Group Meeting

1. Group Meeting Summer, 2007

2. Past Years 2002 - When to begin writing 2003 - Effective time management 2004 - Principles of responding to critiques of your your manuscript or grant 2005 - (1) Overview of the lab’s projects (2) Future directions for the lab (3) Strategies for success at the bench (4) When to submit your manuscript (5) How to run a lab 2006 - (1) How do you do good science? (2) How do you manage time effectively? (3) Are there specific strategies that promote scientific success?

3. WARNING: Taking advice can be hazardous.

4. This year’s marching orders… What are the differences between working in industry and academia? What makes a good mentor? How do you write a scientific paper?

5. Academia vs. Industry • Academia • Research Universities/Institutes - Primary focus is research. Stressful tenure process early, but stability later. • Colleges - Primary focus is teaching. Also subject to tenure process. • Industry • Big Pharma v. Biotech • Both primarily focused on research that pays soon. As a job, big pharma is more stable than biotech, but may offer less freedom. Research programs can be cut rapidly.

7. What makes a good mentor? • Surprisingly controversial • Two extreme views: Sink or swim v. “Mother” • What is your view of training? Are people a means to an end or an end themselves? • Can it be learned? Mentor - in ancient Greek mythology, Mentor was the teacher and guide of Telemachus, son of Odysseus. Mentor was actually Athena (the Goddess of Wisdom) in disguise.

8. What makes a good mentor? • Caring • Empathy (What is your E.Q.?) • Accessibility • Generosity / unselfishness • Appreciating individuality • Acting on principle consistently • The need to develop; role of patience & independence • Honesty / integrity • Savvy: tactical and strategic thinking Adapted partly from HHMI / BW Handbook, Nature’s guide for mentors, my own experience

9. What makes a good mentor? (what I have learned trying) • There is nothing new under the sun. Benefit from those around you. • Enthusiasm in the mentor is essential but motivation (in science) in the mentee has to come from within. • Recognize your limits. Some things you can fix, some you can not. Make the most of what they have. People aren’t Legos. • Prepare for disappointment. Appreciate the unexpected result (what others might call failure). • Ask your mentee what they think they need.

10. How to Write a Scientific Paper • Why publish at all? - Its what we do - Essential for career advancement - Essential for obtaining and maintaining funding • How much? As a post-doc: I was taught a paper per year. The BWF/HHMI handbook suggests first author on 2 or more with one being a high profile paper before job hunting. As a grad student: A common standard at UCSF is one high profile paper or two lesser papers.

11. How to Write a Scientific Paper • When to start? - If you have a key biological finding or if you have developed an important assay or model. • Why start so early? - Encourages efficiency, creativity, and greater “value added” to the introduction and discussion. • How do I start? - Make an outline - Make two more with the same starting point but with different endings - Draw the figures (with controls) - Write out the transition sentences long hand

12. How to Write a Scientific Paper • Abstract Goal:To summarize a finding(s) and excite the reader (1) Tight as a poem but accessible and conceptual; easily grasped (2) Features the key result(s) in a nutshell • Introduction Goal: Setting the stage: What is the unresolved question(s) that this research addresses and why is it so important? (1) “Brain storm” first about all the ways that your work can or could relate to that of the wider community. Think in terms of the big picture and one result at a time. (2) Space: Edit, of course, but pick the best ideas. (3) Ends with a summary

13. How to Write a Scientific Paper • Results Goal:To tell a memorable story that leaves the reader convinced they have learned something new and significant. (1) The narrative (organization + transitions) is critical. (2) Set the stage and draw conclusions along the way. • Discussion Goal: To add significance to the work. (1) Usually starts with a summary, but a discussion that is a simple recitation of the results is a complete waste. (2) What is the broader significance? Brain storm each result and the big picture. (3) Making connections one step away is encouraged. Two steps away and it becomes speculation - use it sparingly: once and no more than twice per paper.

14. Troubleshooting • I don’t have an assay or a key result - (1) do experiments; (2) write a fellowship; (3) buddy with someone else who does. • I have an assay or a key result, but I don’t feel like I am ready - (1) Get over it - enforce a personal discipline, commit to spending an hour a day regardless of what you have to show; (2) Commit to making some presentation. • I have an assay or a key result, but I don’t know how to get started - (1) Talk to me, I am happy to help; (2) If you have more than one result, begin by simply listing the results you have. Sometimes it is easier to see possible stories. • I have results, but I am struggling with the best organization - Get help from your colleagues by (1) presenting your work (retreats, meetings, seminars); (2) circulating drafts

15. How to Write a Scientific Paper (submission: when and where) • What is your primary goal? - for that publication? In relation to your career? Numbers? Impact?. • If it is numbers, then the sooner the better (and sooner than you think). • If impact, then consider several factors - (1) Do I have a story? (2) To what extent is it significant: of general interest, novel, surprising? (3) What would it take to bring it to the next level? (4) Do you have competition? • How do you figure these out? - (1) What has been your feedback so far?; (2) Read; (3) Submit. • Risks of being to early or too late