In Part II of the series on science career success, Morgan discusses the success advice from two important books, and discusses how Hollywood movies (and TV) often work to undermine one of the key pillars of this success
Are scientists the most effective people that they could be?
I've realized something by studying those who are really successful versus those who struggle with success.
The really successful ones usually spend time "meta analyzing" their own lives and careers.
There are two distinct mindsets among many scientists about grant writing. One approach is to write many grants, to "play the odds". Necessarily, when quantity goes up, quality goes down. Another approach is to write less grants but of higher quality. These take more time, but may have better odds of getting funded. Which way do you think Morgan advocates for? Find out in today's episode of The Not So Boring Scientist. Leave a note in the comments if you disagree!
https://morganonscience.com Morgan was invited to participate in a meeting designed to give feedback to the NIH for the future of informatics for handling the flood of data from the "post genome" era of biology. It is a huge challenge. But in the meeting, the primary focus was all about the machines - hardware and software that it will take to get it done. I was a bit frustrated that there wasn't more about the "people" in the meeting, for reasons I discuss on the video.