in defence of the over thinker

I'm known to be a slight over thinker by some of my friends. I'm also known to be a good problem identifier and to a fair extent problem solver. To me, it's not far fetched to think that they are linked.

Anyway, I'm also known to be somewhat of a slight realist (some would call it pessimist) with a taste of cynicism. Even though my interaction with people have a good portion of unrealistic optimism involved with it, and hope - lots of hope. (For the Xth time I'm asking the faculty member to send me the things we're waiting for since it's crucial.... and others don't think they will do it, but I prevail and lo and behold - sometimes it works.)  It's quite possibly most obvious in my inability to discard re-evaluate some of my friends/acquaintances when they disappoint, not just me, but themselves over and over again and I still think that "it can be different this next time". I guess I might be a sucker for "hope that people will change".

Well, my point today was to mention that there is something to be understood about certain of us "over thinkers". Maybe we have experienced a few things more than "the average person" and these experiences make us ponder and wonder a wee bit extra at the time when a more complex situation comes around and makes us less likely to jump on the band wagon and go "yey, happy happy times, lets go".

You see, it's like that time when you hear people proclaim "we will be forever, nothing can tear us apart". Yes, and then one of them loses their job and economic hardship ensues and all of a sudden things aren't as easy anymore.
Or the new graduate student proclaims "I would never write the paper without knowing that I will be the first author" and you think 'well, it's not that clear cut and have you really talked to your PI about it?'.
Or the post doc who starts their position but haven't asked for "how long they are guaranteed a place in the lab (how much money/what kind of grant) and they presume that the PI will float them for at least another year after that".

These three examples aren't great, and they are fairly different, but they do point to something that the over thinker will do - mull over various outcomes, potential problems and (hopefully) possible solutions and then move into the situation better prepared than the "non-thinker".

My main issue with it? (being the over thinker) That I wonder if there isn't times when the over-thinker creates the problems that doesn't have to happen and when introducing these problems/solutions make them more likely to occur.... That things would've been perfectly good if the over thinker had been exchanged to a "happy go lucky person" who might not know about the potential disaster but then again, maybe the disaster wouldn't happen because they wouldn't even steer the boat that way? (There is also the whole discussion about "letting people make their own mistakes and learn from them", which is a tangent discussion to this over-thinking-one.)

Then I rethink (ha) and look at a lot of situations that have happened around me last couple of years an think that maybe that is just my own cynical hope to motivate why I don't want to be cast in the problem/solution finder role for both work and life. (this 'role' and being expected to be the person that pulls the emergency break when others would've happily toted along even when they should've seen the cliff coming up). The "what ifs" are getting fairly complicated and I would like to just step away from the whole thing and just "let it sort out on its own". Alas, I know that it's not working like that so I need to be a grown up and take responsibility for situations, regardless of how inadequately I feel I know the answers to all the "maybe" and "what ifs". After all, it's in my nature as the over thinker to do this. As long as I keep remembering "there are no certainties in life, just a lot of opportunities and choices".




(I'm starting to realise why I stopped writing blogposts earlier this year, it's probably obvious to you too dear reader?! The language is boxy, the sentences chopped off and the point lost in translation. Alas, the only way forward is through - as in "practice more and write", right?!)

abusive relationships - football and science combined

I'm been thinking about this for a bit, especially since the NFL "issue" came up a few weeks back with certain players being investigated/charged with domestic violence an abuse and the subsequent punishment (or not) by said organization. Not so much discussion about the punishment by law as I would've thought. More about the comparison between "how harsh a punishment for smoking pot vs hitting a significant other". I have a lot of feelings about this, both the dual punishment system and the "how many games is it worth" as well as the law investigations and media hype where everyone seems to oscillate between "do nothing" and "off with their heads".

However, last week the discussion at the lab took another turn since we talked more about abuse in a general context and then it spread into talking about lab culture and abuse by or with PI permission..... A lot of it was between some of us older* in the game compared to the graduates/MD fellows/other ppl who might not have seen and experienced as much. I recalled talking to a few of them earlier this year when a technician left their job and ended it on a bad note by lying about "what really had happened" and me explaining that you can't always presume that people tell the truth (especially not when the person in question has been breaking regulations, being warned, helped etc for many months) and that there is always more beneath the surface and what people let on. Ah well, I digress.

About the idea of abuse, that it is by a person you are depending on (or love) that makes it difficult to act on. That you aren't just "leaving because they are passing a line" but staying around "so how bad can it really be"? It's a fairly common** thing after all, I would say that the difference is in the severity (and possibly if it is physical or not). After all, it surely seems like the physical abuse is something that make people take it more serious, not to mention actually seeing the physical (point in case; when the first video surfaced people seemed upset that a man dragged his unconscious girlfriend out of an elevator. He admitted to hitting her, thus rendering her unconscious. However, it was only after people SAW him hitting that they really claimed outrageous upset and said "it's horrible". I could mention similar things about the movie of the school bus incidents ("Bully") and what people really feel after they HEAR all the degrading comments to one person on the bus although "it's just words so it's not that bad"..... but after hearing it in context something might click?)

A person piped up the other day that they are not allowed to wear t-shirts in the lab ("it's not professional clothing") but are encouraged to wear nice looking open toe shoes (hello regulations?). Same person tells the technicians how useless they are and not as great as the former tech in a place far-far away, they see if as "encouragement"... Another person wrote on their blog about a PI who required their post-docs to wear frames (glasses without glasses) for presentations (only the female ones though). Another example would be the post-doc who worked in the lab where the PI slept with another post-doc but people thought post-doc A rather than B and started acting on it. The list goes on....

Again, a lot of it is probably not technically*** abuse but I would think it falls under bullying or more likely unprofessional conduct. It also links these things together since there seems to be a few assumptions and correlations without explicitly stating them. One such thing would be "a great athlete is also a great person" or "great at their sports=good person" and the whole "role model spiel" (for the kids! always for the kids to look up to). Similar thing with highly successful scientists, "they are successful = surely their lab is a great place to work" and "strive to become as great as them". Or "surely they wouldn't do anything like that, they are successful so there is no need to act petty/mean/etc".

I personally would really love if it could be ok to state "they are great at what they do" and keep it separate from "they are great as a person/role model overall" or implying that if you are great at what you work with, you somehow have been a great person to become that good working person. I mean, John McEnroe was a great tennis player but maybe not a "super-nice-and-wonderful-person-all-the-time" and back in the day I don't remember anyone saying that it was a problem distinguishing between them.

I honestly don't remember where I was going with this, it's been a while since I wrote blog posts so I would need to get back on track with "point to make". Maybe I just wanted to rant a little about the annoyment I feel when people state "they should just leave their partner" without seemingly understand that it is not as easy as just getting up and leaving. Nor is it to leave a lab when things are bad since "you need their recommendation for future jobs". And most of all, people are great at denial. "It's probably me, I shouldn't take it like that. After all, they are probably trying to help me realize that I really need to change".

I'm hoping that we can move the discussion back to more reasonable grounds and avoid the black-white ("never play/do science again" vs "snow white and a perfect person"). After all, we are all humans with more or less flaws and the likelihood that new problem situations will be discovered increases if the discussion is more levelheaded than chopping the head off, and also that there will be help to give and awareness for new people.


*being a post-doc or technician for more than 5 years, in more than one lab/institute
** my own definition of common... "not that unheard of"or there is at least one lab in a department that people tend to avoid due to issues in the lab
***technically=punishable by law

failure to post - pain

I can't believe it's been since May that I posted. Where has the time gone? Well, I actually know since I've been moping and whining all of July due to an injury that makes it far near impossible to sleep and move around or even sit. Nowadays I'm not allowed to run or jog, or work out with my glutes at all. Let it be known, there is not much exercise to be done without the glutes in the equation (biceps and triceps curls.... pretty much the thing).

So, all in all - I've spent too much time moping (no sleep) and working and thinking about all the posts that I want to write. I miss writing, the structuring of thoughts and the whole "finish a piece and press publish".

Best thing to get on it is to just do it though, right? Now I just need to sort out that "difference between private and personal experience" - not been too good at that before.

I thought about making a poll on "which subject I should go with first" but that seems a little too hot for attention so I will just try and keep my idea of posting at least twice a month.

For now, I need to go and do some more rehab training and hope that this pain will stop soon. It's been too long....

/end moping and whining phd

jealousy

This American Mother's day is a very good reminder for me that jealousy is something I really have to work on every day. It's easy to get engulfed in "oh they* have it all**, why can't I have that too***". And those thoughts really don't lead anywhere good.

Not to mention that it usually (at least for me) leads to forgetting all the things I do have and what I'm grateful for.

To be honest, I'm struggling sometimes****. Sometimes it's all I can do but wonder why a few things in my life points me to the sneaky suspision that I made a huge mistake a few turns back. Then I remember that it's not going to be helpful at all to keep looking back.

Only good thing with looking back is if you take the lesson and move forward and avoid making the wrong decision next time.

Simple to say. Hard to do.

But for now, I feel good for not missing a beat and being happy with one of my friends when she told me she is pregnant. She is happy, I'm happy she's happy. All better.

It's just a reminder to read about the dog who wanted the bone that the other dog had, therefore open his jaws to get it - thus ending up with nothing. Losing the bone into the lake since it was a mirror reflection of himself.
Ergo, focusing too much on what others have make you lose the things you do have. You can't blame a dog for not knowing, but I can't claim that ignorance.


*they=people I read about, interact with, work with, anyone who posts on facebook and twitter (seeing a trend here...)
all=things I get caught up with thinking I want too, what others want, what I might want
too=extra things and wants that clouds me realizing what I do have, what I don't want to miss out on, what I don't want to lose
****sometimes=more often than I want

why you always need Plan B (and C and D)

This last week I got reminded yet again why it's imperative that you always, always, have a plan B. (Yes, having a pack of Plan B  - what the Americans call the "morning after pill" - at home if you are sexually active and not in the mood for offspring might also apply here.)

It's been mentioned a bunch of times when talking about career plans, especially for post-docs* who say they know they want to go into academia and TT.
"Please have a plan B if the way of getting into a SLAC or Top tier university doesn't happen." 
"Please assess your skills and keep that CV shiny in case something else comes up and you don't have that TT job offer."
"Please think of a Plan C and Plan D, just in case Plan B doesn't work."

And for the love of importance, if you are on a work visa in another country (like a foreign worker here in the USA), please keep those plans B, C and D in place since too often, if you job is terminated, you have a very short time to stay in the country before they kick you out.

All of this reared its head this last couple of months. Not for me per se this time, but in my vicinity and I ended up with damage control that will continue for another couple of weeks.

First of all, let's set the stage for the idea that you work in a state that is "right to work". This means that at any given time you can be let go of your job. Of course, you can always sue for "wrongful termination" and the company can always give you a pay out to stop that, but for many of us who don't keep a lawyer on retainer or have connections, the "I'll see you in court" does come across as a fairly little threat to the bigger company (who has retained legal help for sure).

Second, this is true for many places, the moment someone wants to quit or wants you out - most likely it is better to try sort out the best scenario for everyone (which quite possibly be you leaving the job, regardless if it is "right" or "fair"). I call this "cut your losses and try and save as much pain as possible" and then move on. Needless to say, this is not easy. I know. It does make it less panicky though, if you have some sort of plan or alternative ready. (CV written, a working network around you, alternative plans with keywords...)

I actually had one of those moments early in my 'career'. I was told it was better if I left, since "I wasn't TT material, it might as well be for the better for me to leave" and it was a quite hasty exit that was planned. It's a story for another day**. However, what it taught me was a few very important lessons.

• If someone (e.g. boss or someone who boss likes) wants you gone, there will be ways to get you gone (regardless if it is "fair or right"). 
• If you really want to fight it, you will need to have contacts in high places (more powerful than the boss) and remember HR is not really there for you (worker) but for the boss and most of all, the institution.
• IF the situation gets resolved, be sure that you let go of those bad moments early on, and not try and rehash it with coworkers (then the situation won't be called resolved for long). Also try and get out fairly fast with a better solution so you can keep it resolved.
• When you change jobs, remember that it doesn't really matter what you did during your time unless you finish well. Everyone will remember those last couple of months/weeks and how you left your stuff (and connect back to the old job place).
• Never bad mouth your boss to others (current, old or new doesn't matter. It is just never a good idea).
• Never, ever burn bridges. You never know who in the mess that will end up being important in the end game of this we call career and life. (Sure, it is tempting to burn down that house when you storm out, but for many that is not smartest thing to do. If nothing else, many people are willing to help you our after the fact you've left IF you haven't demolished everything in the process.)

I've forgotten that this is not something people do all the time. To me it's very strange when I see people shooting themselves in the foot and really ruining the opportunity to get a good reference/memory all in mainly just the last few weeks.

Examples from the fray:

• The post-doc who moved labs within the department and then tried to publish data (in the new lab) without either new PI or old PI but a third PI in the lab and the post-doc. They thought they were flying under the radar. They weren't.
• The post-doc who screwed up numerous experiments, didn't keep a lab notebook for an astonishing amount of time and had contact with HR since they were warned. It was a timed contract to start, so it shouldn't have been that surprising that the time was up. Although, somehow they thought it better to tell everyone in lab they found out with less than a week to spare and that the PI was evil, lying and everyone was on the chopping block if they weren't well liked with the PI. 
• The technician who found the salaries for everyone in the lab on a print out and proceeded to go to the lab and tell everyone what they were making and why this was unfair and who was the favourite in the lab. Then got surprised when it affected the relationship with the PI.
• The technician who was told during their first review in the new job by a new PI that they "quite bad and extremely disappointing" out of the blue (the had been a tech for another lab for a long time), and then put in the 'communication ice box' where most things are directives and orders and no positives but yet PI depends on them not leaving since they would be in a bind... (you need your CV up to date here, and leave fairly early, since the self confidence gets down and then it's harder to find a new job)
• The supervisor who applied for the same job as their underling, the underling got the job and the supervisor proceeded to call the new company to cuss them out and how wrongly they'd chosen. And then proceeded to tell this story at their old job to the boss and other coworkers.... (yeah, don't know how that worked out in their head either)

If you are in a (lab) environment where it doesn't feel like 'they' like you or you fit in, I've come to the conclusion that it's better to get out as early as possible. It's a little bit odd in one sense, since I've stuck it out a few times when I probably should've saved myself some headaches and left. Although, it is easier for me since both my times have ended with a good ending (so far at least) and I've been able to turn it around. However, the first time was ONLY because I had friends in high places and played the academia game quite well (and a fair amount of luck with my science results). I also ended up leaving the place without having too much hope for an "extra few months after my graduation" - but all in all, I still go there and chat with them and keep in contact so, who knows what will happen after a decade?!

Back to the "out as early as possible". You can always leave the reference out if it is 6 months or less, quite possibly a year. Claim it wasn't a "good fit" for you or the PI. It's not ideal, but people know this happens and it is way better than staying for several years and then in the end not having anything good to show for it since then you do have a problem if you're not using the reference. Also, most times the PI might be ok with it if you are open about it and make it about the fit rather than the skills etc. Note, "fit" is an HR term that is gaining a lot of attention since it does fall fairly close to the "like" aspect of a worker in an environment. However, I have to admit that there is something there with "fit"- nevermind that I don't like it.***

In order to leave/take a new chance, you need your CV up to par and ready. Nevermind that you have a good job at the moment, things like this happen before you know it sometimes. I have one master list - with EVERYTHING I've ever done - and then I redo it for every job I apply for. I also have two basic resumes that I work from in other times, one in English and one in native tongue, but they always need tweaking based on the keywords for the position I'm applying for.

Oh and this thing with applying for jobs. I found myself the other month applying for a job. Why? I really like my present job, I've just about gotten warm in my clothes and it's really exciting. However this was a really good opportunity and I stumbled upon the ad the same day it closed so I thought "why not?". I highly doubt I will get anywhere with it, but I know the institute and that they check old applications for newer job openings so who knows when someone will glance at my fairly specific resume?

As usual, I'm not sure on how to end my blogpost. I'll leave it as is and see if there are any questions and/or comments. Next time it will be a "how to avoid the biggest mistakes in the application/CV" and "what I've learned from telephone interviewing" (as the hirering person) - I wish I knew these things before.



*exchange for graduate students or any other expendable personnel

 ** I looked through my blog but I haven't written about this, nor the other obstacle I faced as a post-doc. I may do this, since it does have some interesting complications and what I know now I would do differently. Also, I have told the story at a few of the "career developing days" I've spoken at and people seem to like it.

***screening people to hire has a category if they are a good fit for the lab. it's horrendously hard - to me at least - to feel that I'm not only making it about "who do I like", a completely different question. This is one of the many reasons I'm not (yet) HR material but only a support person....