I defended my dissertation five years ago.
I have been thinking about this update for a long time, because I finally feel like there is a happy ending to this story. When I was struggling to find any type of job, I felt like a failure. I would second guess myself about doing a postdoc (which I skipped thinking it wouldn't help me get my career started). Even when I started working, I had incredibly mixed feelings about my work. I started in an entry level role, writing for high school students. I was embarrassed when people would find out I had a PhD, and mostly wanted to pretend I was just starting from scratch- just ignore the interminable education that no one can make sense of. I was impatient to succeed, to make it somewhere, to find my place, and be able to contribute in some meaningful way.
Comparing myself to my peers wasn't ideal, but I realized that if I had stayed on the academic track, I would have spent another five years before I got my first real job as a real professor. I promised myself that when I was 5 years out, I would be in much better shape, and this would all seem like just a bump in the road. At the very least, by the 5 year mark I might be able to name my career path. But it took my a year (a YEAR of interning, volunteering, freelancing, networking, and hustling) to find my first job. That job was fun, but I was not convinced I was cut out to be a writer. I thought I had impostor syndrome as a scientist? Ha! I cant spell, I know nothing about grammar, and I am supposed to making a living writing? Mercifully, I fell in with some good mentors and role models. I put the nervous energy about my career towards absorbing everything I could about writing for education.
A year after I got that first job, my contract expired. I got a new 1 year contract. That grant ran out, too. I was enjoying the hell out of my free time, and I was consistently making more than I would be as a post-doc. Maybe this is what most people feel like, you handle/cope with/pass the time at work, and then have a rocking real life? But I was tired of wondering if I would ever hit my stride, get a chance to settle in somewhere and make an impact. I worked with a career counselor to be more strategic about my next job hunt. My goal was to land a job that would last more than a year, and might even play to my strengths. I networked, I volunteered, I was hustling.
And it paid off. All of it. The people I met at my first job had landed at new company that was growing their team, and was doing technical training. The team is brilliant, and they were willing to hire me on to learn how to do my job. I am not bad at what they hired me to do (develop eLearning), and I have a smashing time doing things they didn't hire me to do. Next month I am giving two talks - one at a local academic meeting of process chemists, and one at a data visualization meetup. I have two volunteer gigs I got through work helping education non-profits take advantage of their data. Its a wonderful marriage of both my education and my work experience. At 16 months, this is the longest I have ever worked in a professional job.
This job probably isn't as prestigious as being a professor, but its also not remotely as stressful as the tenure track or grant cycles. I get to learn about so many different things, and I haven't been bored since I started. My career has actually started, that I've developed relevant, employable skills that I enjoy using. Recently I have been giving informational interviews- people want to know how I got to where I am. Finally, after 5 years, that time feeling lost and anxious really does just looks like a bump in the road.
Showing posts with label writing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label writing. Show all posts
Thursday, June 30, 2016
Thursday, September 27, 2012
Blogging Professionally: Interview with Chemjobber
One of the things that I have realized while job hunting is that there are plenty of ways to do important, professional things that aren't paid, which means I have a lot more choice about participating. One model that I really look up to is Chemjobber. Chemjobber is a blogger who writes about jobs and the job market for chemists. Chemjobber follows the movements of the American Chemical Society, the Bureau of Labor Statistics and various commentary by science writers on this theme. It's all very thoughtful stuff, and the blog attracts equally thoughtful commentary and readership. You don't have to spend much time there (or be a Chemist) to feel like this provides an important place for a community to discuss the under-discussed issue of chemist unemployment and under-employment.
And Chemjobber? He's not paid to maintain this blog, he does it because he wants to. And actually, that got me curious. So I asked if he would be willing to talk to me about it: why blog? And of course, he was glad to. I was SO pumped about this conversation before and after so I wanted to share here.
Chemjobber is a really nice guy, the kind of guy who would dedicate hours a week to writing about the issue of employment even though he actually has a job. He sees average chemists struggling, and a lack of dialog about that issue and uses the power of his blog and pseudonym to address it. By blogging, he can collect resources, add to (or start) the dialog and be a fact-checker for other writers. All this helps get thoughts in order, it allows for ideas to be shared with a critical audience, and sometimes it's even a service.
When asked if it's worth it, he told me that as a scientist he has learned to take his wins very narrowly. He's been able to connect a few people with jobs, or be an ear for someone navigating some career mystery, and that seems equally, if not more important than being quoted by famous bloggers, or even print journalists. For him, connecting people with information and elevating a dialogue about the very scary struggle of the average chemist is important. Worth dedicating time away from his family for.
To be honest, I probably could have guessed most of that about Chemjobber, although I was surprised to learn that he didn't choose to write about this issue because he had experienced unemployment. Seriously, he just writes about it because it seems important for the community. He's just that kind of guy.
I also wanted to know about the pseudonym, and not just the funny story about how he picked it (someone should make him explain it). Does a pseudonym protect you? Give you different freedoms? He sighed when I asked about this, and said a pseudonym is never better that writing with your own name. Instead, he uses it to divide this hobby (blogging) from his work. This is a little surprising, he rarely mentions his work on the blog, and he told me few people at work know he is Chemjobber. People often don't trust the pseudonym (and this is a good rule of thumb). When he has been contacted by reporters, they can't credit him as a source. And I think that is part of the reason he maintains the strict difference- the journalist will site Dr. Jobber, chemist at ChemCo, and that isn't really who he represents as a blogger. Even though we may never fully understand the motivations of the pseudonym, it seems to provide the space for Chemjobber the blogger to be thoughtful, critical and objective (and prolific) in a way that he might not if he thought his employer might read it.
And this got us into the subject of blogging generally. Chemjobber had lots of thoughts about how to develop a following and encourage discussion with a generally positive community. (Hints: Write lots, and don't pick fights.) Using a specific mission statement, there seems to be an unending amount of content, but he hasn't seriously discussed women in chemistry or immigration and jobs. He's found the chemistry community to be dominated by other thoughtful, objectively critical folks who make the dialogues much more engaging (and man, I wish people left such great comments on my blog- seriously, go look at some of that stuff). We talked about how there isn't a similar blog covering the issue for Biologists, or even all of STEM.
My purpose in my own blog so far has been simply to document what I am doing, it's very autobiographical. I thought it would help me to collect my thoughts on my job hunt, and possibly provide a record for me to share with others, and it certainly has done both. But I'm coming to a point where I might not need to blog about job hunting anymore. Would I blog about looking for clients or contracting? Could I do that in a meaningful way, or would I have stumbled on a topic even less likely to spark discussion? As Chemjobber told me, "It's not nice to write about people on the internet" and I don't want to be whining about my editors or clients. I like blogging, but I think this iteration may have run it's course. Do I shut it down? Change course? Talking with Chemjobber certainly got me thinking about using my blog as a forum to discuss the science policy issues I am interested in.
And Chemjobber? He's not paid to maintain this blog, he does it because he wants to. And actually, that got me curious. So I asked if he would be willing to talk to me about it: why blog? And of course, he was glad to. I was SO pumped about this conversation before and after so I wanted to share here.
Chemjobber is a really nice guy, the kind of guy who would dedicate hours a week to writing about the issue of employment even though he actually has a job. He sees average chemists struggling, and a lack of dialog about that issue and uses the power of his blog and pseudonym to address it. By blogging, he can collect resources, add to (or start) the dialog and be a fact-checker for other writers. All this helps get thoughts in order, it allows for ideas to be shared with a critical audience, and sometimes it's even a service.
When asked if it's worth it, he told me that as a scientist he has learned to take his wins very narrowly. He's been able to connect a few people with jobs, or be an ear for someone navigating some career mystery, and that seems equally, if not more important than being quoted by famous bloggers, or even print journalists. For him, connecting people with information and elevating a dialogue about the very scary struggle of the average chemist is important. Worth dedicating time away from his family for.
To be honest, I probably could have guessed most of that about Chemjobber, although I was surprised to learn that he didn't choose to write about this issue because he had experienced unemployment. Seriously, he just writes about it because it seems important for the community. He's just that kind of guy.
I also wanted to know about the pseudonym, and not just the funny story about how he picked it (someone should make him explain it). Does a pseudonym protect you? Give you different freedoms? He sighed when I asked about this, and said a pseudonym is never better that writing with your own name. Instead, he uses it to divide this hobby (blogging) from his work. This is a little surprising, he rarely mentions his work on the blog, and he told me few people at work know he is Chemjobber. People often don't trust the pseudonym (and this is a good rule of thumb). When he has been contacted by reporters, they can't credit him as a source. And I think that is part of the reason he maintains the strict difference- the journalist will site Dr. Jobber, chemist at ChemCo, and that isn't really who he represents as a blogger. Even though we may never fully understand the motivations of the pseudonym, it seems to provide the space for Chemjobber the blogger to be thoughtful, critical and objective (and prolific) in a way that he might not if he thought his employer might read it.
And this got us into the subject of blogging generally. Chemjobber had lots of thoughts about how to develop a following and encourage discussion with a generally positive community. (Hints: Write lots, and don't pick fights.) Using a specific mission statement, there seems to be an unending amount of content, but he hasn't seriously discussed women in chemistry or immigration and jobs. He's found the chemistry community to be dominated by other thoughtful, objectively critical folks who make the dialogues much more engaging (and man, I wish people left such great comments on my blog- seriously, go look at some of that stuff). We talked about how there isn't a similar blog covering the issue for Biologists, or even all of STEM.
My purpose in my own blog so far has been simply to document what I am doing, it's very autobiographical. I thought it would help me to collect my thoughts on my job hunt, and possibly provide a record for me to share with others, and it certainly has done both. But I'm coming to a point where I might not need to blog about job hunting anymore. Would I blog about looking for clients or contracting? Could I do that in a meaningful way, or would I have stumbled on a topic even less likely to spark discussion? As Chemjobber told me, "It's not nice to write about people on the internet" and I don't want to be whining about my editors or clients. I like blogging, but I think this iteration may have run it's course. Do I shut it down? Change course? Talking with Chemjobber certainly got me thinking about using my blog as a forum to discuss the science policy issues I am interested in.
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
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.
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.
Thursday, August 2, 2012
My Publication Record
My manuscript got accepted! Anytime a manuscript gets accepted, it's gratifying, and this one is especially so. As a grad student, I wrote a draft of a manuscript in my 3rd year that continued to be developed until shortly after graduation. I submitted this just before I stopped working. At the time, it seemed like the missing piece- the paper will get out, I'll update my CV and get a job. So simple! This paper went through 3 journals and was finally accepted on its 6th submission. It's about time!
There is lots of time to think during 6 submissions. Can you really believe you are a good scientist if your peers won't publish your work? If your 'peers' only ask dumb questions about your science, do you really have to respond? How many submissions would it take before you'd just scrap the idea all together. Fortunately, before I came up with answers to those questions, we were able to address the actual issue with most of those rejections. My super specialized/limited-audience work wasn't ideal for a general Biochemistry type journal, we really need a specialized journal. Antiviral Research gave us legitimate feedback that was reasonable for us to respond to (Thank you!), and now I've got my second first author publication. Phew!
As long as this process has drawn out now, I'm not sure it is going to be the fix-all I imagined. Other papers came out in the field (it figures that drug discovery in polyomaviruses is trendy now), so my work isn't exactly seminal. But more than that, it has been a long time since anyone asked about my publication record. I told a industry scientist once that I've got a couple papers to my name, and he gave me a sort of patronizing look. I've gotten less interested in bench work, where it might come up more often. Neither internship asked about papers. I've tried drafting resumes to technical writing positions that include my papers, but they seem like a cumbersome way to demonstrate "I have communication skills." I'm still figuring out the best ways to use these.
This also raises a few questions. I no longer have a semi-regular excuse to communicate with my old adviser. We had discussed writing a review, based on the intro to my dissertation. That's easily a year out of date now, so it would require significant effort to update, and there was some doubt anyone would publish such a thing (and after this ringer, I'd love to write something that could get published). But would it make a difference? I don't think I've had a hard time finding a job because my Antiviral Res paper wasn't out yet, I think it's because I don't have preclinical experience or a background in immunology. Would publishing a review change my prospects as all? Is it a good idea to require semi-regular updates with my old adviser while I am looking for a position?
There is lots of time to think during 6 submissions. Can you really believe you are a good scientist if your peers won't publish your work? If your 'peers' only ask dumb questions about your science, do you really have to respond? How many submissions would it take before you'd just scrap the idea all together. Fortunately, before I came up with answers to those questions, we were able to address the actual issue with most of those rejections. My super specialized/limited-audience work wasn't ideal for a general Biochemistry type journal, we really need a specialized journal. Antiviral Research gave us legitimate feedback that was reasonable for us to respond to (Thank you!), and now I've got my second first author publication. Phew!
As long as this process has drawn out now, I'm not sure it is going to be the fix-all I imagined. Other papers came out in the field (it figures that drug discovery in polyomaviruses is trendy now), so my work isn't exactly seminal. But more than that, it has been a long time since anyone asked about my publication record. I told a industry scientist once that I've got a couple papers to my name, and he gave me a sort of patronizing look. I've gotten less interested in bench work, where it might come up more often. Neither internship asked about papers. I've tried drafting resumes to technical writing positions that include my papers, but they seem like a cumbersome way to demonstrate "I have communication skills." I'm still figuring out the best ways to use these.
This also raises a few questions. I no longer have a semi-regular excuse to communicate with my old adviser. We had discussed writing a review, based on the intro to my dissertation. That's easily a year out of date now, so it would require significant effort to update, and there was some doubt anyone would publish such a thing (and after this ringer, I'd love to write something that could get published). But would it make a difference? I don't think I've had a hard time finding a job because my Antiviral Res paper wasn't out yet, I think it's because I don't have preclinical experience or a background in immunology. Would publishing a review change my prospects as all? Is it a good idea to require semi-regular updates with my old adviser while I am looking for a position?
Sunday, July 15, 2012
Off-site contractor culture
I just got off the phone from a meeting with a new team I'll be working with for my previous client. I'm starting to feel like being a off-site contractor for a while could work. I might be able to get this work, I like this work and it might help me get some other kind of work later. BUT it's hard to know if I am doing it right. This client is great, because they are very communicative, but how am I supposed to know how many hours they expect me to work? I have a non-exclusivity clause with them, which is good, because I just signed another contract with Words and Numbers for a big chunk of work. I just don't see how I can do both without either knowing. Do they want to know? Do their other contractors let them know?
I've mentioned before that it's awesome to have a relationship that is based almost exclusively on my work performance. (In this phone call, the other contractor who has seen my name on our last project said she had assumed I was a guy.) I worry a little that there is supposed to be more (or less) in that relationship. When I started, I was asked why my anticipated hours might be, but that was from the perspective of timezones, not accountability. So, when I take a long midday break, do they care? I assumed not if I make the work goals. What about when we are setting those goals?
The purpose of this phone call was to kick off a new project, and the timing is such that I now am going to be fairly busy with other contracts for a while. I was SO relieved that there was another contractor on this phone call. The editor just asked, "How much work do you think you'll get done on this project?" The other contractor just said, "I've got another project right now, so I am looking at about 25 hours a week." I was so excited that was an acceptable answer, I may have said that verbatim. And that was fine.
Another component of this is that my editor reiterated several times that he wants to be supportive and helpful, he wants to get questions, he wants to provide answers and please email him a lot. Ok. It was really great to get that clarified, especially since this particular contract involves some work that I am not experienced with. It's nice to know that he hadn't thought I'd been hired because I am good at this type of work, just that I should be able to learn.
I've mentioned before that it's awesome to have a relationship that is based almost exclusively on my work performance. (In this phone call, the other contractor who has seen my name on our last project said she had assumed I was a guy.) I worry a little that there is supposed to be more (or less) in that relationship. When I started, I was asked why my anticipated hours might be, but that was from the perspective of timezones, not accountability. So, when I take a long midday break, do they care? I assumed not if I make the work goals. What about when we are setting those goals?
The purpose of this phone call was to kick off a new project, and the timing is such that I now am going to be fairly busy with other contracts for a while. I was SO relieved that there was another contractor on this phone call. The editor just asked, "How much work do you think you'll get done on this project?" The other contractor just said, "I've got another project right now, so I am looking at about 25 hours a week." I was so excited that was an acceptable answer, I may have said that verbatim. And that was fine.
Another component of this is that my editor reiterated several times that he wants to be supportive and helpful, he wants to get questions, he wants to provide answers and please email him a lot. Ok. It was really great to get that clarified, especially since this particular contract involves some work that I am not experienced with. It's nice to know that he hadn't thought I'd been hired because I am good at this type of work, just that I should be able to learn.
Thursday, July 5, 2012
Do contractors ever get hired?
I am currently working on a contract in instructional design. I write lessons for high schoolers and edit exam questions. This is really fun; I get to learn about lots of different things, and it is a great way to get back to my early education that was standards based. It's been going really well, outside of the usual contract drama (if I finish this today, can I still earn money tomorrow?). I like the team, I like the work, and I like that they are located in Seattle.
I've heard mixed messages about transitioning from a contractor to a full-time employee. On the one hand, being a contractor may indicate the work is unpredictable and unlikely to require a full-time person. And working offsite makes it hard for employers to form a full impression of you. At the same time, I'm objectively assessed on my work habits- that's the only thing they know about me. And having a known entity come on board is less scary that seeing what you get from a job posting. I've been thinking about how I could make this experience more stable for me- either by having some confidence in more long term contracts or getting hired.
My plan is to keep being as awesome as possible, staying in touch and reiterating how much I like the job. And then to be clear about my intentions: I want a full-time job. That's actually proving to be hard to drop casually into emails (again, the off-site conundrum. These things don't just "come-up" around the water cooler). But they need some onsite work soon, so that may prove a better time to have those conversations (and figure out who to have them with).
I've heard mixed messages about transitioning from a contractor to a full-time employee. On the one hand, being a contractor may indicate the work is unpredictable and unlikely to require a full-time person. And working offsite makes it hard for employers to form a full impression of you. At the same time, I'm objectively assessed on my work habits- that's the only thing they know about me. And having a known entity come on board is less scary that seeing what you get from a job posting. I've been thinking about how I could make this experience more stable for me- either by having some confidence in more long term contracts or getting hired.
My plan is to keep being as awesome as possible, staying in touch and reiterating how much I like the job. And then to be clear about my intentions: I want a full-time job. That's actually proving to be hard to drop casually into emails (again, the off-site conundrum. These things don't just "come-up" around the water cooler). But they need some onsite work soon, so that may prove a better time to have those conversations (and figure out who to have them with).
Monday, June 25, 2012
Transition story
I have been thinking quite a bit about my transition story, especially in the context of story telling. As a blogger, I can tell stories as long and convoluted as I like, but as a job hunter I need to get this baby tamed into one tweet. So I got to thinking about stories and how they are told. Following a comment from the previous transition post, I did a little research on the basic elements of a story. A story has a character- usually a protagonist, and a challenge. A good story has a beginning a middle and an end. And for a short story, that is probably all I can get in there.
At the start of my story was me, before I started graduate school. I can go back and read my admission essay (gawdawful) and senior seminar writing assignments to remember what I was thinking about then. What I wanted then was rather vaguely to "help people" and "change the world." I went to graduate school because I knew that science provides the tools to that, and because I thought that I could explore what I meant by "change the world." I never really WANTED to be a professor, but at the time, the idea of getting dragged into academia seemed inevitable and not that bad. Unlike 4 years at a liberal arts college, graduate school is not meant to be a journey of self discovery, so I never really got to the bottom of that question.
But, I did learn several things about myself that lead me to believe I am not well suited for academia or a bench position. I'm very much a big picture person. I need to finish things, by which I mean I like short time frames and dynamic content. I like working with a team. I enjoy writing. I'm not ready for the responsibility of being in charge of other people. Grant funding scares me. I am happiest when I am working on several different things- like assays for two different stories, running a journal club and creating career workshops for grad students. I get bored easily. When my experiments don't work, I feel like a terrible human being. In the context of my story, all this needs to get distilled down into something more pointed that leads me in a new direction.
And this is the part of the story I am struggling with. In my perfect transition story, I would know where the story ends. You know, "I went to graduate school because I thought that was the best way to cure cancer, but I have a bigger impact on how people with cancer are treated as an FDA regulator." Or "Graduate school appealed to me because I thought I could have an impact on people's lives, but I found that teaching had a more direct and fulfilling impact." The story I was using for a while was "I wanted to go to graduate school because science solves complex problems. Some of the most complex problems we have right now are in policy, and I think I can bring science to bear on those problems." This story oversimplified my interest in living in the same time zone as my family, and the challenge of a two-body problem. While most of the story has slipped away, I now tell people that "I moved to Seattle over the winter, and I am committed to finding a way to make my career here." That's not where my story ends, but it is where I got stuck telling it.
My view of my own career has taken a lot of collateral damage over the last year- I just don't believe that I am going to find a track to jump on and find smooth sailing until retirement. I also don't believe that what I do next is going to be tied to what I was doing before. For better or worse, this means I expect to pick a story, see where it gets me, and maybe write a new one in a couple more years. I'm not quite ready to decide where my story is today, but I am closing in on a version that might look something like this.
At the start of my story was me, before I started graduate school. I can go back and read my admission essay (gawdawful) and senior seminar writing assignments to remember what I was thinking about then. What I wanted then was rather vaguely to "help people" and "change the world." I went to graduate school because I knew that science provides the tools to that, and because I thought that I could explore what I meant by "change the world." I never really WANTED to be a professor, but at the time, the idea of getting dragged into academia seemed inevitable and not that bad. Unlike 4 years at a liberal arts college, graduate school is not meant to be a journey of self discovery, so I never really got to the bottom of that question.
But, I did learn several things about myself that lead me to believe I am not well suited for academia or a bench position. I'm very much a big picture person. I need to finish things, by which I mean I like short time frames and dynamic content. I like working with a team. I enjoy writing. I'm not ready for the responsibility of being in charge of other people. Grant funding scares me. I am happiest when I am working on several different things- like assays for two different stories, running a journal club and creating career workshops for grad students. I get bored easily. When my experiments don't work, I feel like a terrible human being. In the context of my story, all this needs to get distilled down into something more pointed that leads me in a new direction.
And this is the part of the story I am struggling with. In my perfect transition story, I would know where the story ends. You know, "I went to graduate school because I thought that was the best way to cure cancer, but I have a bigger impact on how people with cancer are treated as an FDA regulator." Or "Graduate school appealed to me because I thought I could have an impact on people's lives, but I found that teaching had a more direct and fulfilling impact." The story I was using for a while was "I wanted to go to graduate school because science solves complex problems. Some of the most complex problems we have right now are in policy, and I think I can bring science to bear on those problems." This story oversimplified my interest in living in the same time zone as my family, and the challenge of a two-body problem. While most of the story has slipped away, I now tell people that "I moved to Seattle over the winter, and I am committed to finding a way to make my career here." That's not where my story ends, but it is where I got stuck telling it.
My view of my own career has taken a lot of collateral damage over the last year- I just don't believe that I am going to find a track to jump on and find smooth sailing until retirement. I also don't believe that what I do next is going to be tied to what I was doing before. For better or worse, this means I expect to pick a story, see where it gets me, and maybe write a new one in a couple more years. I'm not quite ready to decide where my story is today, but I am closing in on a version that might look something like this.
I went to graduate school because I have always thought deeply about my own education. Rather than teaching in just one classroom, I want to bring the same kind of passion that propelled me to be a successful student of science to a wide range of students, which I why I am an instructional designer.Thoughts?
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Editing manuscripts
I've got a contract to substantially edit a manuscript this weekend that, um, is in serious need of my services. I'm also trying to deal with comments from my own manuscript that will be celebrating a birthday along with my PhD soon. Honestly, dealing with the revisions of my own paper makes me feel like a terrible scientist. Looking for old files lost in what passed as my 'organizational system,' and trying to find ways to respond to very reasonable reviewers comments is really stressing me out. Trying to navigate this all with my old adviser and our ever growing team of collaborators just feels messier and messier as we go through each resubmission. I just got an email from him that said, "Check submission 4, we used a different supplemental figure 4 there." Oh. Uh. Right. I can't keep this straight because, seriously, if I believed that publishing this paper would improve my career prospects, it would have torn me to bits months ago.
This is why editing someone else's manuscript right now is fantastic. Their manuscript is pretty rough. The manuscript came with comments from two previous submission- one in 2006, one in 2008. Both said the language needs help, but also such silly comments as, "it wasn't clear until halfway through the paper that there would be two drugs tested" and "You need to include the IRB approval" and my favorite "Please discuss the limitations of this study." I'm not very far into this paper, but I suspect the experiments were well done. They have just not been presented well at all. And if THESE people can publish their paper, with it's outdated references and scattered presentation, I've got a shot for sure. I often feel like I must be the worst scientist ever. Being an editor means I get to see other people's work before it is polished, I get to see the weakness and struggles they have, and it's nice to know others go through that too.
My manuscript is, in the scheme of things, probably pretty close to publication. I'm looking forward to being done with it because I feel like I never really finished grad school while this keeps coming back into my life. I'm completely resigned to the fact that it won't change my prospects at all. Other, more interesting papers have come out in the last year. And much more importantly, I'm able to get paid to do stuff that has nothing to do with small molecule inhibitors of polyomaviruses. I'd like to talk more about this later, but I'm pretty sure I am not going to be employed to continue my grad work or anything like it. So finishing it up would be a HUGE relief.
This is why editing someone else's manuscript right now is fantastic. Their manuscript is pretty rough. The manuscript came with comments from two previous submission- one in 2006, one in 2008. Both said the language needs help, but also such silly comments as, "it wasn't clear until halfway through the paper that there would be two drugs tested" and "You need to include the IRB approval" and my favorite "Please discuss the limitations of this study." I'm not very far into this paper, but I suspect the experiments were well done. They have just not been presented well at all. And if THESE people can publish their paper, with it's outdated references and scattered presentation, I've got a shot for sure. I often feel like I must be the worst scientist ever. Being an editor means I get to see other people's work before it is polished, I get to see the weakness and struggles they have, and it's nice to know others go through that too.
My manuscript is, in the scheme of things, probably pretty close to publication. I'm looking forward to being done with it because I feel like I never really finished grad school while this keeps coming back into my life. I'm completely resigned to the fact that it won't change my prospects at all. Other, more interesting papers have come out in the last year. And much more importantly, I'm able to get paid to do stuff that has nothing to do with small molecule inhibitors of polyomaviruses. I'd like to talk more about this later, but I'm pretty sure I am not going to be employed to continue my grad work or anything like it. So finishing it up would be a HUGE relief.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Interview with a Former Molecular Biologist
This networking thing is still a real challenge for me. I'm working hard to introduce myself in terms of where I am going (I'm a
freelance editor and I work in instructional design) instead of where I
was (I have a Ph.D. in Molecular Biology). When you start with the
second one and then say, "I am looking for a job," you get a look that
says 'how smart do you think you are?' and someone suggests you get a
job at a University. 'Uh, I had one of those,' and I usually get too flustered trying to explain why after 10 years at the bench I would walk away form that, instead of focusing on what I am doing to develop better communication skills. I had this problem again at a networking event for Women in Science that was part of the Seattle Science Festival recently. It was a great mix of people in outreach (ALL the museums were there), trainees and working professionals. One of the people I met there introduced herself as a "Former Molecular Biologist." Fortunately, she agreed to meet with me after the event and tell me a bit about that path.
She realized in graduate school she wasn't going to stay at the bench, and ended up working at Science Magazine. Some of her experiences won't be relevant to the current job market, but she understood that. For example, she said that science writing these days is possible to break into, but it can be a bit dicey to make a living at it. Places like Wired Blogs or SciAm blogs make it easier to have a voice, but they don't cut big checks. From there she transitioned into her current position as a usability expert at Philips. They design new products, and she helps engineers make them impossible to use incorrectly. We actually talked very little about her current job, although I'm curious about it now.
What we talked about instead what how to make that first step away from the bench. She is fortunately very well connected to many people who had moved away from bench science at various career stages, and had a lot to say about what worked well for them. Her biggest piece of advice was to create a transition story for yourself. A good story can save you from that flustered babbling in and scenario. And I need a story that shuts the door on a career as a scientist. Not burn the bridge, just make it clear that I am going somewhere else now. These days I feel like grad school is a bit of a black hole- I just can't move beyond the clutches of having a Ph.D. and the trappings of an academic career path.
In her case, she enjoyed the challenge of research, but wanted much more human interaction. She had a friend who was often in an organizational role in lab, and moved from a post-doc to an Operational position. Her partner took a couple classes in bioinformatics and enjoyed the computation, and ended up in a support role a tech company. See how that works? And no one says to them, "but your dissertation work seemed so promising..."
So how does the transition story come together? She suggested I go back to what motivated me to go to grad school in the first place, because that probably hasn't fundamentally changed. Then think about where I want to go, and weave the story so that my transition to this new place I am going (that suits my motivations and values) is inevitable. In her case, she loved the process of solving problems, but found bench work was too small scale for her. Helping teams catch and solve problems is much more inline with her interests and abilities. She said most people have had a transition of some sort, and if you tell the story with optimism, they can identify with it.
What does this mean for me? I'm still working on my own transition story. More on that as it develops.
She realized in graduate school she wasn't going to stay at the bench, and ended up working at Science Magazine. Some of her experiences won't be relevant to the current job market, but she understood that. For example, she said that science writing these days is possible to break into, but it can be a bit dicey to make a living at it. Places like Wired Blogs or SciAm blogs make it easier to have a voice, but they don't cut big checks. From there she transitioned into her current position as a usability expert at Philips. They design new products, and she helps engineers make them impossible to use incorrectly. We actually talked very little about her current job, although I'm curious about it now.
What we talked about instead what how to make that first step away from the bench. She is fortunately very well connected to many people who had moved away from bench science at various career stages, and had a lot to say about what worked well for them. Her biggest piece of advice was to create a transition story for yourself. A good story can save you from that flustered babbling in and scenario. And I need a story that shuts the door on a career as a scientist. Not burn the bridge, just make it clear that I am going somewhere else now. These days I feel like grad school is a bit of a black hole- I just can't move beyond the clutches of having a Ph.D. and the trappings of an academic career path.
In her case, she enjoyed the challenge of research, but wanted much more human interaction. She had a friend who was often in an organizational role in lab, and moved from a post-doc to an Operational position. Her partner took a couple classes in bioinformatics and enjoyed the computation, and ended up in a support role a tech company. See how that works? And no one says to them, "but your dissertation work seemed so promising..."
So how does the transition story come together? She suggested I go back to what motivated me to go to grad school in the first place, because that probably hasn't fundamentally changed. Then think about where I want to go, and weave the story so that my transition to this new place I am going (that suits my motivations and values) is inevitable. In her case, she loved the process of solving problems, but found bench work was too small scale for her. Helping teams catch and solve problems is much more inline with her interests and abilities. She said most people have had a transition of some sort, and if you tell the story with optimism, they can identify with it.
What does this mean for me? I'm still working on my own transition story. More on that as it develops.
Monday, June 11, 2012
Perks of working from home
There are parts of all jobs that suck. I think finding a job where the parts that do suck are manageable is really important to finding career happiness. For me, part of that is recognizing the parts that don't suck. I don't love working from home- spending so much time with my cat makes me feel like a crazy cat lady. But taking editing contracts for foreign scientists and writing curricula from home are the jobs I keep getting. I used to have really fun coworkers and went to work in a very
interesting neighborhood and I'd like to have all that again (but get
paid more to work less). Until that job comes to my door, there are some really great things about working from home.
1) I set my own hours. Even working on an hourly contract, I just put the hours in where they fit for me. Today is too beautiful and I gotta take a long walk? Fine. My sweetie is gone for the evening, I'll put some hours in.
2) No commute. I quickly realized that my 20 hr a week bank job takes at least 25 hours of my week, including a 30 min drive on both ends. No commute give me that time back for whatever I feel like.
3) No dress code. Yeah, I am one of those freelancers that works in my PJs. At least until I feel like a mid-morning shower. For the bank job, it takes me almost an hour to go through the ritual of showering, and putting on make-up, and getting dressed, and packing a lunch.... Add another 5 hours a week to that 20 hour a week job.
4) No workplace drama. Yes, I miss my coworkers, in no small part because it's good to have a cohort you can share those stressful experiences with. Can you believe the department chair did that? Who took the last of the free seminar food? As another off-site worker told me, "There is no one at the office that I don't like."
5) I set the play list. My old lab had the best taste in music, don't get me wrong. But sometimes when we would turn the music up too loud the department chair would just turn off our radio. As I was blasting some sweet tunes this morning, I was relishing that no one was going to turn them off for me.
6) Contracts are low commitment. All that phobia about what might suck about a job (terrible coworkers, awful work, tedious tasks) seems more manageable when it's only for a few days or a few weeks. It also means I've done a lot of different things in the last year.
7) All I need to work is an internet connection. I could work from Starbucks, or the library. I'm currently planning to go to my parent's house for a week and work there. My client doesn't care- they just want to see the work done. (I have mixed feelings about combining working and vacations- it makes work more fun, but it is much less like a vacation when you are looking for 40 hours to get some work done).
8) I'm at my house. I don't live in a super trendy neighborhood with fun shops and restaurants, but my office is the same place I cook, it's where my garden is, it's where my mail gets delivered and I sign for packages. We need to schedule a repair guy, no big. I want to get some laundry started, cool, I'll take a break. Especially for a dual career family, it's nice to have someone who is/can be at home.
9) Time worked = Dollars earned. Science is frustrating because hard work is not always tied to success. For a pretty simple definition of success (financial reward), I just put in the time and out comes the money. It's easier to feel detached about doing the work when you get the pay-off that way.
10) I like to talk to editors by email. I'm not sure if it's because editors make their money from writing, or they understand that our relationship is based predominantly on written communication, but they clearly go out of their way to be polite and professional. When you see your coworkers/collaborators all the time, it's ok to send brief, unfriendly emails "Here's the figure you wanted." It's hard to interpret that as passive-aggressive if you just shared a laugh over coffee. My editors don't have that luxury, and they seem to put a lot of context into their email. ("Great questions," "I appreciate you asking about that...," "Thanks for pointing out those problems.") I always found it hard to take criticism in person, even though that is a big part of professional work. "The figure is unintelligible. Please make it better by doing the following...." It's a lot easier to write the email that says, "Great, I will incorporate those suggestions," than to try and say it while not pulling a face.
11) My editors understand the challenge of being a contractor. They treat me like I am doing them a real favor to be on their team, and try to make all the other stuff (getting paid, understanding the task, understanding deadlines and expectations) as clear as possible so that the only hard part of the job is the job itself. Of course, this just shows I am working with some really great editors right now.
12) I enjoy this work. At the moment, I don't have any single employer to fill my time, I am compiling most of my work from a variety of sources. Basically, I get to find projects I like and work on them. I can't say every one has been as much fun as a pony ride, but I also can't think of any that have been as miserable as a day in the cold room that ended in colossal failure.
13) Comparatively, I can make a lot of money (compared to doing the same work in grad school). I make money now for editing scientific manuscripts and designing courses. These are activities that I actually would have scheduled to do outside of my normal working hours as a grad student. In fact, the course I designed and taught as a grad students occurred almost exclusively outside the normal work day. I'm currently editing a 6 page paper for 354RMB (or about $50), and working on a contract with a pay rate of $45/hour. All this for work I would have done outside of my real work. Nice!
14) This job doesn't have things I disliked about other jobs. Examples include brutal protocols that needed to be repeated ad nauseum, and then rehashed in yet another painful lab meeting. Or irate customers. Or fickle equipment that is prone to failure. Actually, I would say that I like how much more of this job is in my control compared to being a grad student or working at the bank.
Yes, I am giving myself a pep-talk about how much fun I'm having at this job, but in the interest of fairness (and for the benefit of others who might be wondering about the lifestyle), there are some fundamental ways that being a contract laborer is different (and arguably less ideal). The downside:
1) It's all me. I find my own contracts, I set my own hours, if the work doesn't get done, it's my bad. No pressure. And when the contracts as short, it's hard not to feel like each on is an interview to see if they consider giving you another.
2) I'm a LOT more involved in my own taxes. I have a small business license to cover this work, which means that I pay business taxes. I also have no withholdings in my paychecks- so what seems like a lot of money now is going to feel like a lot less come April. I am also buying my own health insurance and retirement plan.
3) Invoicing feels much more tedious than just filling out an hours sheet, or better yet, being salaried. The form takes a little more time to fill out, but it takes some of my clients 45 days to cut me a check. That's a big lag between doing work and getting paid. This is annoying for me, but manageable because I don't provide the primary income at our house. If I did, I'm not sure I could swing this career step.
This list of perks is still much longer, and looking over them, we can say that I like to be in control of my day to day. Interesting insight.
1) I set my own hours. Even working on an hourly contract, I just put the hours in where they fit for me. Today is too beautiful and I gotta take a long walk? Fine. My sweetie is gone for the evening, I'll put some hours in.
2) No commute. I quickly realized that my 20 hr a week bank job takes at least 25 hours of my week, including a 30 min drive on both ends. No commute give me that time back for whatever I feel like.
3) No dress code. Yeah, I am one of those freelancers that works in my PJs. At least until I feel like a mid-morning shower. For the bank job, it takes me almost an hour to go through the ritual of showering, and putting on make-up, and getting dressed, and packing a lunch.... Add another 5 hours a week to that 20 hour a week job.
4) No workplace drama. Yes, I miss my coworkers, in no small part because it's good to have a cohort you can share those stressful experiences with. Can you believe the department chair did that? Who took the last of the free seminar food? As another off-site worker told me, "There is no one at the office that I don't like."
5) I set the play list. My old lab had the best taste in music, don't get me wrong. But sometimes when we would turn the music up too loud the department chair would just turn off our radio. As I was blasting some sweet tunes this morning, I was relishing that no one was going to turn them off for me.
6) Contracts are low commitment. All that phobia about what might suck about a job (terrible coworkers, awful work, tedious tasks) seems more manageable when it's only for a few days or a few weeks. It also means I've done a lot of different things in the last year.
7) All I need to work is an internet connection. I could work from Starbucks, or the library. I'm currently planning to go to my parent's house for a week and work there. My client doesn't care- they just want to see the work done. (I have mixed feelings about combining working and vacations- it makes work more fun, but it is much less like a vacation when you are looking for 40 hours to get some work done).
8) I'm at my house. I don't live in a super trendy neighborhood with fun shops and restaurants, but my office is the same place I cook, it's where my garden is, it's where my mail gets delivered and I sign for packages. We need to schedule a repair guy, no big. I want to get some laundry started, cool, I'll take a break. Especially for a dual career family, it's nice to have someone who is/can be at home.
9) Time worked = Dollars earned. Science is frustrating because hard work is not always tied to success. For a pretty simple definition of success (financial reward), I just put in the time and out comes the money. It's easier to feel detached about doing the work when you get the pay-off that way.
10) I like to talk to editors by email. I'm not sure if it's because editors make their money from writing, or they understand that our relationship is based predominantly on written communication, but they clearly go out of their way to be polite and professional. When you see your coworkers/collaborators all the time, it's ok to send brief, unfriendly emails "Here's the figure you wanted." It's hard to interpret that as passive-aggressive if you just shared a laugh over coffee. My editors don't have that luxury, and they seem to put a lot of context into their email. ("Great questions," "I appreciate you asking about that...," "Thanks for pointing out those problems.") I always found it hard to take criticism in person, even though that is a big part of professional work. "The figure is unintelligible. Please make it better by doing the following...." It's a lot easier to write the email that says, "Great, I will incorporate those suggestions," than to try and say it while not pulling a face.
11) My editors understand the challenge of being a contractor. They treat me like I am doing them a real favor to be on their team, and try to make all the other stuff (getting paid, understanding the task, understanding deadlines and expectations) as clear as possible so that the only hard part of the job is the job itself. Of course, this just shows I am working with some really great editors right now.
12) I enjoy this work. At the moment, I don't have any single employer to fill my time, I am compiling most of my work from a variety of sources. Basically, I get to find projects I like and work on them. I can't say every one has been as much fun as a pony ride, but I also can't think of any that have been as miserable as a day in the cold room that ended in colossal failure.
13) Comparatively, I can make a lot of money (compared to doing the same work in grad school). I make money now for editing scientific manuscripts and designing courses. These are activities that I actually would have scheduled to do outside of my normal working hours as a grad student. In fact, the course I designed and taught as a grad students occurred almost exclusively outside the normal work day. I'm currently editing a 6 page paper for 354RMB (or about $50), and working on a contract with a pay rate of $45/hour. All this for work I would have done outside of my real work. Nice!
14) This job doesn't have things I disliked about other jobs. Examples include brutal protocols that needed to be repeated ad nauseum, and then rehashed in yet another painful lab meeting. Or irate customers. Or fickle equipment that is prone to failure. Actually, I would say that I like how much more of this job is in my control compared to being a grad student or working at the bank.
Yes, I am giving myself a pep-talk about how much fun I'm having at this job, but in the interest of fairness (and for the benefit of others who might be wondering about the lifestyle), there are some fundamental ways that being a contract laborer is different (and arguably less ideal). The downside:
1) It's all me. I find my own contracts, I set my own hours, if the work doesn't get done, it's my bad. No pressure. And when the contracts as short, it's hard not to feel like each on is an interview to see if they consider giving you another.
2) I'm a LOT more involved in my own taxes. I have a small business license to cover this work, which means that I pay business taxes. I also have no withholdings in my paychecks- so what seems like a lot of money now is going to feel like a lot less come April. I am also buying my own health insurance and retirement plan.
3) Invoicing feels much more tedious than just filling out an hours sheet, or better yet, being salaried. The form takes a little more time to fill out, but it takes some of my clients 45 days to cut me a check. That's a big lag between doing work and getting paid. This is annoying for me, but manageable because I don't provide the primary income at our house. If I did, I'm not sure I could swing this career step.
This list of perks is still much longer, and looking over them, we can say that I like to be in control of my day to day. Interesting insight.
Thursday, June 7, 2012
Interview with a Medical Writer
At an AWIS event recently, I met a woman who is a Medical Writer. That is one of the jobs that I am told people with a Ph.D. can do, but given my non-medical background, I wanted to know more. She generously agreed to tell me more about the position: how she got it, what it's like and why it's great.
First, a quick background on her; she has a Ph.D. in molecular biology, and realized towards the end of her time in graduate school that she didn't want to be at the bench and wasn't sure where else to go. She joined American Medical Writers Association, and started looking for jobs. Although she said she had not special training for the role, I think that the membership is the magic piece that helped her get the job. The job she eventually was offered she found on Monster, although she applied for other jobs on the HittList and other places. She started on site at a pharmaceutical company in Chicago, and for personal reasons has moved to Seattle as an off-site contractor with the same company and position.
Her job now is a combination of writing tasks. Sometimes she writes 'primary literature'- data is provided in the form of polished figures and she writes manuscripts to tie them together. Sometimes she writes 'content' for clinical trials. When a doctor recruits a new patient, the patient will be given a brochure with all the legalese and descriptions of the trial methods. Sometimes she helps in filings, which she says makes her feel less like a writer, and more like an aggregation. Other people have done most of the writing, and she copies and pastes bits of documents together to make a new document. She has more of a management role on some projects as well. She said she likes the work because it changes, and she never feels too married to any of her work to take criticism.
Most people who are medical writers are not Ph.D.s, many have clinical backgrounds. This may make them better at navigating the medical lingo, but as far as writing up figures, methods or any research stuff goes, she felt completely prepared to to do the job. And she loves it- the work is interesting and challenging, and the pay is great. According to AMWA, the average Medical Writer makes $92K annually. Starting salaries are high for those with Ph.D.s and there is room for career advancement.
It sounds like a great gig to me. Although I am loathe to work off-site, a well paid job with a contract route of entry seems achievable. I like writing, and could be happy having someone else tell me what to write. I've joined AMWA ($160 annually), in hopes that might legitimize my application to these types of roles. Now I just need to find them.
First, a quick background on her; she has a Ph.D. in molecular biology, and realized towards the end of her time in graduate school that she didn't want to be at the bench and wasn't sure where else to go. She joined American Medical Writers Association, and started looking for jobs. Although she said she had not special training for the role, I think that the membership is the magic piece that helped her get the job. The job she eventually was offered she found on Monster, although she applied for other jobs on the HittList and other places. She started on site at a pharmaceutical company in Chicago, and for personal reasons has moved to Seattle as an off-site contractor with the same company and position.
Her job now is a combination of writing tasks. Sometimes she writes 'primary literature'- data is provided in the form of polished figures and she writes manuscripts to tie them together. Sometimes she writes 'content' for clinical trials. When a doctor recruits a new patient, the patient will be given a brochure with all the legalese and descriptions of the trial methods. Sometimes she helps in filings, which she says makes her feel less like a writer, and more like an aggregation. Other people have done most of the writing, and she copies and pastes bits of documents together to make a new document. She has more of a management role on some projects as well. She said she likes the work because it changes, and she never feels too married to any of her work to take criticism.
Most people who are medical writers are not Ph.D.s, many have clinical backgrounds. This may make them better at navigating the medical lingo, but as far as writing up figures, methods or any research stuff goes, she felt completely prepared to to do the job. And she loves it- the work is interesting and challenging, and the pay is great. According to AMWA, the average Medical Writer makes $92K annually. Starting salaries are high for those with Ph.D.s and there is room for career advancement.
It sounds like a great gig to me. Although I am loathe to work off-site, a well paid job with a contract route of entry seems achievable. I like writing, and could be happy having someone else tell me what to write. I've joined AMWA ($160 annually), in hopes that might legitimize my application to these types of roles. Now I just need to find them.
Tuesday, June 5, 2012
New Contract and a Leave of Absence
Some interesting opportunities have opened up, and I want to document some of the choices I've made and why. In another fit of "Maybe I'll just apply for some OTHER crazy job!" I put my hat in the ring for a position as a developmental editor with a curriculum development company in Seattle. Remember, I wrote a ridiculous letter and put in for a position that a hundred people had already applied for? Well, I got a call back the next day (Ha!).
The call was from the director who confessed that he was too swamped to hire a developmental editor because they were behind on writing. It's a growing company with some very interesting projects, and the just need some extra hands right now. Would I be willing to take on a writing contract?
My feeling on writing contracts is that they are a good way to make money, but not really a career. When you work off-site, you don't hear about things like new openings, or extra work or other things that would make it easier to advance your position. They are a growing company, but will I get a chance to grow with them? And frankly, I find working off-site boring. I miss having awesome coworkers. That being said, I've also come to realize that contract work is what is developing my CV these days, and frankly I do like the work. And the money.
So I agreed to take on a 5 week writing contract. But it sounds like a 40 hour/week position. (Oh, and I'll be paid hourly, unlike my work with Words and Numbers where I bill per task). I consider contract work one of 3 jobs I juggle currently, and so I knew I'd need to push back on the other two. I notified my internship I was going to be away, and that I am planning to send them a status update this week. The scary conversation was to tell the bank I was going to need some time. I'm just a teller, so I didn't figure they would be interested in making concessions for me- but for a 5 week contract, it seems stupid to walk away from a steady pay-check.
I thought a lot about how to have this conversation- I knew I needed to ask for something, so I tried to ask in a way that made them feel like they were generous to offer (not that they OWED me this- Here's to negotiation training!). And I also tried to be really clear about what was already decided, and what wasn't. I have accepted a contract. It is a great opportunity for me. It will take up all my time. I don't want to leave you guys in the lurch, and I am not sure how to do that best. To his credit, my manager was very excited for me, and was able to give me everything I need to make this work. I'll be at the bank for 2 more weeks, and then I am going on a leave of absence. In August, I'll get back in touch and get my old position back. I may be at a different branch when I come back, but I shouldn't have to reapply for my job. I'm glad that I asked for that, because it makes taking this contract much less intimidating- as I said, it's a contract, not a career.
The call was from the director who confessed that he was too swamped to hire a developmental editor because they were behind on writing. It's a growing company with some very interesting projects, and the just need some extra hands right now. Would I be willing to take on a writing contract?
My feeling on writing contracts is that they are a good way to make money, but not really a career. When you work off-site, you don't hear about things like new openings, or extra work or other things that would make it easier to advance your position. They are a growing company, but will I get a chance to grow with them? And frankly, I find working off-site boring. I miss having awesome coworkers. That being said, I've also come to realize that contract work is what is developing my CV these days, and frankly I do like the work. And the money.
So I agreed to take on a 5 week writing contract. But it sounds like a 40 hour/week position. (Oh, and I'll be paid hourly, unlike my work with Words and Numbers where I bill per task). I consider contract work one of 3 jobs I juggle currently, and so I knew I'd need to push back on the other two. I notified my internship I was going to be away, and that I am planning to send them a status update this week. The scary conversation was to tell the bank I was going to need some time. I'm just a teller, so I didn't figure they would be interested in making concessions for me- but for a 5 week contract, it seems stupid to walk away from a steady pay-check.
I thought a lot about how to have this conversation- I knew I needed to ask for something, so I tried to ask in a way that made them feel like they were generous to offer (not that they OWED me this- Here's to negotiation training!). And I also tried to be really clear about what was already decided, and what wasn't. I have accepted a contract. It is a great opportunity for me. It will take up all my time. I don't want to leave you guys in the lurch, and I am not sure how to do that best. To his credit, my manager was very excited for me, and was able to give me everything I need to make this work. I'll be at the bank for 2 more weeks, and then I am going on a leave of absence. In August, I'll get back in touch and get my old position back. I may be at a different branch when I come back, but I shouldn't have to reapply for my job. I'm glad that I asked for that, because it makes taking this contract much less intimidating- as I said, it's a contract, not a career.
Monday, May 28, 2012
Disclaimer: I'm educated, not handicapped
When moving outside of academia, it's sometime hard to know how to address having a Ph.D. Lately, I've been trying not to overemphasize it (I'm a strong communicator and critical thinker who happens to have a Ph.D), but I think I am missing an opportunity to talk about what I really learned in graduate school. A lot of the feel good literature for Ph.D.s thinking about finding a new career path teaches us to recognize the value of the Ph.D. in terms of communications skills, teamwork, independent work, critical thinking... Sometimes I forget that other people (and I mean hiring managers), don't read this stuff. I have certainly written cover letters where I failed to address some of those secondary job requirements. I'm not sure if that cost me the job, but "strong communication skills," "attention to detail," or "Proficiency in Microsoft Word" sometimes seem to obvious to state.
Then again... I met someone a while back who was really surprised, could barely contain his surprise, that I was such a capable communicator. Not that I did anything out of the ordinary, he just assumed I would speak only in math equations and that I'd never hear a word he said. He really thought I'd be handicapped by my education. He was thinking about ways to get kids into STEM fields, and gave me one of those "geeks don't have social skills" lines that made me sigh. I carefully corrected him, scientists don't always value their interpersonal skills, but it is impossible to be successful in science if you cannot write a grant that present a compelling argument to fund your work or present a clear story of your novel finds that gives you credibility with your colleagues. He was sold, but it reminded me that a huge part of communication is understanding your audience. If I am applying to a position where a Ph.D. is unexpected, I should probably explain why I think that 5 years in drug discovery provides me enough professional experience to be successful in a new role. I gotta remember that to some people, a Ph.D. is for those who are too single minded to make it anywhere but in that chosen field. And saying, "This job isn't as hard a grad school," isn't likely to win any hearts or minds.
Currently, I am applying for a hot curriculum development position (LinkedIn can tell you how many people have applied- I'm #117. I suspect my application won't be read, or if it is, it will be forgotten. I'm developing the materials for similar positions, so what the heck- I'm being ridiculous and possibly memorable). My short cover letter explains my background and interesting in the position, but I felt it needed more. They wanted someone with a BA in Comm, so I included this paragraph.
Briefly, I want to address some of the other job requirements that may not seem obvious given my background. I earned my Ph.D. in molecular biology by taking the lead on a large collaborative project that involved investigators in 3 states, so I am familiar with team work, collaboration and the value of interpersonal skills. This project allowed me to share my work in both papers and talks for an audience of highly educated skeptics, so I have developed strong communication skills, attention to detail and a thick skin. As a freelancer working off-site, I have mastered independent work and time management.
Too much? My new, fatalistic attitude about the job hunt is helping me to try new things. But approaching every job thinking, "well, I already don't have this job, how bad can it get?" might not be the fast lane to my dream job.
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Interview: Patent Law
Working at the UWs tech transfer office puts me in touch with a lot of scientists using their training in a non-traditional way. I work directly with tech managers who have a portfolio of projects that they cycle through the development- moving from an idea, to a funded idea, to a company, or a patent or a license to another company. This is a very cool job that I might talk about more later, but these tech managers also work in close contact with patent agents and patent lawyers. In our office, these are all former researchers who've made the leap into law. I got to sit down with a woman from an engineering background to talk about her move into law and her job now.
When we first sat down, she said, "you know, all you need to become a patent agent is to pass the patent bar, and that's really no big deal. Seriously, just sign up, study for a couple weeks and take the test, and you can jump into law." Hold that look of cautious surprise while we back up a bit. Entering patent law is different than other forms of law- in order to sign up to take the Patent Agent Bar, you need a B.S. at least in a narrow list of technical or scientific fields. If you have gone to law school following that degree, you can take the Patent Attorney Bar, which is a different exam. I'm going to focus on the Patent Agent route, since there is no way I am going back to law school now.
What the patent Agent does is help prepare and file documents related to patents with the US Patent and Trade Office (USPTO). There are several levels of documentation that go in with a patent, depending on that nature of the patent and it's claims. What this looks like on a day-to-day basis is juggling several projects, each which requires about 8-80 hours of work, and doing anything from prior art searches, provisional patent language to prosecuting (fancy lawyer term meaning "to persue") patents. Sometimes patents come back from the patent office, and need a response, so you get to advocate for why your client's patent is different that patents 6,923,245. In order to be effective, you actually need to understand the fundamentals of your patents well enough to distinguish it from other patents/ literature available. Even though you don't "do" science in the traditional way, you really need to keep your understanding sharp and up to date.
A little more on the career path. I've heard people say that a Patent Agent is kind of a dead-end job, there isn't room for advancement. It's probably true that your job title doesn't change much over time, but my contact had a little more perspective on it. She said that most people start out in a law firm for at least a couple of years. You work with all the lawyers in that firm and really get experience in the entire life cycle. She said (and I was stifling a smile here), you really need to develop a tough skin and be prepared to put in long hows. You'll be doing a lot of work, getting different types of criticism from the partners. The stakes are high and the deadlines are short, so there is a lot of pressure. The hours can be long and the intellectual labor is exhausting. But after a couple years at a law firm, you have enough experience to pursue another position, like her position at the University, or in a USPTO office. In her position, she manages the law firms that are contracted to do a lot of that work for the tech transfer office. Or to work part-time, or generally take more control over your career. I'm not sure what the job opportunities for Patent Agents are right now or are predicted to be in the near future.
That said, this doesn't sound all that different from post-docing (or graduate school, she had a B.Sc. in engineering before making the switch). Except for the pay. The USPTO reports the average salary for a patent agent is $74500.
Back to the bar then. It's a 3 hour exam, you can probably take at your nearest testing center. You need to pass with a 70% score. The fee to take the exam is a few hundred dollars (which feels like a lot when you are out of work), but could provide some new exciting opportunities. Or, if you decide you don't like it, it doesn't shackle you to the debt of law school. For a career that is a dynamic, challenging way you use your training, the barriers to entry don't seem too high.
When we first sat down, she said, "you know, all you need to become a patent agent is to pass the patent bar, and that's really no big deal. Seriously, just sign up, study for a couple weeks and take the test, and you can jump into law." Hold that look of cautious surprise while we back up a bit. Entering patent law is different than other forms of law- in order to sign up to take the Patent Agent Bar, you need a B.S. at least in a narrow list of technical or scientific fields. If you have gone to law school following that degree, you can take the Patent Attorney Bar, which is a different exam. I'm going to focus on the Patent Agent route, since there is no way I am going back to law school now.
What the patent Agent does is help prepare and file documents related to patents with the US Patent and Trade Office (USPTO). There are several levels of documentation that go in with a patent, depending on that nature of the patent and it's claims. What this looks like on a day-to-day basis is juggling several projects, each which requires about 8-80 hours of work, and doing anything from prior art searches, provisional patent language to prosecuting (fancy lawyer term meaning "to persue") patents. Sometimes patents come back from the patent office, and need a response, so you get to advocate for why your client's patent is different that patents 6,923,245. In order to be effective, you actually need to understand the fundamentals of your patents well enough to distinguish it from other patents/ literature available. Even though you don't "do" science in the traditional way, you really need to keep your understanding sharp and up to date.
A little more on the career path. I've heard people say that a Patent Agent is kind of a dead-end job, there isn't room for advancement. It's probably true that your job title doesn't change much over time, but my contact had a little more perspective on it. She said that most people start out in a law firm for at least a couple of years. You work with all the lawyers in that firm and really get experience in the entire life cycle. She said (and I was stifling a smile here), you really need to develop a tough skin and be prepared to put in long hows. You'll be doing a lot of work, getting different types of criticism from the partners. The stakes are high and the deadlines are short, so there is a lot of pressure. The hours can be long and the intellectual labor is exhausting. But after a couple years at a law firm, you have enough experience to pursue another position, like her position at the University, or in a USPTO office. In her position, she manages the law firms that are contracted to do a lot of that work for the tech transfer office. Or to work part-time, or generally take more control over your career. I'm not sure what the job opportunities for Patent Agents are right now or are predicted to be in the near future.
That said, this doesn't sound all that different from post-docing (or graduate school, she had a B.Sc. in engineering before making the switch). Except for the pay. The USPTO reports the average salary for a patent agent is $74500.
Back to the bar then. It's a 3 hour exam, you can probably take at your nearest testing center. You need to pass with a 70% score. The fee to take the exam is a few hundred dollars (which feels like a lot when you are out of work), but could provide some new exciting opportunities. Or, if you decide you don't like it, it doesn't shackle you to the debt of law school. For a career that is a dynamic, challenging way you use your training, the barriers to entry don't seem too high.
Monday, April 30, 2012
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.
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.
Monday, April 16, 2012
My article is on Page 8
Following the pretty obvious advice to network around when I moved to Seattle, I joined and was quickly added to the board of the Seattle Chapter of the Association of Women in Science. I'm on the newsletter committee, and I was pretty stoked when we decided that this quarter's newsletter was about bioethics. I designed a course in bioethics for undergrads as a graduate student, and it was a lot of fun to put together and teach- so in addition to bugging people (who mostly ignored my requests) for newsletter articles, I wrote one too. You can read it here.
It was challenging to write the article, because I wanted to balance it between "Things AWIS Members might actually want to read," and "Things I wish my future employer knew about me." Let me know what you think.
It was challenging to write the article, because I wanted to balance it between "Things AWIS Members might actually want to read," and "Things I wish my future employer knew about me." Let me know what you think.
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Comparing the work environment
I've got a couple comparisons I would like to make for the sake of
sorting out my own impressions. The first is with regard to the 3 major
groups I do freelance work for. In the first, Nobo Live, I've been
working with them the longest. I edit foreign manuscripts before they
go up for peer review. The second, SciEdit, I've only been working with
a few weeks but it is a similar gig. The final is Words and Numbers,
where I have done some text book editing, and also some curriculum
development writing.
To compare the first two, I make $0.03/word at Nobo Live, and about $0.04/word at SciEdit. NoboLive mails me a check, SciEdit pays me in yuan through PayPal. In both place, my only contact is a person who is my editor, but the role of this person is different. At Nobo Live, the editor will deal with the client, or suggest I may need to make further changes based on her own observation. At SciEdit, I receive a QA form with comments from a separate party. Neither has provided any training on what types of comments/changes they would like to see- which I have heard other groups like American Journal Experts do.
I'd been doing editing for a while before I actually wrote anything that needed to be edited. It was really enlightening to go over editor's comments/changes on some of my stuff. At Words and Numbers, I have an editor who provides me work, keeps in touch with the client, and gets my work edited. I like that my main contact there who provides me contracts (and at SciEdit) is not also the person providing criticism for my work, but that may just be a preference thing. There is a similar QA process, with writers and editors going back and forth to polish a piece before it is returned in the final version to the client. I find it a little frustrating sometimes not to be able to talk directly with the client ("You wrote this software. What do YOU think it does??"), but for the most part, I think it keeps everyone honest and unemotional. The client only sees a near final version that they approve with some minor comments. It's a much more corporate structure then the Chinese version which feels like it has all the structure of a hotmail account. And I do have a lot more interaction with my editor at Words and Number than I do with either of the others.
All three are easy to work with. The first two tend to give me short to very short deadlines (I recently got a paper to edit in 2 days). The third tends to give me a lot of time to schedule things (would you be willing to take a 20 hour contract in the next month or so?). Between the three styles, this week has been very busy, and it's nice to be making some cash.
To compare the first two, I make $0.03/word at Nobo Live, and about $0.04/word at SciEdit. NoboLive mails me a check, SciEdit pays me in yuan through PayPal. In both place, my only contact is a person who is my editor, but the role of this person is different. At Nobo Live, the editor will deal with the client, or suggest I may need to make further changes based on her own observation. At SciEdit, I receive a QA form with comments from a separate party. Neither has provided any training on what types of comments/changes they would like to see- which I have heard other groups like American Journal Experts do.
I'd been doing editing for a while before I actually wrote anything that needed to be edited. It was really enlightening to go over editor's comments/changes on some of my stuff. At Words and Numbers, I have an editor who provides me work, keeps in touch with the client, and gets my work edited. I like that my main contact there who provides me contracts (and at SciEdit) is not also the person providing criticism for my work, but that may just be a preference thing. There is a similar QA process, with writers and editors going back and forth to polish a piece before it is returned in the final version to the client. I find it a little frustrating sometimes not to be able to talk directly with the client ("You wrote this software. What do YOU think it does??"), but for the most part, I think it keeps everyone honest and unemotional. The client only sees a near final version that they approve with some minor comments. It's a much more corporate structure then the Chinese version which feels like it has all the structure of a hotmail account. And I do have a lot more interaction with my editor at Words and Number than I do with either of the others.
All three are easy to work with. The first two tend to give me short to very short deadlines (I recently got a paper to edit in 2 days). The third tends to give me a lot of time to schedule things (would you be willing to take a 20 hour contract in the next month or so?). Between the three styles, this week has been very busy, and it's nice to be making some cash.
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Interview: Grant Writer
It's been a while since I did an informational interview, I should do them more often. Talking with people about why they love their job makes me feel optimistic, and every job hunt could use a bit of that. So here is the context, as you know, I need a job. While getting a full time permanent job has not come easy, finding small contract editing work (of manuscripts and educational texts) or some related writing seems to have come up fairly often. I've been relatively passive about this, but I wanted to give this idea a fair shake, could I (should I?) make a career of reading and writing?
So I had to know, was she working week to week on contracts like me? Well, no. Although she had started doing that, she now works as an off-site contractor for a firm that sends her clients who need various levels of technical and administrative help. She said this sometimes means she is literally writing their grants, and sometimes this means she is just convincing a disparate group of PIs to stick to their writing deadlines. Depending on the client, this may feel like she is making the best use of her background, synthesizing complex data into an easily understandable package, and other times, this might just feel like she is the secretary (but she did admit the administrative work pays better).
Speaking of pay, she makes more than she did as a post-doc, and figures she'll continue to make significantly more than her husband (a post-doc) for a while.
The contract for this is novel to me, it's the antithesis of a non-compete. She signs up for a 3-6 month contract with her employer. They have renewed her contract consistently for 4 years now, so she has confidence that this is fairly permanent work. However, for tax reasons (and as part of this contract), she must take other contracts, to prove that she does not have a sole employer who ought to pay her taxes for her. She said she normally works 40 hours a week, but certainly goes through periods of working 80-90 hours a week, as a result of having to juggle multiple contracts.
So how does a person get into this? She recommended to get started, work with a recruiter. Alternatively, there are writing firms that have stables of writers for regulatory/technical/medical writing, like Synchrogenix. Another option is to subscribe to job lists, like the Hitt list (available here). And this last website brings up some other interesting resources. Medical writers are certainly in demand these days, and while having a PhD is great preparation for this career, to help with the transition, Emma Hitt offers some short courses and workshops on running a med writing business, or med writing. Biotech Ink Insider is another resource for those in the field. The American Medical Writers Association also offers some workshops/short courses in similar subjects. Again, these aren't essential certifications, but if you are looking for a way to show on your CV that you are serious about this transition or just want to build your own confidence this might be a good route. I'd be very interested to hear from someone who has taken one of these courses to see what they think.
I recently joined the Council of Science Editors group on LinkedIn, and in one of those discussions these additional resources were listed. Exciting, right? Doesn't it make you think you could take on a whole new career??
National Association of Science Writers (http://nasw.org)
National Writers Union (http://www.nwu.org)
Society for Technical Communication (http://www.stc.org)
Health Sciences Communication Association (http://www.hesca.org)
Bay Area Editors' Forum (http://www.editorsforum.org)
American Copy Editors Society (http://www.copydesk.org/)
So I had to know, was she working week to week on contracts like me? Well, no. Although she had started doing that, she now works as an off-site contractor for a firm that sends her clients who need various levels of technical and administrative help. She said this sometimes means she is literally writing their grants, and sometimes this means she is just convincing a disparate group of PIs to stick to their writing deadlines. Depending on the client, this may feel like she is making the best use of her background, synthesizing complex data into an easily understandable package, and other times, this might just feel like she is the secretary (but she did admit the administrative work pays better).
Speaking of pay, she makes more than she did as a post-doc, and figures she'll continue to make significantly more than her husband (a post-doc) for a while.
The contract for this is novel to me, it's the antithesis of a non-compete. She signs up for a 3-6 month contract with her employer. They have renewed her contract consistently for 4 years now, so she has confidence that this is fairly permanent work. However, for tax reasons (and as part of this contract), she must take other contracts, to prove that she does not have a sole employer who ought to pay her taxes for her. She said she normally works 40 hours a week, but certainly goes through periods of working 80-90 hours a week, as a result of having to juggle multiple contracts.
So how does a person get into this? She recommended to get started, work with a recruiter. Alternatively, there are writing firms that have stables of writers for regulatory/technical/medical writing, like Synchrogenix. Another option is to subscribe to job lists, like the Hitt list (available here). And this last website brings up some other interesting resources. Medical writers are certainly in demand these days, and while having a PhD is great preparation for this career, to help with the transition, Emma Hitt offers some short courses and workshops on running a med writing business, or med writing. Biotech Ink Insider is another resource for those in the field. The American Medical Writers Association also offers some workshops/short courses in similar subjects. Again, these aren't essential certifications, but if you are looking for a way to show on your CV that you are serious about this transition or just want to build your own confidence this might be a good route. I'd be very interested to hear from someone who has taken one of these courses to see what they think.
I recently joined the Council of Science Editors group on LinkedIn, and in one of those discussions these additional resources were listed. Exciting, right? Doesn't it make you think you could take on a whole new career??
National Association of Science Writers (http://nasw.org)
National Writers Union (http://www.nwu.org)
Society for Technical Communication (http://www.stc.org)
Health Sciences Communication Association (http://www.hesca.org)
Bay Area Editors' Forum (http://www.editorsforum.org)
American Copy Editors Society (http://www.copydesk.org/)
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
A bit more contract editing
One of the things that haunted me as I was finishing up in my grad school lab was that not having somewhere to go would mean I am unemployed, and it seems like a slippery slope from unemployed to unemployable. Yes, any rational person would say that taking some time to get the first job out of college is pretty normal. But look around at this economy, I can't wait for something to just show up! I gotta work! This is what drove me to contract editing- I started out editing manuscripts, but that petered out after the event I was recruited for. A quick look on LinkedIn showed me that there were three major groups that are in constant need of editors:
NoboLive
Write Science Right
American Journal Experts
These companies tend to help improve the readability of manuscripts, especially coming from overseas. I liked this work, I got to learn about new things, and it didn't take long to get a feeling of accomplishment. But, it doesn't really feel like my own accomplishment. Telling someone about how you hate their writing is hardly a challenge. It's good to be able to make some quick cash, but even though I know there are those who do this work full time, I don't think I could.
But, it did open the door for me to do some text book editing at Words and Numbers, which I found via LinkedIn. (I'm under NDA with them as well, but I am pretty sure it's ok for me to say that much.) Although it is similar work, someone else wrote something, I try to help them improve it. There is an educational bent, which I feel better about (I want to use my science in service, not just to make money), and the added challenge of pedagogy. Those last 50 pages were all technically correct, but if I were going to teach it, what would I test on? If I were the student, what would I study?
This may allow me to do some writing with them in the future, which I am interested to try. For now, I don't feel like this is my calling, if for no other reason than I am constantly on the prowl for contracts, which feels conspicuously like being on the job market, which I don't love.
Monday, November 21, 2011
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)