Creating interdependence in teams
With Prof Milica Radisic
Milica is part of a generation of scientists for whom the transition from PhD to academic positions could appear to have been incredibly fast compared to the current generation of aspiring academics. The funding context and institutional expectations were different at the time.
Milica explains that the start-up packages were small then, and the access to research funding took a long time. This meant it took several years for newly appointed academics to get started with building their teams. Milica feels that in the current context, whilst there is a higher expectation at the point of recruitment, those appointed may be able to access research funding more quickly to start building their research group.
Milica’s transition post PhD was likely helped by the fact she had done her PhD in an incredibly prestigious research environment at MIT and had been surrounded by a very talented research community.
Her experience at MIT was one of support, motivation and inspiration. We often make assumptions about the research environment in US highly competitive research groups and institutions. We assume that the environment will be highly competitive between team members, but also that work-life balance will be absent. We all have heard horror stories of Postdocs experiencing unsustainable research environments in this type of highly prestigious institution.
Of course, these cultures of overwork and high competition exist, and each person will experience the environment differently. Milica felt that the head of the research group was setting the tone for the research team. She experienced this environment not as one of competition within the lab, but as one of inspiration to thrive as a scientist. It all stemmed from the ethos held by the Principal Investigator to have a healthy environment for his research group.
It is not because a research group is highly successful and competitive externally that this equates with an unhealthy research environment internally. Some researchers may stop themselves from considering applying for positions in highly competitive teams for fear of what the environment will be like. There is no rule. You just need to see what it is like for yourself. You cannot make assumptions about the research culture within a team, a department or an institution. You just need to discuss it with others who are experiencing it themselves or may need to experience it firsthand.
More about Milica
Prof. Milica Radisic is a Functional Cardiovascular Tissue Engineering Professor at the Institute of Biomedical Engineering (University of Toronto, Canada). Her work sits at the interface of engineering, stem cell biology and chemistry. Her ethos as a PI is to create interdependence between team members to build a collaborative and effective research team.
https://bme.utoronto.ca/faculty-research/core-faculty/milica-radisic/
Listening to our conversation will prompt your thinking:
Are labels (e.g. “world-class”, “highly competitive”, “prestigious”, “high impact”) about institutions and research teams deterring you from applying for roles?
How much interdependence with your research colleagues are you prepared to have?
Who do you have to support you in crafting and refining new research ideas?
Some reflections to ponder based on my discussion with Milica
The courage to change countries
Research careers are often international careers. For Milica, she left Serbia knowing that if she wanted to become the scientist she dreamt of becoming, access to cutting-edge research facilities and teams would more likely happen overseas. Her research journey took her to Canada for her undergraduate studies and the USA for her PhD, before returning to Canada as an academic.
We often expect that this is the normal journey for most successful research careers and rarely show empathy for the sacrifice and challenges that these international careers represent. There is an expectation that those who choose to embark on this type of journey have the resilience needed. I don’t take these changes for granted. I always feel a lot of admiration for researchers who uproot themselves multiple times to work in new teams in different places in the world.
As a researcher who may be on this journey, you may have to acclimate to a very different way of working in a new country or a very different ethos in the research culture. Before making decisions about moving continents, you may want to make sure you get ideas from others who have had that experience.
As a PI who is recruiting researchers from all over the world, what do you need to start becoming aware of when it comes to the educational and research culture of the researchers working with you? We all make assumptions, so showing curiosity towards your researchers is a powerful way of building an understanding of where your new researchers are coming from when they start working with you.
Differences in work/ research culture and norms are not a problem per se, but sticking to your assumptions about others without showing curiosity to understand them can become one. Also, being able to share what you need with team members when your way of working is very different to someone else from a different culture is a key step in building a trusting research culture.
o Are there cultural differences that create issues in the way you are working with someone in your team? What are you doing to hold the space for conversations about the issues?
o Have you asked your colleagues from a different culture whether there is something they find challenging (that relates to cultural differences) and would find helpful to discuss?
o When colleagues for whom English is not their first language are a bit slow at contributing to research discussions, can you slow down the pace, so they get a chance to express their ideas?
The mentorship of peers
When Milica applied for her academic position, she had already been well prepared for that process of recruitment through a peer community she was part of. She described being part of a group of researchers supporting each other in different ways, from practising talking about their research ideas, giving job talks, justifying research directions, or giving feedback to each other. Participating in this group meant observing how others were doing things, even before being in a position to need to do this herself.
I am a great fan of the concept of communities of practice, where groups of professionals meet regularly to discuss, share ideas and explore challenges. It would be easy to believe that these groups are common in research environments. However, they are less common than we could hope. The concept of communities of practice has been used more recently through the setting up of writing groups in academic communities. Even though the idea itself is not new, its use is still lagging.
More recent push for a rethinking of what is needed to foster a positive research culture has seen a re-emergence of this type of group. The Concordat to support the career development of researchers holds in its principle that researchers need to take ownership for their professional development. I see the setting up of communities of practice among researchers as enacting this proactive approach to becoming an active agent in creating the environment that we need.
Whether you are a researcher or a research group leader, you have the scope of creating groups with colleagues to build for yourself the support that you need. You should not wait until someone else thinks about creating this type of group. Whether it is just meeting with a buddy to have some accountability to get on with writing a grant or a small group of Postdocs considering applying for a fellowship, you can take into your own hands the building of a supportive community. You may be in an institution with a very exhaustive programme of professional development that you can access. If this is the case, lucky you! However, if this support does not exist, make it happen. This will allow you to build your network with peers across your department/ institution and this will contribute to your leadership development.
These types of groups do not need to be extensive. It does not have to bring in all of the complications of building a network. This can just be one other person or a small group. Your actions are part of the solution to creating a supportive research environment.
o Is there an area of your academic role where regular conversations with peers could ease the challenges you are facing?
o Can you reach out to one person or a handful of colleagues to discuss whether they would want to set up an informal group for regular supportive conversations?
o Can you remind yourself that an issue you are experiencing as a challenge is highly likely to be something your peers will also experience? You are not alone!
The seedlings of your research team
In the sciences, the setting up of a new research group means a lot of time spent on practical aspects of getting a functional lab running or getting protocols working. Establishing the logistics of a working lab will be time-consuming and is part of the job that is hidden- no research outputs will appear from this complex and detailed work.
As a new PI developing a research group, your first recruits will be instrumental in getting things set up to have a functional research group. Milica admits that having researchers in these early years who will be generous with their time will be an important part of getting your research team on a good starter block. However, not all researchers may be willing to be part of this setting up process.
Early career researchers are likely to learn a huge amount about lab management through this process and will certainly build their professional competencies. It is something that they may also resent- the slow start of their research project because of the time spent getting the lab set up.
Applying PhD candidates may not be completely aware of the impact of joining a research team that is just setting up. Honesty and openness during the recruitment process will help to set the expectations on both sides. As a new PI, convincing someone to join your team when you are still setting up could be challenging but your energy and enthusiasm will play a massive role in convincing applicant to work with you. You may want to emphasise that researchers will be gaining a great deal of transferable skills (as they contribute to the setting of the laboratory) that they can take to many professional contexts. Being open during recruitment conversations about both the challenge and the potential for professional growth that joining a new research group could represent is part of building trust with people joining your group.
The first people who are joining your research group have a massive impact on getting your team to emerge and flourish. The timeframe for recruitment is often rushed, so building relationships with potential applicants even before you are in a position to recruit could be a valuable recruitment strategy.
o What are you prepared to share about the status of your research team when you are recruiting your first team members- what do applicants need to know that will set the right expectations?
o What do you want to know about them to assess how generous they will be in supporting you in building an effective research team?
o What do they need to see in what they will learn more broadly, beyond the research project when they join your team?
“you have to make sure that every person succeeds, because that’s the only way, right? Everybody has to succeed and then as a group we succeed”
