Since joining the ranks of industry science, albeit only two months now, I feel there has been a shift in my level of stress. It's one of the reasons I haven't blogged in so long - I don't really fell the need to rant and complain the way I did when I was an academic - a la disgruntled postdoc. It's been two months and I still adore my job. It's all shiny and new and I'm sure that as a new hire, I'm shiny and new.
During this time, I realized that I was wholly unsuited for the academic environment. And a conversation with my old PhD supervisor as well as several conversations with some high-level industry peeps cemented these feelings. These high-level industry peeps were surprised at how easily I made the transition, because most of the time academics have a hard time transitioning into industry.
Over the course of the next few weeks I'll blog about what I've noticed are some major differences between academia and industry.
In my very first month on the job, I experienced a feeling that I can't remember the last time I felt that in academia - fulfillment. I was asked to perform a scientific task to jumpstart a project that was key to the company's ongoing success. When the task was completed, I passed the results along to the next person to use the data to get to the next step. But my portion was complete. And I had actually completed a task that contributed something meaningful to the team. In one of my weekly meetings, my supervisor, complemented me on making a difference to this project which he felt had be stagnating for weeks.
In academia, you are basically it and until a project goes to press - it is not over (even then it feels like it never ends). Although there are an increasing number of collaborations, at the end of the day, your success as an independent researcher is not dependent on the efforts of others but to your pubs and your grants. And despite having "supervisors," as a postdoc, I designed, executed, analyzed, and wrote manuscripts. I had to rely solely on my effort, initiative, and motivation. When I faced a roadblock, I had to find a way to solve the problem - it felt like I was either going to sink or swim on my own. Academia is a lonely game.
2. Asshole, get thee to the door.
The diva or rockstar academic, nurtured in the ivory tower, is not tolerated in industry. In industry, a team cannot thrive with the presence of someone whose ego is bigger than the company. This is not to say there are no superstar scientists in industry. The difference is that everyone, including the superstar scientist, is vested in the company doing well. In industry the collective interest is the individual interest. In academia, it's all about individual interest, even within collaborations. For the most part, I don't think people start off with huge egos in academia, but the pay sucks, the hours are long, and the only immediate compensation is your name in press, the environment encourages self-aggrandizement. It's a wonder there is anyone still left in academia with any level of humility.
I am also not saying there are no assholes in industry. There are assholes everywhere. To a much larger extent, however, the collective interest within industry (i.e. for the company to make oodles of money), polices the kind of assholery behavior, accommodated by tenure in academia. For examples of this outrageous, unbridled behavior one simply has to peruse old blog posts. The term disgruntled postdoc didn't come from nowhere, you know.
3. You got a glamour mag pub? Meh.
Publications only help if you are coming out of academia into an industry job because it's the way that a hiring manager can measure your productivity. They are, however, not necessary - I know several top level industry scientists that came out of their PhD without publications and are doing quite well. Depending on the size and culture of the biotech company, as an industry scientist you may or may not publish. Smaller start up companies (but not always) may use publications to lend credibility to the science. Within my academic cohort, a Nature or Science pub meant your academic career was made. Within industry, it means shit. More important are patents. Having your name on several pending or completed applications demonstrates innovation.
Industry seems much more interested in the skills that you bring and whether they fit a gap in the company. The attitude is if I hire you today, what can you accomplish to met the company's needs tomorrow. For my personality, writing a manuscript is like pulling teeth. I love coming up with the question or project, designing the experiment, and then analyzing the data. But once I've found out the answer, I could care less if anyone else knew. This is an absolute killer in academia where the attitude is - if it isn't published you never did it.
In a phone conversation two weeks ago with my old PhD supervisor, GeneralSolutionGuru, she said that she understood my connection to the creative aspect of science: the project creation, design and analysis and that she knew I was less enthusiastic about manuscript writing. This was partly true. After leaving the PhD, I initially pushed hard to get my PhD manuscripts published and was moderately successful. Somewhere along the way, however, a confluence of things - my nature getting the better of me, a major illness, and having postdoc supervisors who just sat too long on manuscripts - led to my disillusionment in the process and ultimately to the realization that I didn't want to be an assistant prof.
Recently I heard that two of my friends received national postdoctoral fellowships and one even got a glamour mag publication. Although I was really truly happy for them, I did feel a tinge of jealously for a brief moment. But only briefly, because that tinge of jealously fell away when it was replaced with a choking sensation in my throat when I thought, "They'll probably end up as academics."

