Many young scientists fear that they are not investing enough in their scientific career, however, it is often not clear what exactly they should do and how important different aspects are such as publications, grants, teaching, mobility, technical skills and just being a good scientist. Find some directions here.
Everybody will tell you that going to a famous university is essential for a successful career in science. Important arguments are the network you build (for example, via alum associations), the excellent infrastructure, and the great scientists you might connect with. However, is it real – or is it a myth?
During the last decade, I have interviewed hundreds of candidates applying for positions as PhD students, postdocs, or professors. Most of them made the same costly mistake – and, as a result, did not get the job!
Among the many researchers I know, many people have adopted either a purely cynical attitude toward the scientific establishment or struggle with an intensive love-hate relationship with science (in academia and industry). Several painful dilemmas cannot be solved, and you must learn to handle them.
About 97% of all young researchers find a job *outside* academia. However, most professors focus on academic success and scientific excellence. Some professors are afraid to transform young scientists into “slaves of the market”. Others simply do not feel qualified. Most universities invest a lot of money and efforts to train PhD students and postdocs well for the non-academic job market, but most young researchers do not feel well-prepared.
One of the unspoken rules in research is that a successful career in science is only possible with one or more papers with an impact factor above 10 or higher. This belief creates a lot of peer pressure among young scientists and might even be one of the causes of increasing numbers of scientific fraud cases. However, is it true?
They always ask in job interviews, “Where do you see yourself in 5 years?” I hear the same reply again and again… “I don’t even know where I see myself in 2 years.”
What can you do to get more clarity?
Everybody struggles with the same dilemma. Do I focus on my career or on my scientific contributions? If I concentrate on my advancement, I am seen as selfish. Yet, if I focus on my contributions, I will be outperformed by the career guys. How can you combine your career aspirations and your scientific contributions?
Writing a research paper or a review can be a pleasure or a pain. If you manage your energy and time well, you can dramatically speed up your writing. What are the best tips and easy steps to write a research paper faster and more efficiently?
Scientists often produce negative results. All experiments were done correctly – but there was no difference between test and control. They get conflicting advice from supervisors and ethicists. Some say that publishing negative results is a waste of resources and ruins their scientific careers. Others say that ‘not publishing negative results is unethical’. What should young scientists do in such a situation?