Transcript Slide 1

Starting Your Research
Program
From ‘Soup to Nuts’
The trials, tribulations, and joys
of setting up your own program
Gregory P. Downey M.D.
University of Toronto
Step 1: Find a Mentor

The mentoring you seek should be framed around your
goals for the first 3-5 years

Will vary with style, opportunity, and type of research

BUT, there are some general expectations common to
most academic environments

Choose both:

Scientific mentor


Content expert
Non-scientific mentor

Someone who understands your situation (and
will listen)
Step 2: Set Your Goals

Establish a functional infrastructure in your lab

Launch an independent, funded research program

Meet requirements at your institution for 3 year and
tenure/ promotion reviews (5-7 years)
 Emerging
national and international presence
 Established
record of productivity and training
 Contributions
to the academic mission of your
institution (teaching, mentoring)
 Presentation
of your work at national and
international meetings
 Recognition
of your work by international peers
Getting Advice/Support



Chairperson/Director
 Sage advice and $$$
Senior colleagues
 Sage advice and high level support
Your peers
 Establish a presence for your research
programon campus
 Get to know your colleagues and identify
potential scientific mentors
Graded Lab Set Up



The Big Question: should you start up a new
lab/program or spend the first few years in the
lab of a senior faculty member?
 Hospital for Sick Children model
Benefits
 Critical mass of people
 All the equipment you need
 Can focus on experiments immediately
Drawbacks
 Pride and independence
 Your mentor should not be senior author on
your initial manuscripts!
Negotiating a Start Up Package





Decide how much you need?
A reasonable request:
 $75-$150 K for start up for wet lab
 Make certain to include big ticket items that you
absolutely need
 3 years operating funds ($30-40K per year)
 3 years of technician salary ($40-45 K per year)
 Seed money and staff for clinical trials
 Don’t forget secretarial support
Not everyone gets the same
 Like professional sports
Less bargaining power if you stay where you trained
Hard to negotiate after you have already signed the deal
Staffing: General Principles

Build a productive and positive lab culture

Be a force/presence in your own lab (lead by example)



allows you to produce publishable data

identify strengths/weaknesses in your trainees

find out what’s frustrating people in the lab
How do I identify people to join my group?

avoid the urge to put ‘warm bodies’ in the lab

beware the dominant negative!
Hire more on ‘character’ as opposed to specific expertise

you can teach people techniques

honesty, good humour, and the ability to get along with
difficult people are huge assets
Financial Issues






Create a budget - and stick to it
Track expenses monthly
 Use a spreadsheet or accounting software
 Set maximum allowable monthly expenditures
Appoint a lab manager
Borrow small amounts of reagents from
colleagues for proof of principle experiments
Don’t run out of money with 3 months to go
before next installment
PI is legally responsible for appropriate (and
inappropriate) use of funds
Protocols and SOPs




Important to set standards for the lab / research
program
Key techniques should be written in a detailed
protocol and made available to the lab members
But allow flexibility depending based on individual
preferences and skills
Record keeping is crucial to document details of
experiments and avoid future mistakes
Technicians and Research
Associates

Likely your first hire

Advertise early

Consider hiring ‘green’
a
recent graduate

Interview carefully

Work closely with him/her in first few months
Graduate Students

Plan and get advice on an SGS appointment early

Aim to get a good student or two into your program in the
first couple of years

Rotation system? – interviews?

Graduate students are trainees and deserve your full
attention, guidance, and nurturing

Graduate mentorship is a serious commitment

Avoid taking on too many students in one year

Be a mentor

adjust your supervisory style to the student (weekly
meetings?)
Post Doctoral Fellows






Difficult to attract excellent PDFs when you are
starting you lab
BUT
Keep your ear to the group for outstanding
students ‘in transition’
Talk to your colleagues at meetings etc.
Interview/recruit
 you should have high expectations
You must be prepared to facilitate the career
goals of the postdoc
Step 4: Interfacing with the
outside world
My team is in place. What do I do next?







Get OUT THERE! You are the role model and motivator
Assess individual needs and adjust your supervision
accordingly
This is YOUR LAB:
 There must be a philosophical and practical framework
for the lab to grow into - you must supply this framework
 Decide what type of lab culture you want
 Format for lab notebooks? Flexible hours? Music?
Communication is key: have group meetings, no matter
how painful
Demonstrate by example that honesty, integrity, courtesy
and professionalism are part of your lab philosophy
Learn from watching: how do other successful scientists
manage their labs, their lives, negotiate the tenure-andpromotion process?
Be a good colleague; cultivate scientific collaborations and
relationships
Some Common Mistakes
Don’t:
Complain/gossip to your lab personnel about other lab
personnel


Ignore tenure requirements




Keep 5-year plan in mind
Adjust your projects accordingly (maybe you thought they’d all
be Science papers…)
Let the lab assume its own shape and style: train your
people directly in the first few years
Assume everyone you hire will be as motivated and
competent as you


This is a NO WIN situation; your team needs to trust you
Typically, people will spend more time buying a centrifuge than
hiring a technician
Be afraid to intervene in lab conflicts
Adjust Your Approach

Don’t:
 Forget
to adapt your style as your lab evolves
 people with more experience will resent being
micromanaged

Do:
 Be
prepared to change your view of what is
satisfying
 Celebrate
the success of your student’s
experiments and manuscripts vs getting a result
yourself
Some Common Problems








Simple disagreements/problems about how lab is managed
 Don’t accuse/step in/solve the problem
 Consider a lab ‘business’ component to your group
meetings
Minor or major personality conflicts
 The buck stops with you; don’t avoid these issues
 Don’t pick sides
 Do expect people to behave professionally
Health problems that may impair work performance
Performance issues (lack of motivation; poor work ethic)
 Make your expectations clear; treat people decently
Measure outcomes, not inputs
Set an international standard (scientific meetings)
Recognize that people will achieve at different level
KEEP AN OPEN DOOR POLICY!!
Time/Career Management
Know what is expected of you
 Research
 Clinical
 Teaching
 Administration
How do I get everything done and still
maintain my sanity (or as close to
sanity as possible)?
Rule #1
Learn to say NO
(but not always)
How to balance the
demands of your position

It is easier to say NO if you have prior
commitments

Be selective
 Ask
yourself if this will help you

Set your limits for non-research related activities
and adhere to those limits

Schedule time for research activities into your
calendar

Set priorities for your time
Time Management Grid
Time Management: suggestions





Reduce Stress by starting big tasks (i.e. grant
applications) months in advance
Break each task down into smaller, more
manageable tasks
Set goals for what you want to get done in the
time period allowed and stick to those goals
Don’t waste time complaining about doing the
task
Do not let e-mail consume your time
 Turn off the alarm and check it when YOU
want to (3 times per day)
 Turn off your phone ringer when writing
 use voice mail effectively
Time Management


Work in a way that is most efficient for you
 Do the most demanding tasks when you are
most productive
 Sequential monotasking vs. multitasking
Be efficient and organized
 Never handle a document related to
administration more than once. Make the
decision of what to do immediately
 Sign it, file it, ignore it or discard it
 Save small, mindless tasks for when you have
a few minutes or when you are too drained to
perform more mental functions
Balance work and personal life




Schedule and take vacations
Hire as much help as you can afford
Make use of possibilities for flexible schedules
 Reduce commute time
 Flex time with children
 Set up a home office with high-speed
internet
Be organized and plan ahead
 Do prep work for meals one day a week
(involve the family)
 PDAs are good for more than keeping your
calendar!
Research

Secure research funding

Apply for everything for which you are eligible

Don’t get discouraged
 You
may not get a CIHR grant the first time
you apply but be persistent

The first renewal is often the most difficult
 plan
ahead and work towards publishing your
studies before the first renewal
Publish !




Fine to go for the home run BUT you also need to
secure a few base hits to be able to stay in the game
If you work in a very competitive area- publish first!
Know when to hold ‘em and when to fold ‘em
Begin to write a manuscript as soon as you have a few
pieces of data that fit together



helps to focus your research
plan all experiments to generate data for a figure
write every day for ~ 60 min (no interruptions)

Collaborate, but don’t let collaborations be a distraction
from establishing your own research program

Generally not good to collaborate with former
supervisors
Research

Peer review

Grants panels
 Operating
panels: a great experience, but commit
to one or two meetings rather than a full threeyear term
 After
you have sat on a panel be selective in your
choices
 PDF
and studentship panels are a great place to
get some peer review experience

Manuscript reviews
 Good
way to keep up with literature in your field,
but be selective
Research

Speaking engagements
 Accept
invitations at meetings and other institutions
 If
you are receiving large numbers of invitations, be
selective

Training
 You
 Be
will be expected to attract trainees to your lab
selective in the trainees you recruit
 Not
everyone who gets into grad school or
completes a PhD or MD is capable of doing
research
If You Are a Clinician

Know what the expectations are from the
beginning

If you want to do research, you need to have
protected time

Try to go to a place or service where you are not
needed clinically (at least at first)

Align or mesh clinical duties with research
interests

Seek advice from a mentor who has successfully
balanced both clinical and research commitments
Teaching



Many potential benefits:
 Improve communication skills
 Exposure to students could mean future
recruits
 Can be rewarding
Know how many contact hours others in your
department / faculty teach
 Do not volunteer for hours over what is
expected of you
Set limits on amount of prep time you devote to
lecture preparation
 More time for preparation ≠ better teacher
Teaching

Some Faculties/Departments use teaching
evaluations for promotion

Try to teach the same course for a number of
years

Try to teach in your specialty

Make effective use of teaching assistants

You do not need to be available 24-7!
Teaching: Student supervisory
committees

Great place to impress your colleagues

Be selective: want to learn something of interest to
you or have the potential for collaboration

Do not over commit
 Should
be about a equal number of committees
to faculty on your student’s committees
 Do
not do the supervisor’s job of supervision
 Supervisory
commitment
committees are a considerable time
Administration

Choose to be on committees that interest you
and involve issues that you are passionate about

Try to avoid committees with a large time/effort
commitment or ones that have the potential to be
highly polarized/controversial

If you agree to be on a committee, fulfill the
expectations for being on the committee

Do not, as an individual, do all of the work of the
entire committee!
Enjoy Your Career!
Life is too short to be miserable
Writing a Grant
The Peer Review Process
A Bird’s Eye View
Initial Steps in Grant Writing



Choosing the right type of grant
Choosing the right funding agency
Choosing the right review committee
Types of Grants








Start-up
Operating
 Small/specialized
 Major funding agencies ‘open competitions’
Salary support
Group grants
Equipment
Infrastructure (e.g. CFI)
Special Requests for Applications (RFAs)
Network grants (e.g. NCE)
The Very Beginning: StartUp Funds and Grants



Faculty/Department/Division/Research Institute
funds
 $50-300K
 Technician support ($35-40K per year)
 Operating funds ($15-30K per year)
 Salary support for 3 yrs
Competitive start-up funds
 Dean’s fund, Connaught
CFI- up to $125K for equipment for new PIs
Choosing the Right Funding
Agency

Federal / provincial peer review agencies


Disease or organ-based society / foundation


HSFC, NCIC, PSI, Arthritis Society, Kidney Foundation,
Lung Association, Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, LAM
Foundation
Premiers Research Award (PREA)


CIHR, NSERC, SSHRC, NIH
$50K per year
Industry

May have $$$ but do not sell your soul
Choosing the Right Funding
Agency: Things to Consider

What kind of $$ do you need?

Is the topic of importance globally or to a niche
audience?

How does the mission / vision of the funding
agency fit with your research?
Initial Operating Grants






Consider smaller, specialized organizations
NGOs that want to support your research to
facilitate their goals (win-win)
Sympathetic reviewers (maybe)
Smaller amounts of money
Can provide funding to generate essential
preliminary data for larger grant
Consider not applying for major operating grant
immediately upon setting up lab
 Problem is first renewal (2-3 yrs)
Major Federal/Provincial PeerReview Funding Agencies





CIHR, NSRC, SSHRC
Don’t forget the NIH
Substantially more $$ available (90-150K per
year) for 3-5 yrs
Stability of funding
 Allows development of area of research
 Stability of support staff
Shark country- beware
 Need a great idea and a track record
 Should be in optimal environment
 Days of ‘lone rangers’ are over
Some Things to Consider for
Initial Grants






Don’t propose experiments / study that will
take 3 yrs to complete for your first grant
Short and snappy studies
Issue of feasibility within your proven skill
set and within the time frame of the grant
‘Do the do-able’
Initially, aim for journals with rapid turn
around time and good acceptance rate and
citation index
Get your foot in the door and demonstrate
your ability to take your ideas to
completion
General Preparation Well
Before Grant Deadline
CV Module




Establishes your credibility as a researcher
 Never assume this is understood!
Do you / your team have the skills to do the
proposed research?
Common c.v. module used for many organizations
Web-based CV modules can be tricky to fill out so
don’t leave to last minute to prepare
 Difficult for an inexperienced secretary to
prepare
CV Module cont’d...


Don’t pad your CV
 Public school awards and diplomas nice but
not necessary
Publications
 Peer-reviewed, first (last) authored carry most
weight
 Submitted publications must be supported by
email/letter from journal
 ‘In preparation’ don’t count and may hurt
Internal Approvals

Human subjects



Biosafety


Pay attention to containment level and make certain that you
have access to the proper level of facility
Radiation safety


Especially important for clinical studies and may be crucial
factor regarding feasibility
Ethics certification (NIH)
You and your technician may have to take course
Animal care protocols


Estimate number of animals carefully
Does your institute have room?
Signatures






Applicant(s)
Division/Department Head
Research Institute Director
University level: Associate Dean of Research
Allow 2-3 working days
 Avoid the crunch
Be tolerant and polite
Internal Reviews




Pick internal reviewers well ahead of time to make
certain they will be available
Get grant to them 2-3 weeks (or more) ahead of
deadline
Pick reviewers who are knowledgeable,
experienced, and tough (!)
Face to face group meetings are by far the best
 HSC model highly successful
 Humbling experience so be prepared
Selecting the Best
Committee: Due Diligence







Understand focus of committee
Reputation of committee
Check that committee members have similar
background as you
Beware of major competitors on committee
Avoid being blackballed
 Major scientific disagreements with committee
Ask committee members or experienced colleagues
about the type of grants referred by the committee
Have alternate committees ready
External Reviewers





Remember- these are suggestions that may or
may not be used
1 or 2 additional reviewers will always be
selected
Suggest sympathetic experts, not collaborators
Some agencies honor requests for individuals
NOT to review your grant
 Be careful here
One strategy to avoid a nasty review in to
include the individual in your grant as a
collaborator or investigator!
Peer Review Committees






Chair, scientific officer, agency representatives
 Non-voting
Reviewers
 Voting
Primary reviewer
 Reviews grant, appendices, literature in detail
Secondary reviewer
 Reviews grant in detail with written report
Reader
 Reviews grant in detail but no written report
Other committee reviewers
 Likely will not have read the grant in detail
What Happens at the PeerReview Committee Meeting








For each grant, 1° and 2° reviewers announce initial
scores
Primary reviewer presents 2-3 min summary and
critique
Secondary reviewer presents critique
External reviewers reports reviewed (if any)
Discussion
Consensus score reached
Committee votes ± 0.5 from consensus score
Chair, scientific officer are non-voting
 But can set the tone and balance discussion
Major Factors in Decision-Making
at the Committee Meeting








Great idea
Burden of disease
Productivity of applicant
Preliminary data- feasibility
Interesting hypothesis
Good writing/presentation
Tight protocol which addresses multiple eventualities
and interpretations of results
Interpretation of Scores and Comments
The Typical Grant Reviewer






Overworked and under paid!
Own research career on hold for weeks
Experienced in grant writing and scientific research
 Good eye for fuzzy thinking, poor data, pomposity, etc
 Smart but may not be expert in your specific area
 Assume infinite intelligence but no specific knowledge
Reads 10-15 grants per cycle
 On planes, subways, trains, and while on vacation
Impatient and easily exasperated by poor writing and
science
Make their job easy!
Time Lines for Grant Completion
One Year Before





6 months before




4 months before




Write up and publish as much as possible on the area (gain scholarly credibility
as expert in the area, rather than complete novice)
Talk to people about your ideas and listen to what they say
Read a successful grant application
Target granting agency(ies) for application
Collect preliminary data (and funding to collect this data) to show that you can
handle the issue
Read the application guidelines.
Consider review panel for grant submission
Check if your research institute has a required internal review procedure. If so,
add an extra month to rest of timeline.
Start writing your grant draft. This allows for lots of time to work out problems,
polish presentation, and get input from colleagues.
Send out your draft to colleagues for comment.
Complete your CV module. Web-based CV modules (i.e. Common CV) clog up
prior to major granting deadlines. This can be a difficult task to delegate to an
assistant!
Re-read application guidelines
Submit documentation for local committee approval (i.e. biosafety, animal, human
subjects, ethics,)
2 months before


Check all budgeting figures for salary, equipment, supplies
Collect additional documentation as required (letters from collaborators, etc.)
1 month before


Complete final draft with all appendices
Get colleagues (or internal review committees) to review and provide feedback
2 weeks before

Complete final version. Proof it. Turn off spellchecker.
1 week before


Get required internal signatures
Photocopy
2 days before

Courier application
General Hints on Writing
the Grant
The Application Package



Writing style and appearances matter
 Where in life don’t they?
Follow instructions to the letter
 Formatting
 Font
 Margins
 Page numbering and length
Instructions confusing?
 ask the agency for clarification
 take a look at a successful grant
Grant Etiquette and General
Rules for Success








Style matters
Use all the space provided
Be considerate of the reviewer
 They may have 10-15 grants to read
Spelling, language, minimize abbreviations (and
provide table)
Avoid ‘dense’ writing style
Build in “white” space
 Psychological advantage
Tables and figures interspersed with words
Follow instructions to the letter
The Application Package


Appendices should be there to assist the
reviewer, not just ‘because’
 e.g. questionnaire, a reprint of seminal papers
on which the current study is based
DON’T put pieces of your proposal in the
appendix because you ran out of room
 They may never be read!
Co-Investigators and
Collaborators



If this is a new area of research for you, surround
yourself with good people!
 Choose co-investigators with established credibility
in the area
Be clear about their role and provide letters
 draft letter well ahead of time and email to
collaborators to revise and print on their own
letterhead
Especially important for new technology or need for
unique resources
 e.g. surgical colleagues for human biopsy material
or fancy equipment
Budget / Budget
Justification




Count on getting less than you ask for
Most funding agencies have an average award
 find out what it is and plan accordingly
Appearances are important
 $100,000 seems a lot more than $99,000
DON’T pad your budget
 Reviewers will see right through it!
Budget / Budget
Justification





Never guess at costs
Wherever possible, provide quotes
Specify how each and all required personnel will
contribute to the proposal and how their
qualifications merit their categorization and pay
Animal costs can be substantial
Don’t forget publication costs
 $2000 or more per article
What If You Don’t get Funded

Don’t:

Panic

Get mad (or at least get over it quickly)

Call or email the committee chair or SO until you
have calmed down

Give up

You have an excellent chance of getting funded
on the next cycle

cumulative success rate ~50%
What If You Don’t get Funded

Do:

Vent with a close friend/colleague and get it off your chest

Read the SOs report carefully


External reviewers opinions less critical/helpful to
committee
Consider each major point/criticism dispassionately

They are often (usually) correct

Carefully draft rebuttal page and have colleague read it

Deal with main points only

Remain unfailingly polite/constructive in responses
Summary





Begin preparations early
Think the major concepts through and seek
opinions of colleagues and external experts
Internal reviews are crucial
Aim for polished and flawless final product
If you don’t get funded, learn from the criticisms
and respond positively
 Your chances of getting funded are good!