Investing in my business- as a Medical Writer?

Today I am on day two of my medical writing course.  The course is going to be helpful both  for gaining some experience writing and certainly on the business end- which I feel is the biggest risk of the whole affair.  I am waffling between feelings of gung-ho "Small Business Built America!" and what-have-I-gotten-myself-into-ness, with a very acute sense that I need to learn about odds ratios and the statistics of risk ASAP.  The course is very oriented towards "How to:" run the business, write the documents, find the clients, keep the clients etc etc. It is not so much of the wishy-washy "is this for me?" day dream I am constantly having.  And of course, it is just the tiniest fraction of what I am spending my time on for the next couple weeks.

Just to make the note for myself, I am currently hoping to work 20 hrs a week for my favorite client, as I am trying to convince them to offer me a full time job in the form of a promotion.  I have suddenly received all manner of work that was delayed from my other client, which is awkward timing at best.  I'd hoped to be done with every last iota of that contract by Friday, but I'll be lucky if we aren't still doing this in October.  And while my internship has formally moved into wrap up stage, we decided to write a pre-proposal for a commercialization grant that I am trying to be involved in.  I've never written a grant before, but it appears to be all-consuming, especially when you are working with a nascent idea like ours.  But I wanted to stick around to see what that process is like, since I've never been involved in a grant submission before.

I decided to take the course regardless because I wanted to do something concrete for my career, and I thought enough of the topics would be valuable to me even if I chose to keep freelancing in curriculum development. All of the above is keeping me quite busy, but in 6 months will any of it propel me forward to the next stage of my career?  No. I need to invest in myself and my future a bit, and when you replace "me" with "this business," it seems a lot more obvious where the investment is needed.

In the continued interest of investing in this business, I bought a second monitor.  I have been doing all this work from the laptop I bought after my old mac fizzled out after my defense.  It's a nice laptop, but I notice I work from AT LEAST 3 windows (not counting needing to monitor 2 email accounts and leaving Pandora running), which is cludgy on one small window.  The new monitor is splendid for that, and it makes me feel like I could get a system in order for being a professional in this so called office of mine. My next investment for the business will be figuring out about finances and taxes and other mysteries of being your own bookkeeper. 

Option Two: High RIsk, High Reward

In my last blog post, I laid out 4 realistic directions for my career that popped up last week that will take my career and my life in completely different directions.  I addressed why I wouldn't be post-docing, and I want to address the conundrum of the other science job, which is perhaps non-traditional.  I've been interning with a small start-up that is developing a surface coating technology for the past 6 weeks.  The details of the job aren't important, but the company is run by chemical engineers who have some great technology, are reasonably well grant-funded (SBIR) and hoping to expand.  These are very good signs when looking at a start up.  However, grant funds tie your hand a little: NSF doesn't pay anyone more than half time, so everyone at this company is there half time. They have a technician they love who is leaving to go to grad school, and they offered me her position with the opportunity to help write some additional grants/seek investors (I am the business development intern).

Yes, you read that right.  Get a part-time wage to take on a monumental (and full time) task. If/when money comes in, I've earned my first promotion.  High risk, high reward.

Let's look at the risk first.  In principle, I don't have to give up contracting to take this job, but I probably would so that I could do the job well. Taking a job as a tech wouldn't be bad if I were promoted quickly/moved on to another position quickly, but it will be hard to find a job to follow-up that one if I have used my PhD as a tech for any period of time.  As I explained to my Dad, would you trust a Physician who worked as a CNA after med school?  In particular with the job market here being so tight, I don't need any question marks on my resume. But I am not being paid in equity (lesson learned), and the grant should last at least a year, so there is some stability.  I'm unlikely to just abruptly lose my job if the company goes under (which they seem unlikely to do).  Oh, and I am not a chemist.  For some reason, they aren't really considering the possibility that I might be terrible at this job, and there is no evidence to suggest I won't be.  Failing at this job (either as a tech or a grant writer) would be bad for the company and bad for my prospects moving forward. 

How about the Reward?  Well, getting a chance to write myself as a PI on a grant is not something I thought I would be able to do at this stage of my career.  That's a big one- if we get funded, that's awesome, but for many reasons I want experience grant writing. I will also get to learn some cool chemistry techniques (however, given the dismal career prospects for chemists, I'm not sure that's more than an intellectual bonus). Looking for investors could help me expand my network (I'm not sure this is a talent I posses or will develop though- so add that back to risk), should I ever decide I am done being a Chemist. And I can create for myself a position in this company that is young and growing that could really take me places.

There are other perks as well.  It would be gratifying to tell my old boss I am working at a start-up, it would make sense to him.  I would be working in a cool neighborhood, with cool people, which is something I miss about grad school.  I've actually been offered this job.  It was all I could do not to say "YES, I'll take it!" when offered the position. Wasn't this what I've been working so hard for?? 

The two questions I am struggling to answer though, are do I have this kind of appetite for risk, and where does this position take me?

Business Development Intern

While I was thinking about productive, lucrative, ways to spend my time, I ran across a whole  new arena to spend time in.  I'm currently working as the business development intern for Zwittertech, a start-up that can put non-fouling polymers on a variety of surfaces.  The technology is fairly well developed, but they are at that strange point in a start-up's life cycle where is it is time to decide what they are going to make, and how that is going to make money. 

Before I started working at the C4C, I'd never given much thought to how you convert good ideas (example, cure for the common cold) to profitable businesses (curing colds).  At some point, some savvy entrepreneur decides how that idea can make money, and puts all the pieces in place to get it made, on the market and used by people.  I'm starting to realize this is a unique problem in biotech- well, not unique but incredibly expensive.  Imagine, if you will, trying to turn any assay you developed in grad school into something as reliable as a mini-prep.  AND reagents are expensive, AND distribution is monopolized AND your clients are worried about their funding and uninterested in taking a risk on new products.  This might explain the stagnant growth of the biotech industry in the last few years. 

All that aside, my task for the next few weeks is to help Zwittertech decide on thier first product, of the minimally viable product (MVP).  The sooner they can get something on the market that makes some revenue, it will add stability to their balance sheet, which can allow them to develop more of the products they are interested in long-term.  To figure out what the MVP is, I am using a text book called The Startup Owner's Manual.  I'm developing business canvases, and hope to be moving into customer discovery next week.

Better, cheaper, faster, easier

In my internship at the C4C, part of my job was to help innovators determine if thier idea would be better, cheaper, faster or easier than the current standards.  If you can be one (or all) of those things, you've got a shot at success- or a market advantage.  (If you have none of these things- go back to the drawing board.) This type of assessment is something I'd like to bring to my job hunt.

I was discussing careers with a friend from graduate school, who was describing her resistance to taking on the PI path.  It's no surprise that it's a hard job, with responsibilities that not everyone wants to be good at (grant writing, mentorship, teaching and lab administration pop into mind).  But the people who are successful at it enjoy those aspects, or don't find them as miserable as I might. Or they find it worth it for the exciting and fun parts (assay design, designing projects, pursuing interesting scientific questions).  My friend said, "I'm not going to be better than my old boss at the fun and exciting stuff, and the hard parts won't be any easier for me."  I'm not going to be better at it, and it won't be easier for me.

This got me thinking about what I am doing right now.  I'm not sure it's my dream job, but curriculum development and instructional design are pretty easy for me.  I came from a standards based education that was very participatory, so assessing objectives and meeting educational standards isn't a struggle.  And I seem to be decent enough at it that I'm fairly busy with it for the moment.  I don't know that I am better that anyone at it, but I don't find the work emotionally hard (unlike, say, developing a blank Western at 6pm on a Friday), which leaves me a lot of energy to put into my real life. 

It might not be my dream job, but if a market advantage can score me a stable paycheck, maybe that is good enough.

Notes on working with entreprenuers

In a meeting the other day, an entrepreneur shared a moment of great self-insight.  He said, "I'm an entrepreneur, I come up with all kinds of ideas.  Some of them are great, and lots of them are terrible.  I need people around me to tell me which is which.  But I really need people to get things done."  At first, I thought this was just his take on the role, but I've had the chance to work with several now and I see it's a bit of a universal truth.  And knowing that can help those interactions quite a lot.

This is a guy I am day dreaming about a STEM program with.  He loves it when I tell him which ideas might work, or how we are going to have to pull them off.  He doesn't perceive those responsibilities as his role- his job is to have great ideas and find the resources to make them work.  I am one of those resources, and I'm valuable because I can tell him when his ideas stink. 

When I look back on my interactions with the algae guy, he had a lot of this too.  Great ideas that weren't always bounded by our current access to technology, money or other practical considerations.  I'll admit that that kinda spooked me a bit.  A good entrepreneur is so compelling about that "The Sky is the Limit!" pitch that other people buy into it, literally giving money, and suddenly you've got everything you need.

Scientists can be a little like this too.  If you dread showing your boss data because they will come up with 8 equally important follow-up experiments that don't overlap with the experiments they proposed that got you there in the first place.... you work with an innovator.  I knew a guy like that.  I work with some of these PIs now as an intern at C4C.  The tech managers often complain that their teams can't make forward progress because they get distracted by all kinds of other considerations.  You mix the entrepreneur's dream with a habit of basic research and it can be really tough to move a brilliant idea to a product on the shelf. 

One of the (many) reasons I don't want to be a faculty member is because I don't think like that.  I don't like to invent bad ideas to find good ones, and I am much more opinionated about the practical things.  Honestly, I thought that made me less of a scientist.  But I think in a commercial world, there is a real need for people like me.  Brilliant ideas aside, if you want to put a drug through trials, there is a lot of regulation that doesn't usually benefit from creative thinking.  I mention this, because I think recognizing which type of person I am and how I related to the other type has helped my professional interactions.

On the STEM Skills gap

I have, in the past, weighed in on the question of over-producing Ph.D., and I will probably never run out of things to say on this topic.  But recently I've been thinking about the flip side of this problem, sometimes called the STEM Skills Gap.  You see, there are apparently many companies and recruiters who are at a loss to find qualified people to fill positions under that STEM umbrella (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math).  From my perspective, this is why I get rejected for positions that require some clinical trials experience, or GxP experience.  Locally, employers like Boeing and Amazon need employees to push forward the boundaries of modern manufacturing, and run their SQL data bases or use Sharepoint or other things that we don't do in school.  The argument is that if 'we' (in this case the US or WA workforce) don't provide adequate workers, these jobs will go elsewhere.  I get that, the company needs a workforce that provide the engine of labor to move forward.

What I don't get is why they think these skills are so hard to come by- in contrast to, say, a Ph.D.  All of those 'experiences' I mentioned before are simply things a bright person could pick up on the job.  In a era of tight budgets, there is no time or money to train an insufficient candidate, and apparently leaving a role empty is less of a burden than hiring someone who might be inefficient at their role for a period. Is there a place where there is an experienced workforce ready to mobilize on these challenges?  If these companies don't stay here, where are they going instead, and how are those workers prepared that those of us here are not?  I'd really like to know the answer to this, I think we could learn a lot.

I like the phrase the Skills Gap, because it implies there is a disconnect on both sides.  Schools train us to do something no one will hire us to do directly, jobs are looking for people with training that doesn't exist.  If schools would help their graduates recognize that while your training may provide you expertise in some specific arena, this type of training prepares you, generally, to be successful in a wide array of fields.  And then those companies might be willing to look at these trainees with an eye towards their future, rather than just their ability today.  I think companies are too myopic in their hiring practices.  If the industry is as dynamic and changing as they insist it is, why aren't they looking for a workforce that is as well?  People who are brave enough to take on a technical challenge and have a history of success with other technical challenges are probably going to be just what Microsoft or Philips need to compete. 

I have one other gripe about this process- I don't believe that the people in charge of hiring really understand what they want and need in a candidate.  I was hired at the bank because (among other things) I am "good at math."  I took math up to 3 dimensional calculus; this does not make me a better teller.  Not once have I been asked to calculate an interest rate and returns for a client on the fly. I sometimes total checks and subtract withdrawals, but that is arithmetic- a skill set that I all but lost touch with by high school.  Yes, a teller needs to be comfortable with numbers and fairly detail oriented in that way, but no quantity of calculus will be required on that job. I often worry that I am overlooked as a candidate because my experience doesn't match verbatum the ambitions of a hiring manager who is asking for the stars and willing to settle in between.

I will recognize that if I had been involved in an actual clinical trial as a graduate student, my job prospects would be better.  But our work was funded to be basic research by the NIH.  I did some drug discovery, which means I learned how to pull the very interesting parts out of huge datasets, and how to refine my assumptions by performing iterative analysis.  Unfortunately, potential employers seem to believe that the ability to submit a 510K for FDA approval is WAY more important to my potential for success than my capacity to solve problems.  Sure, the first is easier to quantify.  But there are much fewer funding opportunities for academic researchers who have interest in commercializing their science.  This is why so few of us come out of our training with that perspective.

When I hear educators complain about the leaky STEM pipeline, my heart breaks.  They are looking at students who can't perform in basic skills categories that make it nearly impossible for them to perform, let alone compete for good jobs and opportunities.  When I hear employers talk about the leaky pipeline, I want to scream.  To them, the biggest leak is those who stay in the pipeline and fail to train into the fields that we didn't know existed.  But I don't want to leave this as just an angry tirade.  The gap is real, and it is part of the compartmentalized cultures of "academia" and "industry."  All parties need to do better about seeking out input from the other side about what funding can be earned, what training should be provided and what skills will be necessary to present a workforce that keeps up with the changing demands of the global economy.

Interning and Market Analysis

I've been interning long enough to complete a few assignments for different groups of innovators.  I'm in a better position now to comment on my role and have a little perspective on biotech start-ups, but hopefully we can revisit this often.  As an intern, I take up short, task-based assignments to help a team of innovators at an early stage in the start-up process.  C4C generally works with companies while they are still just a twinkle in someone's eye, before a business license appears or office space is leased.  Lately, I am working with teams hoping to put together commercialization grants- that is, ask for money to do the kind of work that starts them to be profitable.  This is work the NIH won't usually pay for. 

In order to convince someone this is a good idea, there needs to be some assessment made about how profitable any idea could be.  We call this market analysis- I've done a few of these now.  These grants need something to bolster the science as a solid investment.  You've got a new idea that could vastly improve common hip replacements?  $mart.  You've got an idea that could improve a small fraction of hip replacements?  How $mall is small?  Your idea might only be useful in a fraction of pinky toe joint replacements, but is crazy expensive?  Not sure if anyone will pay for that.  The market analysis can help to focus the innovators on where they are going to take their inventions, and it provides reassurance to investors (in this case, the University) that this won't be a waste of money.  So I investigate how much is spent on this technology, on related technologies, and what does the market still want.  For example, cancer treatment is a huge and competitive market with many players, but if you could cure cancer, people would buy it.  In other markets, it's the cheaper, easier, faster trifecta that can be used to drive the market forward. 

I pull together facts including competitors and context, and then make a recommendation.  I'll be interested to see some of the follow-up from these analyses- do my teams get funding?  Do they shift direction?  Some teams I have worked with personally, some I just get an email from their tech manager and return another email with the analysis, these ones feel much like my freelance work.  The projects where I get to work with the team, the most interesting part for me is meeting the EIR- the Entrepreneur-In-Residence.  These are folks who describe themselves as 'serial entrepreneurs' who have a host of start-ups under their belt, and are hoping to mentor these big shot professors/noob businessmen into their first company.  They use an interesting vocabulary and have a fascinating professional history.  I seriously need to pick their brains more.

2 more Part Time gigs

Good news!  I've got two new part-time job-ish things to keep me busy.  At some point, I decided the monotony of the job hunt was wearing on me too hard, so I started applying for entry level jobs.  This is how I landed a job as a teller at KeyBank.  I have had several other PhD types seems surprised and excited that I was able to get this type of job- it is well paid, respectable work, even if it isn't what my committee had in mind for me.  I told my interviewer that my passion for learning is what took me to grad school, and my passion for learning would propel me to success in a new industry as well.  This meshes well with the corporate culture (which likes to promote from within, and encourages and facilitates training opportunities for career development), and I assume the fact that I can speak well, am personable and have been practicing dressing like an adult helped a bit as well.  It's a bit humbling to decide to go this route, you don't need a college degree to do this type of work, but I am ready to get to work.  And I am being reminded of all those nifty perks that other professionals get, like retirement options and paid time off. However, this doesn't mean I am done job hunting.

The other part time gig I'll be starting is as a commercial licensing intern at the University of Washington's Center for Commercialization (C4C) (Tech Transfer office).  They have a nice program to provide Ph.D.s the opportunity to provide (unpaid) technical and intellectual support in terms of considering the commercial viability of ideas and products.  I'll spend a few hours a week on campus interacting with licensing managers, Entrepreneurs in residence and innovators, digging up info on a tasked basis.  And I'll get journal access, which I was worried was going to catch up to me eventually.  It is awesome that they are able to provide this type of opportunity in the community, I am hoping to learn the language of business and expand my network while doing it.

While both of these feel like good opportunities, I still feel frustrated that the things I can do don't feel like they really get me that much closer to the prized job.  Working as a teller will ease the financial burden of job hunting, and maybe give me some perspective to reassess what I really want out of my working life.  But do you see that side-bar?  Someone out there spend hundreds of thousands of dollars training up my brain, and I feel compelled to do something good with it.  The internship is more like what I am looking for, but I have no expectation that a position will open up at C4C.  Even though it is a much more relevant opportunity, it's not really the short track to finding work, either.  A lot of this job hunting work doesn't seem to result in a job, it just primes you for when the job comes along.  Wish me luck- both start in a couple weeks.

Interview: Medical Science Liason

This week, I had a phone call with a Medical Science Liason (MSL).  I met with someone who was previously in this position, and it sounded like so much fun!  Travel and shmooze with docs! Learn about cutting edge technology in your field, and you don't have to sell anything.  Heck, you are forbidden from selling anything!  She suggested I talk to some others first before I jumped in (I think I am just primed for jumping in to things these days).

I called up a colleagues of hers, who also had great things to say about the job.  It is well paid (Glassdoor suggests 6 figures and up), and there are great perks, like a company car.  You get to be the recognized expert to the people you work with, and the position is far from routine.  And, he says, "there is no one at the home office that I don't get along with."  That's right, the MSL works from home when they aren't traveling. 

So what does the job really look like?  A big drug company wants to release a new product.  They will unleash some of the team of MSLs (and this large drug company has about 100 nationally), to meet with "thought leaders" like physicians to drum up interest in the drug.  The MSL is not allowed to promote the product, they are in a support role.  I imagine them bringing by copies of journal articles and preliminary results to share with curious docs.  Then the drug comes out, and all these docs have questions about how the product works, when it should be used, and what else it might be used for.  The sales team is not equipped to handle that, so enter the MSL again.  He made it very clear that an MSL really needs to develop deep expertise on the product, and broad expertise in the field (his field being rhuematology).  He does get to attend professional conferences (at least one in Europe every year) for training and reconnaissance purposes.

In addition, he spends a lot of time in contact with other MSLs in his field (via conference call), talking with the researchers that developed the product, and training the sales team.  He suggested that different companies utilize their MSLs for different amounts of these roles.  And he loved this job!  I've heard that with the heavy travel demands (30-70%) over wide territories (AK, WA, OR, ID, and Northern CA, for example) people often burn out of this role and transition to something more stable after a few years, but he has been at the job for 9 years.  But he said his working interactions are not like a normal job, he doesn't have coworkers he interacts with regularly.  His "regular" contacts he sees quarterly, and most he sees less often. 

He suggested I look at the MSL Quarterly Newsletter for job postings and ideas about skills to perform the job better.  He also suggested, with a chuckle, cafepharma for trending news and occasional industry gossip.

Finally made that meeting

Before I left Pittsburgh, my boss gave me the name of one professor at the UW he thought I should talk to about jobs out here.  Since I knew he gave me this name because they share an academic interest, not because the UW professor has great industry contacts or something, I was hesitant to talk to him.  If I walk in there, won't he try to convince me to post-doc?  I gave it a couple weeks, but really, I need to start meeting scientists here face to face and making contacts.  Fine, I'll go, he'll tell me some about some dudes who need post-docs, I'll thank him for his time and be done with it.  And it is about time I get to the UW campus, since that is a major employer here.

Although he started out with the usual advice (have you checked Amgen's careers site?), he actually discouraged me from trying to get an academic post-doc.  Money is tight, you'd probably need your own funding to get a position.  He did mention some training grants, but focused instead on who could help me identify small start-ups in the area that might need a post-doc.  He gave me the contact info for the Tech transfer people at UW and the Hutch- I supposed I could have found this on my own, but reaching out to them will mean more with his approval.  I'm really hoping to talk to these people, since that is a great source for new and emerging businesses that might take someone on at "post-doc" level in a capacity that would look like industry experience.  I sent out those emails, so wish me luck.

Hello, I am a business owner

I live in Washington now, and some of the laws about business things are different here.  Actually, I don’t even know that for certain, I just have a better sense that people know and follow those rules.  Why?  When I mentioned that to kill time while job hunting, I was doing some contract work, someone asked me if I transferred my business license.  I laughed, “I don’t make enough to pay taxes on, so, I didn’t have one in PA.” “Oh, but in WA you need one if you make more than $600 a year or something.”  Really? I should look into that.  Whether or not I am actually going to make that much money in WA is yet to be determined, but I figured, what the heck- I want to prove I have business savvy? I’m getting a business license.  I mean, if I can.  Fortunately, Washington has some useful resources for making this an unintimindating process.  I managed to open a ‘sole proprietorship’ ‘doing business as (DBA)’ Sandlin Seguin.  Ok, $20 later, I am a business owner.  Is that the difference between entrepreneurs and the rest of us Schmucks?  I think there might be more to it, but I’ll keep you up to date. The nice lady at the state suggested I get a separate bank account for my “business,” in case there is liability at some point, it allows my personal and business finances to be distinguished.  Put that on my list of Things to Do before I make my millions.

Feast or Famine

It’s feast or famine here, people.  Monday was coffee with a REAL professional Scientist.  That was really good, he was encouraging about my prospects, about the market here in general, about my skills specifically.  And he told me, this is a good time to be job hunting, since this is the time of year budgets are set for the new year.  And that slowly sank in as, “Wait, I might not have a job until January?!” The whole reason this job hunting all day everything works is because I still believe that the next phone call is going to be an interview, or the next contact will help me get an offer.  Not that I have been very buoyant about this lately, but that left me completely deflated.  I grumbled a lot, and then started doing things I thought were ridiculous- responding to LinkedIn posts, calling recruiters who I’ve been trying to get in touch with for months, Googling networking events (weaseling my way into professional societies), I got a business license (more on THAT later)…. And just feeling sour about it.  “If I’m not gonna have a job until next year, why should I apply for jobs that I am a match for??  Why not jobs that are on my bus route or some other inane criteria?!”  I was not in a pleasant frame of mine.

And part of my desperation to DO something was because I’m traveling a fair bit in the next couple weeks.  I’ve got some family stuff this week, and next week I am going to an algae workshop.  That should make me feel like I’ve got lots going on, but instead I feel like I am spinning my wheels, not making as much progress as I ought to.  If I really wanted a job, I could have called every employer in King county by now.  Again, not helpful thinking.

I did manage to schedule a meeting for my consulting, which I thought I could mentally track as “not a total waste of time.”  No sooner did I arrive at my grandmother’s house than the phone started ringing.  “Quick meeting to schedule some volunteer work?” Sure, that will keep me busy for a week. Then the consulting meeting lasted ~2.5 hours, spanning everything from our big plans, to how business works.  Very productive.  My brain is full.  Then that recruiter finally called back, “Sure, I’ll send along my resume and CV.” And I finally checked my email, looks like I have a couple more applications to fill out.  Oh me. And that contract someone had open on LinkedIn that I said I would do (writing educational materials, what the heck?), yeah, she will pay me to do that.  In dollars?? Wow.

I wrote a contractor contract

I am hoping to find some contract work to fill my time while I am working on job applications/waiting for the economy to improve (ha!).  This still seems like a vague aspiration to me.  I still have to find someone who needs me to do work and convince them to pay me for it, which is the central struggle of the job hunter. But there is a lower standard, contractors are less expensive (yup, because they make less, either in hourly rate or because there are no benefits), and aren't so long term.  I am just trying to color my CV with more industry-experience before I eventually crack and get a post-doc, so my standards are lower too.

I've got this one lingering lead for an equity based contract, and the nature of the small start-up means that for all our big plans to get things going, a contract has never actually appeared.  I was complaining to my brother about how I WANT to start this work, but I feel like I should wait until there is a real contract, but bringing it up hasn't seemed to help.  He suggested I write my own contract- which to me gets at the heart of why I want to take this contract even though there is no economic benefit; I have never seen a contract before.  Like most things in business, I am a complete novice, and need some immersion school.  Well, he sent me a link to a site with contract templates ( I used Rocket Lawyer, you can use them for a week free and create as many legal documents as you might forsee very easily, but there are other services out there).  I created a quick contract to formalize the nature of the "we work together" relationship that was left open broadly to renew or terminate in a couple months.  It made me feel really empowered to send off the email. "I look forward to working with you once you have signed my contract."

However, this does bring up a lot of other issues I have about this intermediate type of work.  Should I form my own business (for legal/tax reasons)?  If I actually make any money, how will I figure out who to pay my taxes too?  I formerly thought I would never want to deal with those things, and thought I would pursue a job where taxes and business entities were more clear cut, but I think having some professional independence may give me some flexibility in the types of positions I can accept and work I'll be able to do.  But will it make me more appealing as a candidate? Investigation to continue.

What's in a business plan?

When I started asking around for advice about working for a start-up, everyone said "Look at the Business Plan." That's nice seeming advice, but considering my first experience with one is the one I am making a career choice on, I'm not sure if that actually puts me in a good position to judge.  Seriously, what is normally in one of these?

A business plan (esp for a company looking for investors, or anticipating growth), should include everything from the mission statement to the revenue streams and expected profitability timeline, and provide an indication that each of the major issues for the business have been considered and addressed.  There should be some indication that both the Market (who will buy what you have to sell?) and Finances (can you make it for less than you'll sell it? How much outlay is required to make it?) have been considered. For example, it might include the expected clients, or investors, predicted areas of growth or challenges.  In a science field (I'm clearly thinking about biofuels, but this holds true for biotech as well), these is probably some oblique reference to the whiz-bang science that is going to move the company forward.  If it doesn't sound believable, you should be able to get references about it.

The part that is a little confusing is that a business plan is normally written for investors, either the bank that will make a loan or venture capitalists.  As a result, everything is couched in the language of "Potential Success and Profits!" It's hard to look past the "uniquely qualified team," and their "cutting edge approach," despite their "deep understanding of market realities" to see if there is a good idea down there. And working for a start up might not be like a normal job, where you know if you show up and do your thing, you'll have some stability.  It's riskier, and as someone who doesn't like job hunting much, I want to be sure the job I take is one I'll still have in a few months.

I'm not really sure how one balances all that, frankly.

The one other think I have to add was this funny acronym, EBITDA- earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization which is a nice way of making earnings look as GIANT as possible, even  though that isn't a perfect reflection of the final take home.

Equity and other Business Jargon

I am currently pursuing a short term contract with a start-up. I will share with you the magic phrase that opened up this opportunity, and then try to explain why this is a double edged sword.  "I would consider working for equity."  My Dad told me to try this, so I blurted it out when asked about compensation, even though I don't really fully understand what it means.  Well, now it looks like I'll have the opportunity to learn.

The phone interview was really winding down in a "don't call us, we'll call you" kind of way, but I mentioned I'd like to tour this facility, and I'll be in the area for a while.  For some reason, this got the CEO interested again, but when I uttered those magic words, he said "You are getting gold stars for that answer."  Why?  As a start-up, I know that he has limited funds.  He is seeking investors, but it isn't clear that the money has arrived yet.  Working for equity is a delayed (and risky) promise of money.  That is, this privately help company will someday have a public offering of these shares (go public), and if the market has confidence in the business, the shares will increase in value.  Hooray!  However, if the company never gets enough investors to develop enough to go public, the shares don't really have value. Or the markets deems this a terrible business, the shares may loose value.  Many companies will offer partial equity to employees ("employee-owned"), as a way of helping them being equally invested in the success of the company.

This contract I am trying to get is a "high-risk" contract; it's 100% equity.  I'm hoping that a short term contract with a start-up will give me some business cred and help me get my foot in the door somewhere. It's giving me the opportunity to learn some of this business jargon I've never considered before.  I signed a non-disclosure agreement.  I am trying to figure out the difference between Founder's Shares and regular Shares.  I am trying to imagine how many shares there might be in one company, and what it means to spin-off the investment arm of the company.