Lab Culture

Abbey, Anne, Dylan, Rachel, and Elisa attended the Northwest SDB Meeting at Friday Harbor Labs.

Abbey, Anne, Dylan, Rachel, and Elisa attended the Northwest SDB Meeting at Friday Harbor Labs.

Abbey and Rachel on the ferry to Friday Harbor.

Abbey and Rachel on the ferry to Friday Harbor.

Elisa giving her first poster presentation.

Elisa giving her first poster presentation.

Abbey expounding on the wonders of the electrical synapse.

Abbey expounding on the wonders of the electrical synapse.

Exploring the San Juan Islands with Abbey, Rachel, Elisa, and Anne.

Exploring the San Juan Islands with Abbey, Rachel, Elisa, and Anne.

Lab alums Anisha and Audrey with Adam in front of our starter lab back in 2016.

Lab alums Anisha and Audrey with Adam in front of our starter lab back in 2016.

Oregon isn’t green and doesn’t have hiking trails, who told you that?

Oregon isn’t green and doesn’t have hiking trails, who told you that?

Anne describing her ideas on synaptic balance.

Anne describing her ideas on synaptic balance.

Jen concentrating on an important experiment.

Jen concentrating on an important experiment.

Abbey FTW!

Abbey FTW!

Rachel learning about the coastal habitats.

Rachel learning about the coastal habitats.

A rare sighting of a PI ‘helping’ in lab. ;)

A rare sighting of a PI ‘helping’ in lab. ;)

Important coding project.

Important coding project.

Mission: A work in progress

One of the best explanations of the way to do science I’ve every heard, from the TED stage, from OkGo. And Dr. Anne Martin’s comment about the above video: “I … really enjoyed his talk because he reinforced something I've been talking about … for a little while, how there are really not geniuses in the way we traditionally talk about them, there are just people who are in the right place at the right time who are willing to put in the work and have an open mind for putting things together that you normally wouldn't think of putting together. And if you're going to inspire people to become scientists, it's a much easier sell if you take away the factor of "are you smart enough to do this" (which naturally comes with a lot of baggage and doubt) and replace it with, "are you willing to work hard (try a bunch of things, play in your sandbox) and have an open mind about how things come together." I think it plays to the creativity part of the equation of successful scientists as well, just being willing to try things others have written off as obvious no's or impossibilities. 

To understand the wiring of the brain - from genetics to cells to behavior
I came up with this list as I was thinking about the things that are great about being a scientist and doing research. Being a researcher, with all the ups and downs it entails, is a challenging and exciting business. We are lucky to have the chance to explore the world, and this is my current, and admittedly a bit stilted, way to create a framework that builds great lab culture. This process, and document, just like the research we do, will continue to evolve and change.

Principles to get us there
Science is fun, enjoy it.
Science is hard, get better at it.
Think big and take risks.

Discovery - Scientists need to push boundaries and explore the unknown. We all must dedicate ourselves to accepting uncertainty and finding new paths. The world is amazing, let’s find out how it works. Critical to this endeavor is feeling free to fail. See this important essay on the subject of failure in science.

Trust - Each scientist has important ideas. To find the best ideas we must critically analyze them. Put ideas forward. Don’t be defensive about ideas. Don’t be personal about ideas. Be critical about the idea, not the person. Ideas are the way to build scientific understanding and they must be robust against scrutiny. Each scientist is responsible to build ideas but also to build a community of trust to allow ideas to be freely exchanged.

Growth - Science is ever changing. Scientists must keep up and be agile. We must invent our own new methods to meet challenges. We must adopt the best practices of others. Each scientist must know the body of work related to their project. But also must know what is outside so they can take new approaches to get deeper into their science.

Ownership - Each scientist must know the ins-and-outs of their project and role. Scientists think hard about short-term goals and how to achieve them, and dream big about the possibilities of where things can go.

Quality - Scientists get to have a glimpse of the inner workings of the world. But to understand it we must be able to examine it, test it, and build models. Only good data allows us to understand the world. We must quantitate and reevaluate constantly. We have to attain and maintain and accept only the highest standards.

Balance - Scientists need to publish to stay in a job, but also find new ideas to stay alive. We must push forward quickly on projects that we can complete in the short-term (papers). At the same time we must build the projects that give us new insight (the next cool thing). The rule of thumb is 80/20, with 80% going to the now and 20% to the next.

Team - Each scientist is responsible for their project, but we all must maintain the mindset that there is no “that’s not my job”. If we recognize that we are all on a journey towards “scientific truth”, and each of us is at a different point along a trajectory of growth, then we can all help each other move forward.

Success- Quote from Liqun Luo, via Hui Zong - “There are three things necessary for success in science: brains, luck, and hard work. You only have control over one of them.”

Required reading!

A good friend of mine Minna Roh (if you're into cancer and cell biology check her out because she is really cool) shared this link with me from ASCB about being a leader. I think it applies to the lab head (me) but also to everyone in lab. Everyone should be creating their own leadership and independence at their own appropriate level.

Note that I don't like the term "staff" used in the ASCB article - and I hate the term "boss". The article above doesn't use "staff" in a negative way, but I think a better way to view it is that we are all colleagues at different parts of our own scientific trajectories.