NOTE:  During the interview for this profile, Dr. Milner noted that he had some exciting findings his lab was submitting for publication.  Those findings were published in the New England Journal of Medicine and highlighted in the NIH e-clips. 

Name: Joshua Milner

Current position: Tenure-track investigator, Laboratory of Allergic Diseases, NIAID, NIH

Location: Bethesda, MD

Time in current position: 2 years

Summer student project: Immunology research with Michael Lenardo at NIAID

Clinical fellow in allergy/immunology in William (Bill) Paul’s lab at NIAID

My story: I worked in Mike Lenardo’s lab for 3 summers right after high school. I had a few other internships, and when I did my residency after medical school, some of my projects involved collaborating with NIH researchers. Then I came back here for a fellowship in 2003.

Job search in a nutshell: The third year of my fellowship, I was approached by a major international medical center. I wasn’t anticipating that. For M.D. fellowships, that’s classically the time to get a job, but it was too early to get an NIH job. I liked what I was doing at NIAID enough that I was willing to wait to see if I could get a job here. I interviewed for that medical center job but I basically turned it down because it seemed too early. Still, I thought if I was approached by one place, I’d better contact others. I really didn’t know if I’d be able to stay at NIAID.

Exert a little pressure: I interviewed at several other places, and made it clear what they were offering. I also had mentors who were trying to help. The uncertainty was tough. There was not a clear path to become faculty here. They were finally able to cobble together a way for me to become a staff clinician and partner with a clinical lab, and I decided to stay for the time being.

Taking that last step: The next year, I was accepted to NIAID’s transition program for fellows who want to move to tenure-track. Right at that time, I kind of hit it big: I got a Nature paper. After that, I felt more confident, although I still didn’t know if I’d get a tenure-track position. But it turned out I only stayed in that transition program for a short time because NIAID conducted its first IC-wide tenure-track search—where the whole IC advertised and said you could pick the lab—and I and a few other folks were accepted. I didn’t think twice about accepting.

That was 2009. All told, it was a two-year process.

The upside: What I do specifically is patient-centered science. The opportunities to do that are so much better here because of the way the Clinical Center is set up. We get interesting, unique patients and look at their cell pathways and the biochemistry related to the conditions they have. By looking at these rare cases, we hope to learn more about common allergic diseases.

A major issue for me is work/life balance and spending time with family. I have 4 kids. The flexibility here is great. In an outside position, if nothing else, I’d be spending more time writing grants and performing mandatory, time-consuming clinical duties. Of course, you could have a great balance but not be doing good work. If I weren’t being productive, I’d have to reevaluate.

Necessary compromises: The career path in academia was clearer. There was the attraction of being in major medical centers that focus on clinical immunology, where there’s a tremendous intellectual and scientific community and where I had made lots of relationships. Certain types of patients are also much more available out there. Also, here, things can work more like individual fiefdoms. I’d like to push to have more interaction between labs and a more academic-type environment here.

The transition: As a fellow, I was just doing 1 or 2 projects in another person’s lab. As a tenure-track researcher I had other people doing projects for me. It was a quantum leap difference. Now I am a manager of people and of a program. I’m very extroverted so I wasn’t as worried about that. Being fairly young, I was a little worried about hiring people older than me. And I clearly remember walking through my empty lab and saying, “What the heck do I put on these shelves?” I was petrified. But it was a quick transition. I talked to more experienced folks who were either a few years ahead of me or who were far senior.

It would have been useful to have different templates for startup purchasing. The instruction on how to hire a postdoc often comes after you’ve hired a postdoc. There is mentorship about how to get tenure, and rightly so, but not about how to set up a lab. I recommend asking lots of questions of lab chiefs about what they do. Because I was from here, I was able to do this a little more informally.

Full circle: My lab is 2 doors down from Mike Lenardo’s where I worked back then. Now I have my own summer students. Frankly, it takes work! I now have an even greater appreciation for the people who took me on when I was a student. But I want to make sure I have them because that’s how I got my start. I’ve had 3 so far, and I’m starting to get “repeat offenders.”

Make it your own: People [at the NIH who are looking to make the move into tenure-track positions here] should show they know how to use the power of the NIH intramural program and show what their unique mark is in using those resources. I had been working with mice as a fellow. The research that led to the Nature paper was in patients. I hadn’t done human research, so I found a lab that worked with patient samples all the time. I brought together different groups, which is what was needed to do something this translational. You shouldn’t just expect that if you do good work, you’re going to be rewarded; you have to do your work. Be creative, independent, and make it your own. Chart your own course.

Joshua can be contacted through the OITE alumni database.

We have conducted a random poll around the OITE and with fellows who have recently left.  The results are clear:  Having a conversation with their PI about the next step can be scary.  You may be unsure that you have enough data to actually say this is the year that you will move on.  If you are going to be a PI you may not be sure if will be able to take part of your project with you.  Perhaps you do not know what reaction you will get if you say you want to take a different career path than staying in academic research.  All of these factors can persuade you just to not have the conversation at all. 

One thing we know, is that this conversation if often more scary in our mind than in reality.  We have expectations of what the PI will say, and then when the conversation actually takes place it typically goes much better than we had played it out in our heads.  Most PIs actually have good intentions and just want you to be successful in your career.  Before you start booing, we are aware that some PIs are tougher than others….BUT many of us suspect that our PI will not approve of our choices, but we never actually give them a chance to have a conversation about where we plan to go next.

So, here is a way to start. 

• Make an appointment to sit down with your PI in January and state that in 2012 you want to start making moves for you career.
• Have this conversation away from the research group (think the coffee shop). 
• Plan ahead to make sure you get what you need out of the conversation. 
  • Do you need to discuss what part of your project you can take with you if you leave?
  • Can you discuss the direction you would like to see your own lab go in as you move into your own PI job?
  • Who do you need to meet to make your career dreams come true? AND does he/she know any of the people and can they connect you?
• Be bold!  This is YOUR career. 

Your PI may not have the knowledge or network to help you, especially if you are moving away from the bench.  If he/she doesn’t, that is OK!  You have many other resources around you.  However, you might be surprised by who your PI knows in different fields and at different companies.  Your PI wants you to be successful.  Not just because that is part of being a mentor.  But also, because successful alumni/alumnae reflect positively on a PI, both for recruiting top postdocs to their lab and for positive reviews from their departments. 

If it really is not your PI that you want to talk with, consider who else you might be able to discuss your career with.  Do you have a mentor outside of your lab?  Have you considered talking with your Lab Chief or Institute Training Director?  While your PI likely knows you the best and, you also need to find someone you are comfortable with and who can have an honest conversation about your career path.

We all know that resolutions often do not see success beyond the second week of February.  Saying that you are going to make your career a priority in 2012 is not enough.  You should also make a plan for how to do that.  Below we have sketched out a timeline of things to do in 2012 to make sure that you are ready to face that next step. 

January:  Meet with your PI to discuss your career.  Yes, it can be scary.  We will be posting next week with some tips to conquer that fear and get the most out of such a meeting.

February:   Meet with a Career Counselor.  We have two on staff here at OITE, and they are really good at their jobs. 

March:  Create a “Networking Map” and update and improve you LinkedIn presence. 

April:  Use a conference to build your network. 

May:  Attend the annual NIH Career Symposium and use that information to figure out what is next.

June:  Set up at least two informational interviews.  If you need some tips on how to go about that, check out our blog post here.

July:  Make a decision on the where you want your career to go.  Then, figure out holes you still have in your CV or Resume and find ways to fill them.

August:  Create your Job package.  Whether for an academic position, a postdoc, or a career transition, you will want to have a competitive application.  OITE staff is well equipped to help you with this process.

September:  Practice and improve your interviewing skills.   

October:  Be prepared to negotiate a job offer.  Know what to ask for and how to improve your chances of getting it.

November:  Prepare for the transition to your new job.

December:  Celebrate your Success!  Even if you have not found that perfect job yet, you have stuck to a plan that will benefit your career in the long run.  Be proud of that and take some time to pat yourself on the back…then get back to work. 

This list may contain topics with which you are uncomfortable or unfamiliar.  Do not fret!  We will be checking back in throughout the year with tips and advice on how to be successful following this career development calendar.   Also, you can always write us a comment, or contact us through LinkedIn with questions and concerns.  We would love to hear from you.

Your job search begins before you start looking for a job:

“The best advice I ever received is related to networking.  Think of your network as a bank.  When it is time to search for a job, you will need to make a withdrawal from your network. You need your network to work for you.  The key questions will be:  Have you invested enough in your network so you can make a withdrawal?  Did you invest in a network that will provide a good return on your investment?  

Investments can be as simple as attending someone’s seminar and asking an insightful question to volunteering to lead a project that will assist their career yet provide you invaluable experience.  So next time you hear the phrase network, network, network; think invest, invest, invest!”

“The bottom line:  A timely volunteer effort can significantly improve your professional network, while also providing relevant experience and sometimes leading directly to a job.”

Be prepared for an interview:

“Research, research, research.  Do your homework on any company to which you are applying.  This will enable to you be ready for that “what do you know about our company?” question.  Do not think that it’s unimportant.  Your answer will show initiative and solid interest.”

“Regarding interviews, someone once told me not to worry about thinking for a few moments before answering a question. Just say, ‘Great question.  Do you mind if I take a moment to think about it?’  Then genuinely think about it (probably for no more than 30 seconds) and respond. I did this once and I think it went over very well.”

Ready or not, do it anyway:

“There is never a good time to make life changes, so now is as perfect a time as later.  This piece of advice sticks with me to this day, and was a present from a faculty member during my graduate work.  He said it as I was exploring the pros/cons of getting married during grad school, but it became a mantra during my job searches later on.  As I was deciding on positions after postdoc this advice helped me to put in perspective that the transition is tough, but the goal is to keep moving forward to make my life what I want it to be.”

“The best advice I received was from the provost at University of North Carolina.  We met for an informational interview and to talk about my long-term goals. I said I was thinking of making a move in a few years and he said to apply now, even if I didn’t feel ready.  You never really feel ready or qualified enough. I took the advice and applied for two jobs. I got one and withdrew from the other search.  And, here I am.”

If you have received the gift of great advice, please “regift” it to all of us in our comment sections!  Happy Holidays!

Name: Mona Dvir-Ginzberg

Current position: Lecturer, Institute of Dental Science, Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Location: Israel

Time in current position: 2 years

Postdoc: Histone-modifying enzymes involved in the pathology of osteoarthritis with David Hall at NIAMS

A change in path: I was very lucky during my postdoc to have made some novel observations. But I was held back by thinking it was way too early to look for jobs and that my publication record was insufficient. After my first publication, I felt more confident to start pursuing a position. At that point, I wasn’t thinking about academia at all. I wanted applicability and financial security, and industry seemed very appealing, so I began interviewing in the States and in Israel with several biotech companies.

It turned out some of the requirements did not suit my expectations. I was drawn to R&D, but some of the projects in the industry already had a product which only needed to be optimized. One company had outsourced all R&D. Others had a lot of documents and regulatory affairs, which appeared to me as being extremely technical and not very creative work.

A few friends persuaded me to look into a career in academia. In the beginning I was hesitant since I knew it would be tough and the hours would be crazy. On the other hand, the opportunity to interact with students and peers and engage in scientific research was very alluring. I could create my own research theme and still keep it applicative toward discovering new therapies. I began thinking that it might be in my reach. I started putting together an application package and sending it to suitable positions. A mentor in OITE helped me perfect my package and gave me some helpful tips on how to handle an interview. She gave me some tough love, but she did a terrific job preparing me for an academic career. Without her, I wouldn’t have a clue about interviewing or writing application packages and grants.

I learned that if you go into industry for the money and aren’t fulfilled by the work, you won’t have a long-lasting career and will feel dissatisfied. You need to look for jobs that fulfill your core needs and passions in science. It’s a metamorphosis you have to go through on your own.

How I got my job: I applied to positions in the U.S., Canada and Israel. I didn’t think I’d get anywhere with my package—I still thought I wasn’t an attractive candidate. But I heard back that I was being considered at two universities in the U.S. and Israel.

I was invited to give a talk at Hebrew University of Jerusalem. They were looking for someone with a specific expertise. At that point the institute had another candidate with a better publication record than I did. But they liked the overall impression I gave in my interview, my experience in biochemistry and epigenetics could let them open new venues in their curriculum, and my research experience complemented much of their existing research. Although I was unaware of the competition, I requested a relatively modest startup package. Three months after my interview, I was notified that the committee had unanimously accepted my application.

Surprises along the way: At a conference, someone from theU.S. university department I’d applied to let me in as to what they were looking for. They needed someone who could teach undergraduate engineering and had a strong engineering background. I hadn’t realized there were considerations other than publications. Each department’s needs are different; even if your research is in line with theirs, you may not fit other requirements.

Similarly, I gained the impression that the biotech industry doesn’t emphasize publications, and that sometimes having too many publications may be a hurdle.

A difficult adjustment: I found some things very difficult in the beginning. I needed to get a lot done. I had to set up my lab. There wasn’t a vacant space for me when I arrived, and I didn’t receive my start up package right away. I was the only woman in the institute, which was at times challenging. But the hardest thing was that I had to do it alone. As an independent PI, you’re completely isolated from the sort of community of friends you have when you’re a postdoc. I was literally an ocean apart from my friends in the U.S. The fact that you are assigned a mentor and have an institute head helps you deal with many issues, but it’s not the same level of communication you have with your colleagues and friends. You are simply expected to handle the load, and you don’t want to complain too much. 

Find your support: I made it a priority to make time for my family. They energized me—they filled my batteries so I could go back in the ring. My family is my support. My mother, father, husband and children who are excited to see what I do in the lab. They keep me going through tough times. And my institute has a tremendous group of people who are very supportive and professional. They got together to help me out when I didn’t get any grants. That’s a great example of camaraderie and it shows me I work with people who want me as part of their team. You don’t want to go somewhere you’re not wanted.

Day-to-day: Now, most of my day is dedicated toward writing papers and grants and mentoring students. I have two students and a published paper; I have another paper accepted and one under review. Sometimes I indulge and join my students at the bench. I really love doing that. As part of my work, I need to teach. I teach undergrads in dental medicine and advanced students in Master’s and Ph.D. courses. I’d had a little experience teaching science enrichment for high school kids. I loved it and had no problem doing it. It’s very exhilarating. I love interacting with an audience and listening to their thoughts and ideas.

During the day unexpected responsibilities get thrown to your desk like budgeting, committee attendance, invited talks, and reviewing grants and papers. I try to plan it, but most of the time I don’t know how my day will pan out.

Essential skills: Multitasking. Working efficiently throughout the day so you can try to make time for things other than science. Trying to be courteous and patient to all the people who come to you with questions and requests. Not to lose your temper. And not taking on too many responsibilities if you think you’re maxed out. Learn to say no. We’re human. We can’t do everything.

Facing the challenge: In the beginning, I wasn’t sure I wanted to go back to Israel. There are fewer resources compared to the NIH and U.S. extramural. But it occurred to me that I should turn it around for the better. There are so many talented, well-published, well-acclaimed scientists in Israel and it would be great to work with them. Here you are more prone to collaborate with people. Because of limited resources, you improve to some degree your creativity. You are always thinking of ways to overcome various hurdles. There is so much open range. Many times I have attended conferences where I may have been the only attendee from Israel doing basic research in osteoarthritis. I want to lay this foundation. I see it as a challenge.

Mona can be contacted through the OITE alumni database.

Make it short and to the point:  The key principle here is respecting the reader’s time.  Everyone is busy.  No one really has the time to read a long drawn out e-mail that addresses every aspect of who you are, what you want to do with your life and the role that they can play.  Keep your initial communication on point.  Introduce yourself.  Explain that you are interested in the job that they do and how they got there.   Then, ask them for the interview.  Your entire e-mail should be no more than two short paragraphs. 

Have a clear and direct subject:  When sending an e-mail, never leave the subject line blank.  When you are contacting someone who will not recognize your name or e-mail address, make sure your purpose is clear from the subject line.  A subject line such as, “Request for Informational Interview” clearly states your purpose in writing.  If you are being referred by an acquaintance or friend of the reader, you can include your contact’s name in the subject line by writing, “Referred by John Doe:  Informational Interview.” 

Be detailed:  This may seem contradictory to making it short and to the point.  However, you can be detailed and to the point.  When you ask for the informational interview, be specific when it comes to their time commitment.  Let them know you want 15 to 30 minutes of their time.  Suggest a time frame in which to conduct the interview, such as “within the next couple of weeks,” or “between date A and date B.”  This indicates you have thought this through and shows that you are organized.  Also, show that you know something about their position or company.  Stating, “I want to be a Program Officer” only shows you know the title.  You can demonstrate a little knowledge of the field by including a comment like, “I am interested in a career that allows me to not only stay current in cutting edge research, but also be a part of moving research forward in my particular field of interest.”  However, keep it to one or two sentences.  Remember you are trying to make it short and to the point.

End with appreciation:  Even if they never respond, you should state your appreciation for them taking the time to read your e-mail.  It is amazing how far a simple “thank you” will go.  So, end your message with “I appreciate you taking the time to read my e-mail and respond.  I look forward to hearing from you soon.” 

As with all your communication, make sure that your e-mail is professional and grammatically correct.  For some tips on writing a professional e-mail, visit https://www.training.nih.gov/writing_professional_e-mail.  Also, if you want to see an example of a cold e-mail and more tips on writing an effective one, check out this post from “Career Rocketeer.”

First you should understand the purpose of an informational interview.  It is to gain information, not a job.  You are asking a person who works in a field, a position or a company of interest to you about their job and career path.  The interview is not about you and your aspirations.  It is about the person you are interviewing.  However, a successful informational interview will build your knowledge base and your network by at least one person. 

So, how do you set up an informational interview?  The first step is to identify someone you want to interview.  Once you have done that, you will need to make contact with them.  The current convention for first contact is an e-mail.  In general, make it concise and to the point.  You want to respect their time.  State clearly that you are writing to ask them for an informational interview to learn more about them, their work and their career path.  Ask to meet in person or to speak on the phone for fifteen to thirty minutes.  Assure them you will not take up any more of their time and then be sure to honor that. 

Once you have set up the interview, take some time to write out your goals for the conversation and some key questions to ask.  A good list of objectives and questions can be found on the OITE website by clicking here.  However, do not go into the interview set on asking the questions in a precise order.  Let the conversation flow naturally.  If they give an answer that really intrigues you, ask them to elaborate on that particular subject.  Let the flow of the interview dictate the direction it takes.  The more comfortable the person you are interviewing is the more forthcoming and honest they will be. 

Ending an informational interview often can feel a little awkward.  A good transition to ending the interview is to ask them if they know anyone else whom you would benefit from talking to.  If they do, ask them if you can use their name when introducing yourself.  As obvious as it sounds, be sincerely appreciative of their willingness to share with you and express that gratitude at the end of the interview.  Also, send an e-mail after the interview to say thank you. 

Note:  It is often helpful to have a mutual acquaintance that can connect you with the person you wish to interview.  That is not always possible and certainly isn’t necessary.  However, if you do not know the person, you will have to write a “cold e-mail.”  We will go over tips for writing a cold e-mail in a special Friday post this week.

Name: Sandeep Dayal

Current position: Health science policy analyst, Office of Scientific Program and Policy Analysis, NIDDK

Location: Bethesda, MD

Time in current position: 1 year

Postdoc: Role of chromatin remodeling in class-switch recombination with Gary Felsenfeld and Marty Gellert at NIDDK

Day-to-day: We analyze the science that goes on at NIDDK and make it accessible to people, i.e. Congress as they decide on funding. We support the institute director. I write in lay language a lot. I work on things like meeting reports, admin reports, PowerPoints and briefing materials. I analyze data sometimes. I work a lot with the extramural staff and the communications office.

Almost everyone in the office has a Ph.D. and some postdoc experience. It’s necessary to have people with strong science backgrounds to quickly digest very technical material. It’s actually kind of intimidating! Everyone’s really smart.

Essential skills: The main skill that stands out is writing. You have to really love to write, and writing in lay language is not the same as what you write in the lab. That part was kind of new to me. You really have to understand the science inside and out to write for the public and maintain the accuracy. It’s a constant learning process.

It also takes a little bit of humility. You have to be okay with people editing your work. In the beginning, documents would come back all bloody red with tracked changes and I was like, “Oh, my God, I thought I was a good writer.” And lots of things I do don’t have my name on them. You have to be okay with people not knowing you wrote something.

Adjustments: In the lab, I was used to being pretty independent. The amount of interaction with other people in this job is just so much more: working in a group to discuss ideas, managing projects, delegating responsibilities, being diplomatic in how you handle things, being tactful and respectful of people’s time and effort. On the other side, you spend a lot of time sitting in your office and writing.

The scope of the science is completely different. In my postdoc, I worked on one region of the genome. I knew every single modification of that histone. In this kind of job, you never do anything in depth. It’s much broader. One day it’s X-ray crystallography of a drug interacting with a protein and the next it’s large-scale trials of whether vending machines affect childhood obesity rates. I love it, but it wouldn’t be for everyone.

Another difference is deadlines. I was told in the interview that I’d have to work within deadlines, but I guess I didn’t fully appreciate what that does for your work when you’re juggling three or four or five projects. You have to work quickly and budget your time carefully. You have to get things done to 80-90% of your satisfaction and then let them go.

Sometimes I do miss doing experiments and analyzing data. I miss the flexibility of lab life. On the other hand, I work 8:30 to 5:00 most days. There’s more structure. I don’t miss failed experiments or troubleshooting! The way I see it, every job has its mini-preps—the little jobs you don’t want to do. But if the fun stuff outweighs the boring stuff, you’re in a good place.

A path in hindsight: When I started my postdoc, probably like most people I was thinking about PI positions and academia. It didn’t take long to realize that maybe I don’t want to do this long-term. I was watching people smarter than me at the bench struggle. You have to really love it. There was something missing for me.

Since grad school, I’d been doing all these things outside the lab. I was president of my grad school student association and I started my own journal club. At the NIH I joined Felcom. It’s all stuff you’d call leadership. I talked to lots of people at the NIH, and what kept coming up was policy. I took a look back and saw that all the things I’d been doing were good preparation for a career in policy.

Network, network, network: Start with your friends. It sounds silly, but it’s true. They’re your immediate networking circle. Then expand on that. Go for coffee, send emails, make phone calls, go on “informational interviews.” I used the contacts I made at Felcom. I learned of this job because two people gave me the heads up. They knew I was looking, and they said I should apply. I got an industry offer through networking with people I knew in grad school.

If you have people who can put your resumé in front of the right eyes, it really helps. It won’t get you the job, but it’ll get your resumé looked at.

Take a chance: I almost didn’t apply for this job. I didn’t have direct policy experience. But people said apply, apply, so, okay. I sat down with the person whose job I would be filling—she was moving overseas—and tried to really understand it, to see if it was what I wanted to do. And it was. Then it was a matter of navigating the federal government hiring process. I got through the first screen, so my resumé was looked at. Then in the first interview I met everyone in the office and it was a great fit. There was a second interview with different people. For policy, personality really matters because there’s so much interaction between people. They offered me the job.

Making the choice: I applied to industry positions, too, which is like 180 degrees from policy. I think I would have liked industry, but this appealed to me more. An industry job I was offered in Connecticut paid a lot more, and I had to wrestle with that. But I really love D.C., and I had family reasons to stay.

Beyond the lab: Try to get extra skills under your belt outside the lab. Everyone’s really smart and good in the lab, and on paper, most of us look roughly the same when it comes to the science. Sometimes you’re lucky or creative and you have top-tier publications, but that’s not the case for everyone. You have to find other things to stand out. There’s things you can do to make yourself marketable beyond pipetting. It’s really good to have leadership skills. I would encourage anyone interested in policy to get involved in the community.

The right fit: I think this is where I’m going to lay my roots. I’ve gotten to know people in different ICs, and the cultures are different. I’m really pleased with my office. It’s fun to do policy at the NIH.

Sandeep can be contacted through the OITE alumni database.

Many of us are trained as research scientists.  Others are NIH employees committed to education and training.  We remain involved in biomedical research while providing the research tools into the often overlooked part of your scientific life…the career part.  We understand the pressures to publish and the long and often unpredictable hours of the lab.  We appreciate the sacrifices you make to further science and to provide better treatments and cures for diseases.  It is that great appreciation that drives us to do what we do:  Help you have the successful career you desire.

We meet with many fellows either through our workshops or in one-on-one meetings to help you improve your career prospects, in any job sector.  We strive to take our understanding of the dynamics of lab life and couple that with our knowledge of career development to help provide the tools and guidance needed to succeed in whatever career path you choose.  We try to provide a positive influence and inspiration.  We help you prepare to become a PI by helping with your application package all the way through negotiating the offer.  We provide training on breaking into industry, from crafting the resume, networking tools, and transitioning to the new job.  And we also present career options along with ways to gain additional skill sets so you can pursue any career that excites you. 

Through helping others reach career goals in science, we get to be a part of advancing biomedical research, growing the broader workforce, and helping people lead fulfilling lives.  When all the pieces come together and we are able to help a fellow achieve career success, it is like getting that final bit of data that completes a paper.  We are grateful to be able to participate in your success.

Current position: Research scientist at Johnson & Johnson

Location: San Diego, CA

Time in current position: 4 months

Postdoc: Molecular neuropharmacology of dopamine receptors with David Sibley at NINDS

My story: When I came to NINDS, I didn’t know what I was going to do [for a career]. I thought it would all be unveiled with time. Looking back, I should have had more “career intellect.”

I knew I didn’t want to go into academia. Figuring out what I did want was the hard part. I knew I needed to get closer to helping people. I wanted to get more into drug discovery. Pharma was in line with my interests. It was more big-picture; okay, so you have the target, but what happens after that, how does it go down the pipeline, at what point does it get to the patient, how is it helping them, what went wrong, what works. The other thing is that funding was being cut. This was 2007, and the market was crashing. I had colleagues with their own labs who were struggling. It wasn’t an environment where I could thrive.

Job search in a nutshell: One and a half years out of completing my term, I knew I needed to look for jobs. I started going to seminars through OITE and going on informational interviews. Then I got more serious. I did a ton of reading. I did more extensive job searches and tapped into every connection I could find, even if there was no position immediately available. That included things like mixers and roundtables after work. I had connections with a lot of embassies through the Visiting Fellows program. I used Fogarty. I worked with people who were in the medical field outside the NIH for additional perspective on my CV and so forth.

The thing is not to feel embarrassed but to let people know you’re looking for a job. Don’t cross over into hounding, but mention it in conversation. You just need that one person who will put in the word for you.

Challenges for a non-citizen: I wasn’t a citizen, and I wasn’t a green card holder. That puts another whole dimension on the job search. I had a J1 visa and tried to change my status to H1B. It’s very challenging because you’re only there to train for a certain amount of time (5 years) and then you need to go back to your home country for 2 years (although that can be waivered in some countries). You need to get someone to sponsor you. It all takes time. You really need to get up to speed as soon as possible about what you need to do.

Visa status is not a mark against us, but there are some companies and science organizations that won’t sponsor you. You need to take that into account when you’re looking at jobs. There will be a disclosure at the bottom of the job description if it’s open to U.S. citizens only. If not, it needs to be brought up at some point during the interview. NIH being in DC, the majority of positions require permanent residency or U.S. citizenship. The likelihood is you’ll have to relocate. I cast a wide net. I was willing to move to wherever the best job was.

It was a huge hurdle for me, to be perfectly honest. You aren’t just up against people who want to do the job you’re interested in, but people who are citizens and who have experience. I learned that you have to really tailor your CV to what the job requirements are. The experience you don’t have, you look for what you can substitute. For example, if they were looking for people-management and team skills, I may not have done that as part of my job, but I was co-chair for the Visiting Fellows Committee, organizing events and teams. I didn’t mention visa status until the interview. Usually it comes up with HR. At the end of the interview I would say something like, “Oh, I wanted to let you know, is this a problem, is the company willing to sponsor?” Usually, unless they’ve disclosed otherwise, it’s not issue.

Stepping stone: I was getting interviews but not job offers. The answer was invariably that the other person had industry experience. So I ended up doing a second postdoc in industry at Eli Lilly. It was a completely different line of research, using techniques I’d never used before. The postdoc did three main things for me: it gave me industry experience, it added new techniques to my resume, and it involved a company that was ready and willing to sponsor my visa.

How I got my job: A colleague of mine from back at the NIH received a job announcement through a recruiter. She didn’t want it, but she thought it was a good fit for me and forwarded it to me. It was a great fit. I contacted the recruiter, and within a week I was set up for a phone interview.

Day-to-day: There are a lot more team meetings and a lot more projects. Just about every project that needs a drug crosses my desk. I’ve got an incredible amount of diversity. I like the collaborative nature of the work. I’m still doing bench science, and there’s freedom to look for collaborations outside industry.

What’s next: I’ll probably take more of a management route, away from the bench. I am very interested in the managerial side of pharma.

Elizabeth can be contacted through the OITE alumni database.