlos Lopez-Mariscal, Julio Gutierrez-Vega

By Jean-luc Doumont

Jean-luc Doumont, a regular contributor to OPN’s career column and blog, has generously allowed us to adapt this content from his new booklet on effective communication, Traditions, templates and group leaders. You can download this free 16-pp. resource directly from Jean-luc’s website.

I have been running sessions on effective scientific communications for 20 years, and they are largely about challenging traditions. Ideally, traditions converge to best practices. But doing things “the usual way” without questioning whether it is the most effective method is hardly a guarantee of success. Critical thinking is as useful for communication as it is for research.

Here, I take a look at some ineffective traditions and myths in conference talks and scientific writing.

Opening a talk with the speaker’s name and presentation title. At the start, attendees want to decide whether it is worth staying. The speaker must thus first of all create interest and establish credibility. A self-centered opening is unlikely to achieve either, and the name and title of the talk are usually on screen.

Going over the preview of the talk at the very start. Attendees are not ready to assimilate such a preview until they know what the talk is all about. They first need to know the research need, how the speaker went about it, and his or her main message. The preview should outline the body (just before it), not the whole talk.

Thanking attendees for their attention. Thanking attendees suggests they paid attention as a favor. If you wish to show respect, make the talk interesting for them. Get their attention, motivate them and adapt to them. Make them want to thank you.

Writing a highly specialized abstract for a paper. Usually, the abstract is read by everyone, including the least expert readers, whereas the paper itself is read by more expert readers, who want details. While short, abstracts should not be overly technical. They should focus on the motivation and outcome.

Putting up with bad talks because conferences are supposedly more about networking. Networking can admittedly be a significant benefit of conferences. Still, talks should incite networking, not hinder it by reflecting poorly on the speakers or obscuring their topics. As for other things in life, if talks are worth doing, they are worth doing well.

Using “scientific language.” A tenacious yet often subconscious myth suggests that scientific prose requires a specific, unique writing style: “scientific language.” Group leaders are even known to criticize papers that “do not sound scientific enough,” as if credibility depended on obfuscation. If colleagues are grateful when you explain your research straightforwardly to them, why would you need to write differently, except to polish an imperfect use of the language?

Insisting on the passive voice (or the active one). Should research be reported in the passive voice? Certainly not when it makes for heavier sentences or omits an agent that matters, as in it is believed. Who believes this? The authors? The community at large? Readers will want to know. Should you write every sentence in the active voice? Of course not. The passive has legitimate uses as well, in particular to place the topic in subject position. Absolutes are convenient, but they are seldom tenable.

Do not let traditions stand in your way: Research is not about fostering mediocrity. Question habits. Identify ends before discussing means. In my experience, the scientific community accepts what is different if it is manifestly more effective.

Jean-luc Doumont (jl@principiae.be) holds a Ph.D. in applied physics from Stanford University. He now devotes his time and energy to training researchers and others in effective communication. He is a traveling lecturer for OSA.

Career, Communication skills, Conferences Optics and photonics, Career, Communication, Jean-luc Doumont, Myths, Conference talks, Conference papers, Writing

Marc J. Kuchner

Have you ever wondered what your colleagues think of your website? I have. I know from experience that our colleagues judge us partly by our presence on the Web. Hiring committees often search online to learn more about job candidates, and review panels use our sites to help decide whether to fund us. 

An experiment
I did an experiment to learn more about what our colleagues look for in a website. I organize a Facebook group called “Marketing for Scientists,” where scientists, engineers, and other interested professionals discuss issues related to science communication, science advocacy and careers. I suggested that we take turns critiquing each other's websites. Altogether, 26 colleagues volunteered.

I asked each volunteer to review three URLs. I instructed them to play with each site for 30 seconds or a minute and then write a few sentences about what they liked and didn’t like. I asked them to address the following questions:

• What impression does the site give about the person who made it? 
• Does the site make you want to find a way to work with him/her?
• How could the site be improved?

The volunteers were a mix of faculty and postdocs, with a few science communication professionals thrown in. Soon my inbox was flooded with critiques that offered a wealth of advice and some real surprises. Here are the major lessons I learned. 

Include the basics. First, I heard a cry for more basic information. Andras Paszternak, a chemist at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and the founder of The International NanoScience Community social network, said in a review, “place a direct contact address (email) on main page.”  In today's world of social networking, it's easy to forget about good old email.

Add video and graphics with captions. Next, there was a demand for images and video. “I would supplement your homepage with more graphical things,” said Robert Vanderbei, chair of the department of operations research and financial engineering at Princeton University. “Please use some color and/or pictures,” said Stella Kafka from the Carnegie Institute of Washington, department of terrestrial magnetism.

Although many of us recognize the importance of images, we often forget to add captions.  These photos are important to us, but they are unidentifiable to the people who visit our sites. “Nice photo.  Is it decoration? Art? Should it have a caption? Are we supposed to guess what it is?” asked Nancy Morrison, professor emerita of Astronomy at the University of Toledo.  I heard that sentiment several times.

Be passionate. One element that multiple reviewers mentioned caught me by surprise. If I could summarize it in a word, it would be passion.

“Maybe the homepage could include your personal motivation,” suggested Phil Yock, professor in the department of physics at the University of Aukland.  “I really like to know what scientists are passionate about, so I’d love to see a short write-up of what fascinates you the most about the universe,” said Emilie Lorditch, the news director and manager at the American Institute of Physics.

Share materials. The reviewers also expressed a desire for generosity. “I was impressed that you offer PowerPoint slides, poster presentations and data from your papers—It's generous and collaborative and makes me want to follow your example,” commented Yale astronomy professor Debra Fischer about one site. Sharing was not a value that was emphasized when I was in graduate school, but science has evolved since then. In today’s collaborative environment, it is a sought-after trait.

Next time I’m up late tweaking my website, I’ll know just what to post: full contact information with email address up top; video and pictures with descriptive captions; a passionate description of my research; and generous freebies that my colleagues can download.

Marc J. Kuchner (marc@marketingforscientists.com) is an astrophysicist at NASA, a country songwriter, and the author of the book Marketing for Scientists: How To Shine In Tough Times. His website can be found at http://www.marketingforscientists.com/

Career, Communication skills, Job Search career, science, science careers, Marc Kuchner, Website, Communication, Internet Presence, optics, photonics, OPN, Optics & Photonics News, OSA, The Optical Society

Tyler S. Ralston 

So you are finishing your degree, and you need to decide what to do with your life. Some science grads simplify this into a decision between academia or industry. However, there is a third option—a national laboratory.

 In the United States, many national labs are federally funded research and development centers (FFRDC) that are operated and staffed by private corporations or academic universities under contract to the government. In several ways, these labs straddle the gap between academia and industry.

Broadening your professional pursuits
When Ph.D.s finish their degrees, they often feel they are so specialized that they have few options. Fortunately, in a national lab, there is room to expand and diversify. National labs generally have several thousand people with several groups working on projects. They have seminars that allow you to see what other projects are being developed around the lab. This is a great way to survey many projects and find new opportunities to apply your specialty.

Publish or patent?
While a national lab doesn't necessarily subscribe to the “publish or perish” adage from academia, there is value ascribed to publishing research articles (albeit sometimes classified ones). Similarly, patent writing skills are a valuable skill to have in a national lab. The onus is on you to complete the paper or patent while pushing forward your project's objectives.

Research and development
National labs differ from industry in that there are generally few projects with manufactured deliverable systems. The deliverables tend to be technical analysis, system research and development, and proof-of-concept prototypes.

The types of funding agencies can vary, but it's safe to say that a majority of the financial support comes from defense- and energy-related grants. In academia, on the other hand, funding derives from a variety of sources, both government and private. Having grant ideas to push forward the lab’s mission areas are important. For ideas that need preliminary investigation, there are generally opportunities within the labs to apply for internal funding.

For each funding cycle, the labs have a budget for laboratory-directed R&D, which is used to promote highly innovative and exploratory research that supports the lab’s mission. Generally, an advanced concepts committee reviews proposals and funds research that supports the strategic initiatives of the lab. Beyond this, other opportunities for funding include funds set aside for collaboration with associated campus laboratories.

Reputation-building
Many FFRDCs operate by way of a technical meritocracy. That is, employees advance on the basis of their talent and achievements. For that reason, the first several months can be very critical in your career development; it's the time when you'll set the course for your career at the institution.

The more you can hit the ground running, the more opportunities you’ll have to demonstrate your skills and build achievements. It's important to find a mentor and a project so that you can see your contributions flower.

I was once given excellent advice that I will now pass on to you: Select the people and projects that best suit your vision of your career direction. National labs give you a unique opportunity to get a lay of the land entering a job. Don't be afraid to survey your appointment after a trial period and apply yourself within the groups that best suit your abilities.

Career roles
There are four main career roles at a national lab:

Technical Guru: a field expert who may be well renowned for publications, leadership, and participation in professional societies. He or she may bridge gaps between universities and the lab for collaborative research.

Capability Leader: This person is involved in lab review committees and programmatic strategic planning opportunities, which build the lab capabilities.

Program Developer: Someone who often responds to proposal calls. He or she has broad knowledge of the lab’s programs and the sponsors’ needs.

Project Manager: A specialist at organizing tasks and projects. This role involves managing finances, scheduling, and subject matter experts.

Any member of the lab staff may take on multiple roles throughout their career. A technical staff position is often thought of as secure and stable employment. In my opinion, a national lab is the best place to grow and learn skills rapidly.

Tyler Ralston (tralston@gmail.com) has worked at Battelle Memorial institute, the Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, MIT/LL and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. He is currently partnered with an advanced technology startup.

Academic careers, Career, Job Search Optics and Photonics, Tyler S. Ralston, job search, career, national laboratory, FFRDC

By Lauren Celano

This post is based on content that has already appeared on the Propel Careers website and BioCareers.com. It is reproduced here with the author’s kind permission.

In today's competitive marketplace, being able to differentiate yourself is critical. LinkedIn is a useful tool for branding yourself, showcasing your background, building connections and job searching. It's hard to imagine how people functioned without it. Many people have asked for my advice on how to best use LinkedIn to search for jobs. Here are some tips for maximizing the value of this tool.

Build out your profile. When creating your profile, think about who will be reading this information. Your profile should explicitly state who you are, what experience you have, and what skills you master. Potential employers will almost certainly review your LinkedIn profile. The more professional you can make it, the more attractive you become as a candidate. This shows that you are serious about your career and your personal brand.

Your profile should include additional information, such as lab techniques you know, presentations you have given at large conferences, publications you’ve contributed to, etc. Many companies and recruiters use LinkedIn to search for individuals with specific skills. If you have these in your profile, you increase the chance of being "found" by an HR person when they search. If you do not have details listed, then your chance of being identified is almost zero.

If you are a student or postdoc, state when you think you will be done. Without this information, companies may be reluctant to contact you about jobs. Recruiting is extremely time-consuming, so the easier you can make it for companies to know what you want and when you will be available, the better.

To learn specifics about building and taking advantage of your LinkedIn account, use the LinkedIn learning center. Don't forget, your online presence is often the first thing that potential employers see, so don't lose the chance to make a positive first impression.

Have a professional photo. In general people are extremely visual, and they remember faces more than names. For example, if you meet someone at a networking event and send him or her a LinkedIn invitation afterwards, your profile picture will immediately help them to connect your name with your face.

Join groups. If you are looking to learn more about a certain area, join a LinkedIn group related to it. There are thousands of groups available. When you are new to the job search, using this feature is extremely valuable for getting a lay of the land. To find groups, search for them by keyword under group categories. Use the following link to learn more about groups in your LinkedIn profile. You may be surprised by how many groups are relevant to you. Also, you can become an active member or a group and share your expertise. This can build thought leadership.

When requesting a connection, mention where you met that person. People are busy and have a lot of things on their mind. The easier you can make it for people, the better. If you met someone at a international networking event and are following up with a LinkedIn request, you may want to write in the subject line: "International networking event follow up." In the body of the LinkedIn request, you might say something like: “Dear X, It was a pleasure meeting you at the international networking event on DATE. To follow up, I would like to link into you so that we can keep in touch.”

It is amazing how many times people don't do this. I wonder how many LinkedIn requests do not get answered because people cannot remember the context in which they met someone.

The connections you develop over time are a valuable part of your professional career, so respect your network, be responsive, and finally, keep it human.

Lauren Celano (lauren@propelcareers.com) is the co-founder and CEO of Propel Careers, a life science search and career development firm focused on connecting talented individuals with entrepreneurial life sciences companies. 

Career, Communication skills, Job Search, Profiles Optics and Photonics, Career, Job Search, LinkedIn, Lauren Celano