ECR Network: Coping with Rejection

Early Career Researchers’ Network

Coping with Rejection

4 March 2015, 12 noon

Peter Brown Room, Darwin College

Rejection is an integral part of academic life. Whether you’re applying for jobs or for funding, submitting journal articles or book proposals, or putting yourself forward for promotion, academics need to develop a thick skin in order to survive and thrive. But rejection need not be crushing: there are strategies for overcoming it and support available for coping with it. In the second ECR Network meeting of this term Prof DarrenGriffin (Biosciences) and Prof Ray Laurence (SECL) will talk about their experiences of rejection in their careers, and how they moved on from them. The session will allow participants to hear from each other, and learn about what works for others.

The session is free and open to all, and lunch, tea and coffee will be available. However do let me know if you intend to come along so that I can get an idea of numbers.

More information on the Grants Factory and ECR Network sessions this term is available here. 

It's Good to Talk

Bob: it's good to talk

To some, getting feedback is a no-brainer. To others, it's as alien as the moons of Jupiter. Wednesday's Early Career Researcher Network meeting looked at the reason why feedback was essential, and how applicants should seek and use it.

Prof Paul Allain kicked off by outlining why feedback was important:

• It's a chance to test ideas, even if it's just a 'corridor chat' with a colleague;
• It 'depersonalises' your research. Whilst your work is personal to you, it also plays a part in the wellbeing of the department and the University. Sharing your ideas with others helps to move it from the personal to a more objective 'commodity.'
• It's an opportunity to consider other, unimagined options for your research;
• It gives you a chance to benefit from more experienced colleagues;
• It allows you to hone and clarify your ideas before it's too late.

However, feedback should be sought in good time. Paul suggested that the whole process could take up to two months, and longer if there was a need for more discussion and redrafting. 

He finished by highlighting some of the reasons why people avoid seeking feedback. These included a fear of criticism and of IP theft, and a desire for perfectionism. Ultimately you need to develop a thick skin; your research will be improved as a result of external comment, and the chances of someone stealing your ideas is actually very slim.

Prof Darren Griffin took over. Your research, he suggested, was like your children: to you its fabulous clever and handsome, devastatingly interesting and packed full of potential. However, to others it's a snotty-nosed, ill-mannered, incoherent mess. 

Unfortunately perception is reality. It doesn't make a difference how good you think you are, or even how good - objectively - your research is. It's about the presentation of that research, of selling it to the reviewers and panellists. If they can't understand it or can't see its worth, they won't be interested. Darren was quite frank: the process of selecting applications to be funded was 'shallower and more formulaic than you think.' 

He finished by drawing a Darwinian analogy. Feedback allows people to see how they should change, and those who adapt to take on board the comments are the ones who get funding. They are the ones who 'survive'.

The slides and notes from the talks are available on the Kent SharePoint site. 

ECRs: Planning a Personal Research Strategy

The Vice Chancellor, Prof Dame Julia Goodfellow, launched the University’s Early Career Researcher Network last week by reiterating how important new academics were to the long term health of a research intensive university. In front of a packed room the VC stated that the University was keen to support ECRs as they developed their careers and started to take on leadership responsibilities. Kent already provided a range of formal training courses, but this Network was the opportunity for ECRs to share their experiences, to focus on common issues, and to discuss with and learn from senior colleagues.

Prof Darren Griffin and Jenny Billings then looked at planning a personal research strategy. Their contrasting careers demonstrated that it was difficult to generalise about this, but there were common themes. Darren had had a very ‘traditional’ academic progression, from PhD, to RA, Lecturer, Senior Lecturer, Reader and Professor. Jenny, on the other hand, had had a career outside of academia, and was now working in a self-funded research centre.

ECRs needed to think about how they would be judged by their peers, and to plan for this. As Darren put it, ‘perception is reality’. If you are seen as the leading expert in your field, or a successful grant getter, or someone with great impact, then a virtuous circle is formed, and perceived success leads to further success. He outlined ’10 commandments for getting ahead in research’, which included taking opportunities when they presented themselves (including adapting your research interests slightly to fit with current priorities), building good relationships and allowing team members to shine, and using both failures and successes to build future research.

The group then opened up to discuss their experiences. The issue of time management was common, and Jenny made it clear that ECRs needed to be both flexible and assertive, and be willing to negotiate with others. Developing an academic career was hard work, particularly at the beginning, but being positive and persistent did pay dividends. Both Jenny and Darren encouraged ECRs to remain firm; for instance if a senior colleague said that they didn’t have much time to talk, ask them how much time they did have, and work with that. Knock on doors, and don’t be afraid of rejection.

Slides from the session are available on the Grants Factory SharePoint site, and this will be added to over time. The next ECR Network meeting will take place on 17 October, and will focus on ‘Getting Published in Journals’. It is being led by KLS, but all are welcome. If you want to come along, drop me a line.

The Launch of the ECR Network

This year, as part of the Grants Factory, we are launching an ECR Network. This will give early career researchers the opportunity to meet and discuss issues that are relevant to them, as well as hearing from more senior staff about their experiences. The first two events are as follows:

4 Oct: Planning a Personal Research Strategy (Keynes Seminar Room 4, 2:30 – 4:30pm)

This event will be introduced by the VC, Prof Dame Julia Goodfellow, who will discuss what support there is and should be across the University for ECRs. This is an opportunity to talk about your experiences, and think about what would help in the development of your career.

This will be followed by an informal talk by Prof Darren Griffin (Biosciences) and Jenny Billings (Centre for Health Services Studies) about developing a personal research strategy. They will cover issues around strategically planning and developing your research, balancing idealism with realism, and how to cope with the unexpected.

  

17 Oct: Getting Published in Journals (Senate Chamber, 9:30 – 11:30am)

Organised by KLS but open to all, this event will look at how to improve the chances of getting your articles selected for publication in journals. A panel of academics with extensive publishing experience will cover issues including:

·         How articles are selected for publication

·         Choosing a journal

·         Disseminating a thesis

·         How to improve the chances of your article being read

·          How to deal with referee comments

The panel will be chaired by Prof Sally Sheldon (KLS), and consists of Prof Rosaleen Duffy (Anthropology), Prof John Mingers (KBS), Prof Tim Strangleman (SSPSSR), and Prof Jon Williamson (SECL). 

These events aimed at ECRs, including Research Associates and Assistants (RAs), but are open to all academic staff. The events are free and refreshments will be provided.  Do let me know if you intend to come along so that I can get an idea of numbers.

2011-12 Grants Factory Programme Announced

A new programme of Grants Factory events is now available for 2011/12. Each of the themed workshops addresses a different aspect of the research funding process and is led by a senior Kent academic with a track record in winning (and awarding) research grants.

Autumn Term

• Thurs 1 December 12-2pm Big Questions, Big Projects (Prof Elizabeth Mansfield, Prof Jon Williamson)
• Weds 7 December 2-2pm Inside the Grants’ Committee (Prof Peter Taylor-Gooby, Prof Mick Tuite)

Spring Term

• Weds 15 February TBC Playing the Game: how to understand the rules (Dr Jenny Billings, Prof Sarah Spurgeon)
• Thurs 1 March 10am-12 Writing Better Bids (Prof David Shemmings)

Summer Term

• Weds 9 May TBC Eurovision: the pros & and cons of European funding (Dr Jenny Billings, Prof Simon Thompson)
• Weds 30 May 10am -12 Writing Better Bids (Prof David Shemmings)
• Mon 11 June TBC Winning Fellowship Funds (Prof Paul Allain, Prof Darren Griffin)

All events are suitable for researchers of any discipline and at any career stage and you can find more information here

Please get in touch if you would like more information or want to reserve a place.

Fellowships Applications: Notes from the Grants Factory

‘I looked at the criteria and thought, ‘that’s me!’’ Prof Darren Griffin kicked off the latest Grants Factory event by highlighting the importance of ‘fitting’ the funder’s scheme. The event focused on fellowship funding, and Darren was talking about his experience of applying for a BBSRC Career Development Fellowship.

Fellowships offer more flexibility and freedom than standard project grants, but both you and your research have to be ripe for it. To do so you have to piece together the past, present and future of your research, and demonstrate its momentum and trajectory.

Prof Paul Allain continued by highlighting the necessary ‘craft’ in preparing a fellowship application:

• Read the guidance, but also read the guidance for the funder’s other schemes so that you can understand the specific aims, and specific requirements, of the fellowship. Where the funder has stated their ‘strategic priorities’ make sure that your fellowship fits with them and, ideally, show them how it does. Quote their Delivery Plan back at them;
• It’s all about the person, stupid: highlight your ‘pedigree’, and how previous work, publications and practice lead inevitably to this fellowship. Show how you are the person, the only person, who can deliver on this research. Create the picture;
• Use diagrams and timelines. This both breaks up the text (see below), but also gives a sense of certainty and deliverability – making the ‘picture’ more believable;
• In terms of the language, keep it simple. No jargon. Check and double check for typos. Make the format clear, with paragraph breaks and bullet points. You’re not writing for an academic journal, and the requirements are different here. As Paul said, ‘you can’t be too subtle.’ Use frames and signposts, interlinked phrases, repetition and emphasis;
• Don’t hypothesise: what are you actually going to do? Avoid hesitancy and conjecture, and use active verbs. You want to develop a sense of a momentum that can’t be stopped, and that you’re ready to go if they give the word.

As with all funding, you’ve got to think of the peer review panel members on the train, rattling towards London for the panel meeting. They’re reading through applications for the first time. There’s someone barking into a mobile phone next to them, and a child bouncing on the seat in front of them. The conductor’s coming down the aisle in one direction, and the refreshment trolley down the aisle in the other. Take pity on them, and keep your application simple, realistic and compelling. They need to know quickly and clearly:

• Who are you? What's your research? Why now? (‘Tickets from Birmingham New Street, please’)
• Why should I care about any of it? (‘Can you hear me? We’re just going through a tunnel...hello?’)
• Okay, okay, so you're right for the fellowship - but what are you actually going to do - and can you succeed? (‘Mum! Muuuuum!’)
• How are you going to tell people about your findings? (‘Tea, coffee, hot chocolate?’)

If you can do that, and keep their attention amongst all those distractions – well, yours is the fellowship, and all that’s in it. As Kipling very nearly said.

Grants Factory: Making a Successful Fellowship Application

Prof. Paul Allain (School of Arts) and Prof. Darren Griffin (School of Biosciences) will lead a new Grants Factory workshop on Monday 13 June on how to make a successful Fellowship application.

Both Paul & Darren have exceptional track records in attracting research funding from a wide variety of sources - their diverse backgrounds will ensure that the workshop appeals to staff in all 3 Faculties.

The workshop will cover presenting yourself and your proposed project in the best possible light and will include a practical session.

It runs from 11.00-2.00pm and includes lunch. Places are limited so contact Lynne Bennett as soon as possible if you would like to participate.

Medical Research & Non-Standard Funding: Notes from a Seminar

I went along to an excellent PVC's Lunchtime Seminar this afternoon on medical research and non-standard sources of research funding. There were 30-40 others there with me, from the University and beyond (including the NHS), and we heard from four people with different experiences in this area.

Prof Darren Griffin kicked things off by outlining his experience of working with charities, and how this differed from the more conventional Research Council route. In Darren's view, Research Councils had got to the stage whereby the appilcation process was akin to a bureaucratic lottery, and the monitoring of awards could be burdensome. Charities, by contrast, were more interested in flexible partnership. However, one should carefully target which charities to approach:

• is your research relevant to the stated (and unstated) aims of the charity?
• are you likely to have results that will fulfil the goals of that charity?
• do you have personal connections with the charity?
• what can you do to help promote the charity, by acting as an advocate or directly fundraising for them?

Charity funding varied hugely, and he demonstrated this range by highlighting a number of recent awards at Kent, from £1.7m to £150. It is useful, therefore, to have in mind a 'tariff' so that a charity can get a sense of what can be funded. For instance:

• £1m would fund a 5 year programme;
• £300k would fund a 3 year postdoc;
• £10k would fund 1 year of consumables;
• £1k would fund reagents;
• right down to £100 for a micropipette or £50 for a printer.

Prof Bill Gullick and Mary Buchanan then spoke about the work of the Kent Cancer Trust. KCT was established six years ago to bring together clinicians and scientists in the county to develop new treatments based on observed patient need. Mary is Chair of Trustees of the KCT. KCT had provided small amounts of funding that had been effective in enabling research, often at PhD level. One example was £8k for a studentship that enabled a MPhil student to carry on to do a PhD. The student had then raised £5k herself for consumables, and had the potential to have a considerable effect in the fight against cancer.

The final speaker was Alison Coles of the Development Office. She spoke about philanthropic donations, and how she can help in facilitating interactions between faculty and donors. She also highlighted both internal and external matched funding schemes. Interestingly, she noted that whilst a number of academics had come forward to enquire about funding, none had done so for health research. Bill suggested that this is something that those in the audience should remedy.

The session ended with a discussion of some of the issues raised in the talks. If you would like slides from the seminar, do get in touch. Alternatively, if you'd like to find out about the next events in PVC's Lunchtime Seminar series, have a look at the dedicated page here.

PVC's Lunchtime Seminars: 'Medical Research & Raising Money from Non-standard Sources'

The next PVC’s Lunchtime Seminar is due to take place on Wednesday 2 February at 12: 30pm.

Medical Research at the University
and Raising Money from 'Non-Standard’ Sources

Lab-based medical research is expensive. Typically, funding must be found for the salary and stipends of the investigators and researchers, plus consumable costs, equipment and overheads. As it is becoming increasingly difficult to access Research Council funding, attention is turning to "non-standard" means such as charities and philanthropists. While some charities (such as the Wellcome Trust or Cancer Research UK) act in similar ways to the Research Councils (i.e. a grant application for a post-doc, consumables and equipment), other organisations and individuals may provide funding for specific projects in focussed areas for smaller sums. Cooperating with charities may also offer a potential avenue for social and economic ‘impact’. These collaborations can make all the difference to the research profile of an academic.

Professor Bill Gullick will chair a session in which Professor Darren Griffin will give a brief overview of the lab-based medical research going on in the University, an idea of some of the charities that give money to the University and some examples of how small pots of money can make big differences. Mary Buchanan of the Kent Cancer Trust will talk about the activities of the charity and some of its successes, and Alison Coles, the Director of the Development Office, will say a few words about the prospects for philanthropic giving at the University. The session will finish with Professor Gullick leading a discussion about the issues raised in the presentation.

All are welcome; the seminar will have relevance to all Sciences, but to many other disciplines beyond. The event will take place in the Senate Building. Lunch will be available at 12:30, and the talks and discussion will be between 1 – 2pm. Do let me know if you would like to come so that I can arrange catering.