Cristina Rabadán-Diehl, Pharm. D., Ph.D., M.P.H

Rabadán-Diehl is a mother and immigrant who flourished from a laboratory technician to an outstanding multidisciplinary biomedical scientist and global health affairs professional with over 30 years of diverse experience in academia, private sectors and high-level U.S. government multilateral organizations.

A native Spanish-speaker, Rabadán-Diehl overcame challenges and sought “less travelled” and alternative roads to traditional career paths for biomedical scientists and stands as a role model. She currently serves as the associate director for clinical trials at Westat, a contracting research organization. She is also principal investigator of a clinical trial sponsored by the U.S. Department of Defense providing scientific expertise and guidance to clinical trial practice and involved in multi-site international clinical trials.

Rabadán-Diehl has extensive management and leadership experience as evidenced by her outstanding contributions for more than two decades at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Department of Health and Human Services. She is affiliated with several world-known U.S. academic institutions and involved in creation of innovative and effective global networks, government to government agreements and the development of multimillion dollar international programs.

Rabadán-Diehl is an expert on cardiovascular health who also served as acting director of the Office of Global Health for the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). She has extensive experience in chronic non-communicable diseases, maternal child health and health systems research and policy. As a member of Women-in-Global-Health, she is committed to promoting better health services mainly in developing countries. Additionally, Rabadán-Diehl serves several other positions at the Milken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University; Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Advisory Council; Canadian Institutes of Health Research Cardiovascular Complications of Diabetes Initiative. She is an ambassador for Shatterproof, a national nonprofit organization that helps parents cope with the loss of a child to drug overdose and is dedicated to reversing the addiction crisis in the United States; and an editorial board member for the World Journal of Diabetes and The Journal of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease. She was also the spokesperson for The Heart Truth®, NHLBI's landmark national awareness campaign for heart disease in women, and We Can!® (Ways to Enhance Children's Activity and Nutrition), the NIH's national childhood obesity prevention program.

These sessions provide tremendous opportunities to learn from personal stories of the speakers with diversified and successful career paths, as well as the importance of soft skills necessary for the success of postdoctoral professionals.

Chris Gunter, Ph.D.

Gunter has a great deal of experience in genomics and well-honed expertise in scientific engagement, outreach, and communications. She currently serves as a senior advisor to the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) director on genomics engagement, Division of Intramural Research in its Social and Behavioral Research Branch at the NIH. She works closely with the NIH communications and public liaison and the Education and Community Involvement branches. She is also involved in assessing the long-term impact of specific NHGRI research, training, and outreach programs.

Her previous positions include: director of communications operations at Marcus Autism Center, Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, associate professor in the division of autism and related disorders, Department of Pediatrics, Emory University School of Medicine and director of research affairs for the new HudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology.

Gunter has 16 years of experience in science editing, formally at four journals and informally as a consultant for laboratories around the world. She wrote several grants and papers, organized seminars and conferences, recruited faculty/staff/students, created and maintained collaborations with universities. She served as a senior editor for the journal Nature, and as an education editor for the blog Double X Science. She also helped establish and serves in editorial positions for the journal Molecular Case Studies and the preprint server bioRxiv.

Experienced in scientific communication, Gunter specializes in social media strategy for organizations/companies and communication of science. In 2012, Huffington Post Science named Gunter as one of the top 30 biologists to follow on Twitter (@girlscientist). She has given several presentations about the role of science communication and organized a panel on science communication for the ASHG 2015 meeting, which was very well received by the audience. In addition, she has authored blog posts for Spectrum, owns Girlscientist Consulting, assisting authors with cover letters, submissions, revisions, and press preparation, and is lecturing on the editorial process for publishing in scientific journals and social media engagement.

Gunter always gives three pieces of advice to postdoctoral fellows seeking alternative careers – network, be creative and do NOT let anyone else define “success” for you.

It is difficult to justly introduce these two incredible speakers who have played impactful roles in science and beyond. The career stories of our distinguished speakers shape postdoctoral career goals, especially with a focus on alternatives to traditional career paths for biomedical scientists. Make sure to join the live sessions presented by these amazing speakers on April 15 and 16, and take advantage of the opportunity to participate in the real-time discussions. With the flexibility of joining the NPA Annual Conference nationwide and across the world, we look forward to seeing you at the meeting. Stay tuned for more updates about the keynote sessions and other events.

Check here for more information about registration and sign-up to receive the latest updates regarding the NPA conference.

Interested in serving as a volunteer? Please complete this form or email the Meetings Committee at meetings@nationalpostdoc.org.

Lalitha Kurada, PhD, is a co-chair of the communications subcommittee and postdoctoral researcher at the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute (USUHS/DoD), Bethesda, MD.

The benefits that postdocs receive on average do not match the extensive training and immense talent they bring to the table that fuels research and innovation. One of the benefits that vary greatly among postdocs is the retirement benefits. This is mostly attributed to the fact that postdoc positions are greatly defined by their sources of funding. Most institutions don’t treat postdocs as full-time employees—their position often lies in a grey zone between students and faculty or staff members.

Postdocs can be classified variously as postdoctoral scientists, research fellows, research associates or other titles, even within a single organization. The classification depends on the sources of income—individuals might be paid through their principal investigator’s (PI) grant, their own fellowship award or directly by the university where they work. While postdocs paid directly by the university or through grants earned by the PI are considered as employees and are given access to retirement plans, postdocs on fellowships such as the Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards (NRSA) receive stipends, which means no salary on the W-2 to take deductions from. For more information please see NPA Applauds Pay Increases for Postdocs.

The benefits that postdocs receive on average do not match the extensive training and immense talent they bring to the table that fuels research and innovation.

According to the survey by National Institutes of Health (NIH), ~29 percent of the institutions reported that none of their postdocs receive retirement benefits while only 3 institutions (~2 percent) provide retirement benefits to NRSA recipients (Figure1).

Another layer of discrepancy arises from the university structure itself. Private universities with large endowments and donations have resources to provide for match benefit to the postdocs. For example: Emory University provides its postdocs access to employee 403(b) retirement plan and it matches contribution. On the other hand, public-funded universities, dependent on state funding, while able to provide access to retirement plans, often fail to give matching benefits.

It seems unfair that postdocs performing the same jobs enjoy variable benefits based on either the funding sources or the institution they work for. These differences call for setting up a uniform standard for postdoctoral researchers on any form of funding (training fellowships or research project grants) to receive retirement benefits that are equivalent to other employees.

Figure 1. Data from the NIH survey indicating the differences in the access to retirement benefits based on various sources of funding. Adapted from https://nexus.od.nih.gov/all/2015/11/30/update-postdoctoral-benefit-survey/. Right click on the image and select "View Image" to enlarge.

Public organizations that participate in advocacy efforts such as NIH, Association of American Universities (AAU) and Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU) should come together to formulate universal policies that standardize retirement benefits for postdocs across the nation. In addition, universities should offer financial planning workshops for postdocs to help them understand their options and begin to plan for their future.

Employer-sponsored retirement plans are critically important. Many postdocs spend years on low-income stipends that do not contribute to their social security or on low earnings. This leaves postdocs financially way behind when compared with other colleagues who left academia earlier. These abysmal facts cannot deter them from saving for retirement. It is of utmost importance to start saving early. Remembering the advantage of compounding interest, even starting with small amounts now can make a big difference in the future.

Most investments options available fall into one of these categories:

1. Employer-sponsored retirement plans: 401(k) and 403(b). At most nonprofit institutions, the 403(b) is the retirement plan of choice wherein, an employee contributes some percentage of salary to the 403(b) plan. The employer then provides a matching contribution or not depending on the provided benefits. Even if the employer doesn’t contribute, it is still worth investing. In this scenario, you still get the tax-deferred savings, just no employer contribution.
2. Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs). IRAs are tax benefits offered by the U.S. federal government to incentivize saving for retirement. Anyone with taxable compensation can contribute to an IRA, however it is not a benefit offered by your employer. The contribution limit to an IRA in 2020 is $6,000. It is important to remember that you have the choice between opening a traditional IRA and a Roth IRA. In the traditional IRA, you get a tax deduction on the money you contribute, then your money grows tax-free, and then you pay income tax on the amounts you withdraw each year in retirement. Conversely, you pay the full-income tax due on the contribution you make to the Roth IRA, then your money grows tax-free, and you withdraw it tax-free in retirement. Starting on January 1, 2020, fellowship income or stipend was made eligible to contribute to an IRA. This is a huge improvement for those on fellowships.

Given all the confusion about what is available to postdocs and what is not, here are a few things you can do to keep yourself informed:

1. Financial literacy. Educate yourself regarding best practices to handle income in a tax-efficient manner and the advantages of saving early. Invest in a financial-literacy course or a book on investing, covering asset classes and investment styles, bonds, stocks and types of mutual funds. A great starting place is Personal Finance for PhDs podcasts.
2. Emergency fund. Consider setting-up an emergency account to help with unanticipated expenditures and financial adversities. This would help with keeping your credit-card debts to minimum. As a rule of thumb, consider keeping aside 3 to 6 months' worth of living expenses in an emergency fund.
3. Institution's administration and human resources department. Get in touch with the benefits administrator at your university and keep yourself aware of the opportunities and resources you have in hand. Don’t feel afraid to ask questions in case of doubts.

Ankita Arora, PhD, is an international postdoctoral fellow in the University of Colorado- Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO and is the communications chair of the PDA at the University of Colorado- Anschutz Medical Campus/Denver.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of any other entity or employer.

There is a long-standing hypothesis in economic history that high levels of immigration stimulate economic growth by increasing demand for housing, urban development, and other amenities. Indeed, a recent study found that immigration provided the necessary labor supply for the rapid growth of manufacturing during the American Industrial Revolution from 1880 to 1920. In contrast, the opposition’s thoughts point towards lowered employment opportunities for nationals, thus depressing wages for the American workers. While immigration is one of the important issues that the country faces, misperceptions regarding the basic aspects of this important topic linger, including proportion and composition of the immigrants (e.g., age, gender, ethnicity) and the actual budgetary influence of immigrants on the U.S. economy, especially in the field of science and technology.

Visa bans in 2020 destroyed many young scientists’ dreams

A flurry of U.S. visa restrictions, coupled with rising anti-immigrant sentiment in the nation, has negatively impacted many early-career international research scholars. In January 2020, the Trump administration added Nigeria, Myanmar, Eritrea, Sudan, Tanzania, and Kyrgyzstan to the current list of 13 countries that face the most stringent travel restrictions. In a series of proclamations made in June 2020, the Trump administration banned the entry of non-immigrant workers such as H-1B visa holders, thus preventing specialized and skilled workers in industry or academia from entering the United States until the end of 2020, stating that the entry of additional foreign workers “presents a significant threat to employment opportunities for Americans affected by the extraordinary economic disruptions caused by the COVID-19 outbreak.” Three weeks before his term ended, the former president extended the ban on the H-1B visa till March 31, 2021. As a result of these drastic visa bans and travel restrictions, the career paths and aspirations of international researchers have disappeared or have been put on hold. A Nature article tells saddening tales of many early-career, foreign-born researchers who were forced to abruptly discontinue their research at U.S. academic institutions and go back to their home country, or plan to travel to another new country to further their research and academic career. Such scholars also encountered increased visa scrutiny, denial of new temporary work visas, and difficulties in bringing their dependents to the United States with them. Collectively, these events forced many scholars to sacrifice their dreams and promising career opportunities that they had envisioned for themselves in the United States. The potential ripple effect of losing these young postdoctoral scholars means that the normal course of research and academic programs in U.S. institutions that heavily depend on the contribution of international researchers will experience severe disruptions. Moreover, experts warn that a lack of scientific talent from other nations has the long-term potential to halt U.S. research and innovation.

Immigrants lead many scientific and technological innovations in the United States

Scientific progress is a major source of modern economic growth, and has increased average life expectancy, and has enhanced the quality of life in the United States through modern development. It is frequently claimed that American economic development has been fostered by government investments in scientific and technological innovation in the industrial sector, as well as in universities and research institutes. One of the most astounding observations shows how influential immigrants’ innovation has been in Americans’ everyday lives; 60 percent of the most highly valued tech companies have been co-founded by first- or second-generation immigrants - these include Steve Jobs, a second-generation Syrian immigrant and co-founder of Apple; Sergey Brin, a Russian immigrant and co-founder of Google; Elon Musk, a South African immigrant and founder of Tesla and SpaceX; Hamdi Ulukaya, a Turkish immigrant and founder of Chobani; and many more who led the American transformation to the digital era. Of particular current relevance, the scientist Katalin Karikó from Hungary paved the way for the development of the Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines with her breakthrough research on RNA messenger technology—research she was initially conducting while at the University of Pennsylvania. There is no doubt that scientists such as Karikó, who are shaping the future of the pharmaceutical industry are assets to the American economy and society.

Entrepreneurship and the immigrant worker

New restrictions intended to protect U.S. workers curb access to a pool of highly skilled foreign labor. The changes to the H-1B visa program announced in October 2020 will make qualifying for the work visas much harder and compel employers to pay foreign workers drastically higher wages. Many salaries under the new rules start at $208,000, even for inexperienced workers. A report shows that those rules hit especially hard for technology startups, whose founders and rank-and-file are often immigrants, and which usually pay employees a lower salary but compensate with stock options. Restrictive immigration may be detrimental for U.S. entrepreneurship and the overall growth of the economy, as it will likely result in fewer jobs and opportunities for Americans. In a new study, MIT Sloan professor of management Pierre Azoulay, PhD, stated that, “immigrants appear to be more entrepreneurial than the native-born (sic), and their firms create a lot of jobs." He reported that immigrants are not only 80 percent more likely to start a business than U.S.-born entrepreneurs, but the number of jobs that the immigrant-founded companies create is 42 percent higher than native-born founded firms.

Impact of evolving immigration policies on scientists

Immigrants are crucial for the development of science in the United States, including talented scientists and engineers. American universities have played an exceptional role in training and educating immigrants as emerging scientists. A recent study found that foreign-born scientists and engineers are playing a critical role in American universities, laboratories, and scientific industries. In science, it is crucial to foster diversity, whether they stem from different perspectives or experiences arising from different academic, cultural, socio-economic backgrounds and geographic locations.

Many U.S. universities and industries use H-1B visas to hire faculty, postdoctoral scholars and scientists and engineers. The suspension of the H-1B visas could preclude these academic institutions and smaller companies from recruiting international talent for jobs in research, teaching, and scientific development. Such immigration policies contribute to the inherent instability of faculty or postdoctoral roles at universities, sending the signal to many: “you are not welcome here.” Moreover, H1-B restrictions prevent many scientists from visiting their families, which may further contribute to high levels of stress and anxiety, ultimately negatively affecting their mental health.

New restrictions intended to protect U.S. workers curb access to a pool of highly skilled foreign labor.

Concluding remarks

Opening the doors to immigrants and scholars only makes countries, their academic institutions, and their economies stronger. U.S. immigration policies would do well to develop a welcoming system in order to ensure that they are able to usher in new and diverse talent from all over the world. This in turn will ensure a renewed interest in thigh-skilled workers from around the globe to move to the United States, and help to sustainably fuel the U.S. economy in the post-COVID era.

Although the new administration has assured changes in the immigration system that will likely be more welcoming to high-skilled international scholars and professionals, those changes may take time to be effectively implemented. Immigrants, especially researchers and scientists, play a positive and invaluable role, not only in the progress of science and technology innovations, but also in advancing the U.S. economy. Going forward, a more progressive immigration policy would mean that international postdocs and scientists are encouraged and protected, actions that can only result in an enriched and revived society, both in the present and the future.

Arpa Ghosh, PhD, is a postdoctoral research associate at Bioeconomy Institute at Iowa State University, Ames, IA, and is member of Diversity and International Task Force at NPA.

Rasika R. Hudlikar, Ph.D., is a postdoctoral fellow at Ernest Mario School of Pharmacy, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ.

Start Where You Are

This might seem obvious, but is often overlooked. Ground yourself. What is visible from where you are right now, in this moment? At this time right now? Take a minute to notice breathing, the room you’re in. What is in the room?

Ruminating about the past or paralysis of considering too many future paths (or being unable to see a future path at all) is one feature of being stuck. Both of these lead to a disregard for where we are now, the present moment.

There are lots of resources and exercises that can help firmly root anyone to their current present moment to focus on what is here, right now. Focusing on breathing, the fine details of something in hand, visible, audible, or otherwise sensible and explorable can work. Even a daily habit, like tooth brushing, doing the dishes, or pipetting can be cues, moments to be present.

Map Possible Destinations

Once grounded, it’s not quite the start on a journey just yet. It’s important to assess the environment first and choose possible routes first. Being stuck often means not having a conception of a desired destination.

When stuck, good choices of destination may not be far off, but closer by, something that can be achieved in relatively few steps to see a difference. This is to build momentum, a sense of achieving something.

Plan a first experiment for when back in the lab, not 20, for example. Another example that can be powerful for some, start making the bed each day as a first accomplishment, and perhaps a first step to a larger goal like a neater home. Even nearer, perhaps, start documenting things to be grateful for regularly.

Pick a few things in directions that feel possible and reachable, but still a stretch from your present. Pick relevant goals to move toward (yes, these are SMART – Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, and Time bound).

This is design thinking, or wayfinding. It’s defining a space and figuring out what destinations are possible, relevant, and attainable from a current location or state.

Being untethered and away from a usual work and social routines can lead to a lack of motivation, disconnection, a lack of vision for the future, to feeling stuck.

Make a Map

With some destinations in hand, it’s time to map your way there. This also takes into account obstacles that might be present and developing a plan to address them. Plow right through the barrier? Or pivot to an alternate route? Go around the obstacle in a clever way? The key is to at least have thought about and written out the steps to the goal, potential obstacles, reasons to go there at all, and imagine some of what might be possible from the ultimate destination.

Get Going

Start moving. Take the first steps along your designed and mapped out path(s). Reflect on how those first steps feel. Keep going. The goal is one percent% movement towards a destination, not 99 percent, at least to start. Maps aren’t perfect and demanding perfection isn’t remotely realistic or desirable here. Get unstuck first, feel movement. If movement occurs, perfection has been achieved.

As scholars and researchers, the temptation is often to constantly map, to constantly refine, to seek more information to better define an environment. That’s what we do in our work, after all. Refine, learn more, refine again, iterate, and discover more. When stuck, however, the key is to get moving again. The first steps are the beginning and all that’s needed is a good enough map to move forward.

Don’t Go Alone

Humans don’t, and most can’t, exist in isolation. No one is truly alone. Despite physical distancing, we can still connect with others virtually and where safe bubbles exist, even in person again (“bubbles” in this case are a small group of tested for COVID-19 and who remain quarantined for at least two weeks symptom-free ahead of close physical contact).

Being stuck is not uncommon and reaching out to family, friends, a therapist, even the informal network we all have can help shake you free of the rocks you’re stuck on. Some might be great at doing the above steps by themselves. Others might need insight from others to get going again. And of course, having others to celebrate with at the end of a journey is brilliant.

Even buying a planner or using a book or article someone else wrote (like this one, even) is being helped by someone else. We are all here together and part of that is learning from each other. The specific effective tools and framing used to get unstuck are likely different for everyone. If need be, experiment here too and see what others have done that could work for you.

Repeat

Once the first destinations are reached, repeat the process, maybe see about stretching a bit further in the next iteration. And then, as you are able, keep moving. If there ever is a time when you are stuck again, remember how you got unstuck last time and get going again.

Ian Street, PhD, is a virtual lab manager at HappiLabs and deputy editor emeritus of The POSTDOCket.

Postdoctoral scholars who get their own fellowships will often have their first opportunity to manage getting some necessary items for their work. Further, an understanding of the supply chain is helpful to anyone starting their own lab, company, or entering a job in industry. Knowing how to navigate the supply chain is worth anyone’s time.

Knowing how to source things in a timely fashion means a more efficient and sustainable research program, and by not always relying on the giant distributors, it’s possible to support small(er) suppliers and manufacturers. Where supplies are sourced can also be a statement of values, supporting the most ethical, best practice, and highest quality suppliers rather than less scrupulous ones.

Manufacturers and Distributors

Some suppliers manufacture and distribute their catalog of items. Some, like the names most life scientists know like VWR and Fisher Scientific are largely distributors (even their own branded products are made by someone else and merely branded as VWR/Fisher). Most universities will have a contract with one of these two companies and have discounted (off of list pricing that can essentially be made up by the distributor) pricing. For some basic consumables like plates and serological pipettes, going with the university contracted pricing and distributor is fine.

In general, ordering directly from a manufacturer is better than going through a distributor. For example, ordering directly from New England Biolabs means you deal with their excellent shipment system (next day delivery in the United States) and their excellent customer service if there is an issue.

Don’t be Afraid to Negotiate

If there’s an item or reagent that is heavily used in the lab, asking for a bulk quantity discount is possible.

Some suppliers base discounted pricing on how much is ordered which is worth inquiring about as well (Biolegend, an antibody supplier, works this way). Any equipment like microscopes, freezers, thermal cyclers, etc. are also always worth requesting discounted quotes for. Some suppliers offer new lab discount programs (be wary as not all of these are created equal; compare any deals to what you might get negotiating outside of that). However, an amazing program is Sigma’s new lab program that offers discounted pricing for six months on a large part of their catalog.

Generally, it’s good to have a reason for asking – i.e. “my lab uses a large amount of this item...”, “this is a large quote request...”, or “I’m starting a new lab...”. Having some idea of how much is being spent with a given supplier is a good idea as well and that number can be cited as a reason to be extended discounted pricing.

The goal isn’t always saving the most money. Sometimes it’s possible to get free consumables with a piece of equipment. It’s also relationship building with suppliers and building those with suppliers can lead to better terms on future requests (or even networking opportunities for trainees).

Keeping Track

Ideally, every lab has a lab manager to do all of this. However, in reality, that’s not the case. How does a new lab or individual scholar keep track of orders? A minimal suggestion is to start a spreadsheet with columns for a requestor name, supplier name, catalog number, item description, link, price paid, and date requested/ordered. Share this with anyone who can make requests and make any requests go through the spreadsheet. As most scholars know, there’s a lot of ways to format a spreadsheet and capture data. Have a method of knowing when something has been ordered (an easy way on Google Sheets is to create a section for requests and anything dragged below a certain demarcated row has been ordered – this is where the requested date becomes the ordered date). Bonus points for creating a second tab to keep track of suppliers, account numbers, contact info, etc. Even more bonus points for having a column for marking down when an item arrives in the lab.

Creating a dedicated AwesomeLabOrders@CoolUni.edu email address for the lab dedicated for supplier accounts and interactions only. This will keep those interactions contained in one place that can be a helpful archive of orders and supplier interactions. A spreadsheet to track/approve orders and a dedicated email account for suppliers will go a long way to helping organize supplies and suppliers.

Of course there are more sophisticated software and procurement systems out there and some universities make all procurement go through that system.

Where supplies are sourced can also be a statement of values, supporting the most ethical, best practice, and highest quality suppliers rather than less scrupulous ones.

Work With Procurement/Stock Room Systems

For those at universities with dedicated procurement staff and stockrooms where all orders flow through, get to know those people and as with anyone, treat them well, learn how they work and what is possible within the system. What suppliers can have accounts established within the system? How do you request items (it’s still worth keeping track of orders on a lab’s own spreadsheet)? Can they help with budgeting for the lab? With getting quotes?

Managing Backorders

Many scholars have no doubt noticed some supplies are backordered. Even basics like PCR tubes and filter pipet tips or freezers are in short supply. That’s largely due to COVID-19 testing labs taking up supply as well as suppliers operations/capacity being impacted due to social distancing protocols for their workers. This won’t last forever, but is a current reality.

If an item a lab needs is backordered, see if another supplier has a similar item that might work. Outside of the giant distributors, there are a bevvy of smaller, usually regional, distributors who might have availability of an alternative. Basically, diversify the lab’s supplier-base.

Another way is to plan ahead and help suppliers plan ahead is to project a minimum amount needed for an item and set up a standing order for that item (i.e. three cases of 20 µL filter tips per month for six months). This won’t guarantee no backorders, but does mitigate against it, and bonus is that such larger orders often qualify for discounted pricing.

Supply chains keep science going. Learning at least a few details about it can really help quickly start and then sustain research momentum. And once it’s going/well funded, hire a lab manager to specialize in the lab’s supply chain.

Ian Street, PhD, is a virtual lab manager at HappiLabs and deputy editor emeritus of The POSTDOCket.