Ask a Mentor

There is very little communication between me and my mentee, and I'm not sure why. Most of the other postdocs I have worked with have been more forthcoming when they need help or have questions. She seems competent and is well-liked, but I worry that my project could be getting away from me in her hands. Am I being too controlling?
Submitted by: anonymous, via e-mail

Answered by: Martha L. Bruce, PhD, MPH

See Answer

This issue does not seem to be one of control, but whether the structure you've developed for mentoring this postdoc is sufficient. It sounds like you've been successful using an informal approach with other postdocs, but with this postdoc, you may want to schedule formal meetings. I usually set up a standing weekly meeting with each of my postdocs. In some cases, the schedule becomes flexible (we meet as needed) but for others, the weekly meeting provides a useful structure for just the kind of discussions you are hoping to have with your mentee.

Interested in having a mentor answer your questions?

Questions: Career Development

Q: I'm a first-year postdoc, recently married, and seriously considering having children very soon. Can you give me an idea about what I should be prepared for in so far as balancing work and baby? I would like to continue working full-time after a short maternity leave.
See Answer

A: Having a baby during a postdoctoral fellowship is often an ideal situation. Many fellowships afford great flexibility in terms of schedules, which is generally useful when you have young children. Most employers have specific policies regarding family leave, so it is best to check what your institution’s specific leave policies are. It may also be useful to ask other people working in your institution what their experiences have been to provide a "reality check" regarding policies and procedures. The NIH’s National Research Service Awards (NRSA) policy allows trainees and fellows up to 8 weeks’ stipended leave per year after the birth or adoption of a child. The training Program Director must approve parental leave. Reducing work time to part-time for NRSA trainees is also possible on a case-by-case basis. Check the NRSA Web page, http://grants.nih.gov/training/nrsa.htm for more details.
Q: I've been a postdoc for longer than I care to admit, but I love research and I am not looking to get on a tenure track. Is it possible to stay in academia as a full-time research scientist or should I start looking at industry positions?
See Answer

A: Barry D. Lebowitz, PhD
It depends on what you mean by academia. In graduate school there is usually just a single (tenure) track. In medical schools there are numerous tracks, but few of them convey tenure. The issue hinges on whether you want to pursue your own independent line of research--that is, whether you want to be a principal investigator on grants. If you do, then you need a faculty position (regardless of whether it conveys tenure). If you don't, then there is the possibility of "research specialist/research scientist" or "research associate" type of positions (titles vary). It is possible to have a career in this type of position. These are not much different from industry positions; the pay is about the same and things like employee stock purchase benefits are available. Of course, you don't get the advantages of access to students and fellows and other aspects of the academic lifestyle.

Maureen Halpain, MS:
It is indeed possible to stay in academics as a full-time research scientist (non-tenure track) after an extended postdoctoral training period. Many senior researchers are moving to a model used for many years in basic science labs where they have a person with a terminal degree (such as a PhD) who serves as "lab manager." The person with the terminal degree has a keen understanding of the science behind the everyday work and provides outstanding training and quality assurance in a lab (basic or clinical). This person can also provide competent analysis of data and serve as an author on papers. Many institutions have positions for "research scientists" or "project scientists" that are non-tenure track. These positions are generally reserved for individuals who do not want to pursue independent funding as a PI. This does not mean that one cannot, on occasion, get independent funding; it just requires an extra administrative level of approval in most institutions. Industry may be another career option depending on your field of interest and educational background.
Q: How does one get invited to review papers?
See Answer

A: Martha L. Bruce, PhD, MPH:
Your mentor and other faculty will usually be happy to have you collaborate on reviews if you haven't had much experience, or they may forward your name to editors as an alternative when asked to do a review. If you are collaborating, your mentor should let the editor know about your involvement.

Maureen Halpain, MS:
Let your mentor and other senior colleagues know that you are seeking opportunities to review papers. Often times, more senior faculty members will ask a junior colleague to write a review with them as part of the learning process.
Q: I have been asked to do a phone interview for a postdoc position. The interviewers will be looking at a PDF of the presentation while I'm speaking to them. I've never done a phone interview before, although I'm pretty comfortable giving presentations in person. Can you give me any advice?
See Answer

A:
Martha L. Bruce, PhD, MPH
First, prepare your slides carefully. Make sure you can refer to each slide and each element in the slide without using a pointer. Number the slides and give clear labels to columns of figures. Find out if the PDF files will appear in color so you can use that as a point of reference. Second, practice. Give the talk over the phone to other fellows and/or faculty. Do this multiple times so that you are comfortable giving the talk over the phone and can refer to your slides easily. Make any changes suggested and then try them out. Make sure that at least one person in your audience is not already familiar with your work so that you are practicing in front of an audience that is similar to the real talk. Third, talk a little slower than you would if the talk was given in person, and minimize jokes or side comments as you won't be able to see people’s reaction. Decide ahead of time how you will deal with questions. If your phone audience is small, people may jump in with questions at any time. If it is larger, you may want to request that questions are saved until the end of the talk or during structured times throughout the talk. Ask for guidance from the person arranging the session.

Maureen Halpain, MS
Practice your presentation "live" in front of someone before you do the phone interview. This will give you a chance to read the face of the person you are presenting to. One of the hardest things about not having face-to-face interaction is that you cannot read the body language or other subtle cues that you normally get when you give a presentation. A few practice runs will help you to spot any unclear or dry parts of the presentation. Also, at the beginning of the presentation be sure to ask if they can hear you clearly and if they have a copy of your presentation handy.
Q: I am not an American citizen. Exactly how does this impact my academic career development?
See Answer

A: I presume this is not a visa question. Assuming you have the kind of visa that allows you to work in the US (and you may have to show that documentation as part of a grant submission process) then there are few if any barriers to your career development. Most government funded research grants are available to you regardless of citizenship or institutional position. Some large grants, centers, for example, are available only for US institutions, and certain individual grants, especially training grants and career development awards are available only to citizens or permanent residents. Policies for foundations or private organizations vary widely. Your best bet is to check specific grant announcements for eligibility criteria statements.
Q: How important is the cover letter in terms of the whole "application package"? Do reviewers really spend that much time reading them?
See Answer

A: The cover letter is very important in helping NIH staff assign the application to the appropriate review group and the appropriate funding program. You and your mentor should spend some time looking at the Center for Scientific Review (CSR) study section rosters. CSR staff may not follow your recommendation, but it certainly couldn't hurt to let them know where you think your application would receive the most appropriate review.
Q: I am considering applying for postdoctoral positions overseas (I am an American citizen). I have read that this may not be a good idea if I want to work in the US again since I will have missed the chance to network on this side of the pond. Is this true? What else do I need to consider before taking this step?
See Answer

A: Barry D. Lebowitz, PhD: If the position is in a very famous lab (eg, Karolinska Institutet, Max Planck, etc), then the credential itself would be very helpful and would open doors. The critical aspect of "networking" is facilitated with a solid background and an impressive publications record; you need to be sure you will be getting these regardless of which side of the pond you choose.

Maureen Halpain, MS: It is not entirely wrong to consider an overseas (or "out of the country") postdoctoral training opportunity. If an outstanding opportunity presents itself with highly qualified scientists, particularly if they are in a very specialized area, this could be looked upon quite favorably. However, one should not take a postdoc just to have the opportunity to visit another country. The quality of the training should be a big factor in deciding where to go. However, there could be some risks associated with going abroad. One would be not participating in the "US style" grantwriting process and learning the ins and outs of competitive grantwriting. Another risk would possibly be some missed networking opportunities, though many meetings are international.
Q: I’m one month into a project in which my timeline calls for recruiting 10 subjects per month, but I have only recruited one subject. What trouble-shooting approaches can I use to identify barriers and solutions?
See Answer
A: Maureen Halpain, MS: Recruitment of research subjects is often a difficult task. There always seems to be an abundance of potential subjects until you start needing them!
- First, review your recruitment strategies carefully. Are you really getting the word out to the subjects you need to recruit? Are you advertising in clinics or venues where appropriate research subjects may congregate?
- Are your study entry criteria limiting recruitment? Review the potential subjects you have interviewed and declined to see if there is some common factor limiting their enrollment. If this factor is not critical to study outcome, you may consider altering your enrollment criteria (with IRB approval, of course) to allow these subjects to be enrolled.
- Seek the advice of experienced investigators or study coordinators regarding recruitment. You will find the successful investigators have developed multiple strategies for recruiting patients.
- Can you offer incentives (financial or otherwise) that while not coercive, entice people to participate?
- Consider "going to" the subjects for testing whenever possible rather than expecting them to come to you.
Barry D. Lebowitz, PhD: It is good to be concerned but not yet time to make any drastic changes. First, you need some more info -- were these screen failures, lots of exclusions, changes in contexts or circumstances, problems in access, etc.? Once you have identified source of problems you should discuss it with your mentors and possibly your project officer. They most likely have seen this kind of problem before.
Q: I have been trying to decide on an area to focus on for my postdoctoral research. To increase my chances of getting a job, is it better to go with my interests, or do I need to also pay attention to which areas have been funded more readily?
See Answer

A: Fellows need to "skate to where the puck is going to be," not where the puck is now. In other words, someone starting a fellowship will be seeking independent funding some years from now (2-3 years as a fellow, perhaps another 5 years as a career development awardee). Areas being emphasized for funding today may not be the ones that are cutting edge later on. So the answer is to target your postdoctoral program to your specific areas of interest (and passion) and to master the state-of-the-art scientific tools that will keep you on the leading edge of scientific development. Your mentors will be able to provide important guidance during this whole process.
Q: What are some questions that should be asked during a job interview?
See Answer

A: A job interview is an opportunity for you to gather information about an institution and your prospects there. Ask about policies regarding appointments and promotions, including tenure requirements and benefits, the different tracks available and titles that go along with them, and maternity leave, if applicable. When meeting with a departmental chair or section head, ask about the direction and any future plans for the department and available resources and listen for signs of how much support you can expect and how much enthusiasm there is for your work. Expect to be asked similar questions about your views on the future of your field and the direction of your research, how you plan to fund your work, the kind of collaborators you're looking for, and the resources you will need. Don't be shy about discussing and negotiating salary and benefits. It's worthwhile to look at an institution's Web site before an interview to generate questions or get information about some of the issues cited above.
Q: What are the important questions to ask at a job interview that help determine if there is the type of institutional support that's required to succeed?
See Answer

A: Institutional support can broadly be thought of as both salary and administrative support. Find out how much salary support is available in the beginning and for how long, particularly if you're not coming in with a grant, and what the expectations are in terms of balancing clinical and research activities and teaching. Administrative support can be assessed in terms of an institution's infrastructure and efficiency. Try to determine whether the administrative departments are facilitative or adversarial, if the internal review process is straightforward and relatively fast or bureaucratic and drawn out, and if the necessary equipment, resources, and staff support are available. Ask about what the Institutional Review Board process is like for your research area, whether there are internal review committees, and what kind of help is available for doing a budget. After sizing up an institution's level of commitment to your success and its expectations, assess whether you would be able to succeed there.
Q: What do you look for in terms of a suitable academic institution?
See Answer

A: Liking the people at an academic institution is important, as well as feeling that people there like and value you and are excited about your work and potential. Look for a place where your work offers something unique or moves the department forward in a different way. Be clear that an institution -- and its grant office -- will support your grant writing and submissions and find out how much weight an institution gives to grant work vs teaching vs clinical work. Also look at the track record of an institution in terms of how many other people there have been successful in winning grants.
Q: What are the pros and cons of jobs at prestigious research universities vs second-tier institutions?
See Answer

A: There is no easy answer to this question. A prestigious research university offers a resource-rich and stimulating environment, whereas a second-tier institution may offer an opportunity to establish new programs. It's important to know yourself and whether you have the self-starter leadership qualities needed for establishing a new program or whether you're more comfortable being somewhere where things are already set up and in place. The culture of a particular institution should be considered as well. For example, some places prefer to have those who easily get along rather than those who make waves. Also, being at a smaller institution need not be isolating. Today's technology allows people at a smaller place easy access, and many researchers have advisors and collaborators all across the country.
Q: What role might a mentor play in helping a mentee find suitable academic positions at the end of a fellowship?
See Answer

A: Mentors play an important role in recruiting and championing their mentees for faculty appointments. Mentors who work in underserved fields, such as mental health and aging, are often aware of the need to "grow" their own investigators and may be quite active about recruitment. Even in situations where an individual is happy to stay postfellowship, mentors best serve their mentees by encouraging them to interview elsewhere and use the process to better formulate their career goals, learn how to sell themselves, and see what's available on the open market and what they're worth. This way, an individual can have greater confidence that an informed and right decision has been made. When it's clear that a fellowship has a definite endpoint and no future prospects, a mentee should first look to the mentor for help in going about a job search and finding out about possible options.
Q: What should be considered in choosing the appropriate career development award mechanism and institute, ie, the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) vs National Institute of Aging (NIA)?
See Answer

A: Targeting the NIMH vs the NIA has implications for K awards because the NIA has its own internal K award review committee, whereas the NIMH sends grants to a centralized committee at the Center for Scientific Review that considers several types of applications, not just K awards. Be aware that K awards for clinical research are more generous than the other K awards. It's also smart to familiarize yourself with the NIH sites and the work of those on the NIH study sections and to regularly read journals to learn about the kinds of research that are generating attention and receiving support.
Q: When is it appropriate to get the opinions of National Institutes of Health (NIH) program staff?
See Answer

A: Get the NIH program staff on board early in the application process to establish a relationship with them, engage them in the process, and facilitate their investment in the application. Your mentor may know someone to contact at the NIH as a starting point. Keep in mind that while the program officers attend the review committee meetings, they are not the reviewers. If a program officer's advice differs from the mentor's, the program officer's opinions should be considered along with other ones. In instances where the mentor is not familiar with a particular review committee, the input of the program staff may be invaluable in terms of their knowing how the review committee tends to think and what will likely fly with them or pose a red flag. However, don't get overly concerned about the review committee until you're really clear about the questions you're asking and putting together your application. At that time, having insight into the workings of a particular review committee may be beneficial.
Q: What questions must be asked and answered in coming up with a career focus?
See Answer

A: In choosing a career focus, ask yourself the following questions: Is your intended career path a realistic pursuit? What are the aspects of a career that particularly appeal to you? Are you excited about your choice? Before committing to a research interest, always take into account its relevance and feasibility. You may need to be more flexible about your career and goals, which includes being open to different opportunities. Finding a niche where you can achieve a national reputation and where there aren't a lot of other people flooding the field may be a major consideration. Consider how you want to spend your workday. Will focusing on your area of interest provide sufficient satisfaction, or is it also important for your workday to be about problem solving, bridging different fields, or filling a leadership role? Without enthusiasm for your work, it will be difficult to stay motivated over the long haul. A mentor's experience and perspective can be invaluable in this decision-making process.
Q: What are the important things to consider in choosing a focus or a specific research question for writing a career development award application?
See Answer

A: When choosing a career focus or a specific research question, important considerations include the likelihood of receiving funding and the feasibility of the project. How far should you shape and bend your particular research interest to current trends in the field and the priorities of a funding agency? Usually, a compromise must be made between "following one's heart" vs "following the funding." The question of feasibility encompasses practical considerations such as access to a particular patient population or piece of equipment or having the expertise needed for the project. When starting out, it may be more realistic to grab opportunities when they occur rather than trying to create them. It may also make more sense in the beginning of a career to be involved in an offshoot of a mentor's work rather than work more independently.

Questions: Mentor-Mentee Relationships

Q: I'm a first-year research fellow, with some specific research questions that I'm eager to pursue. However my mentor has suggested that I begin by getting involved in some of his ongoing funded work -- even though it is only peripherally related to my main area of interest -- to get some pilot data early on for developing a career award application. How do I decide whether to stick to my guns or cave in?
See Answer

A: Martha L. Bruce, PhD: Generally, it is useful for research fellows to involve themselves in an ongoing project as a way of learning about data collection/research implementations; getting to know your colleagues and environment; having quick access to publications opportunities, and perhaps obtaining pilot data for subsequent studies. How much involvement is partly a function of your interest in the subject area, and whether or not the research can contribute at all to your longer range career goals. This point brings me to an underlying question -- what kinds of discussions did you and your mentor have before taking the fellowship? Was it clear than that your interest were so divergent from your mentor's? Or from your mentor's ideas about what your career goals should be? If you really don't see a connection between the ongoing research project and your own research interest, it’s probably time to have a more basic discussion with your mentor and come to some kind of understanding about your role during this fellowship.

Maureen Halpain, MS: I would agree with your mentor. It is important for research fellows to gain some practical experience prior to launching independent studies. By participating in an existing study, it will allow you to gain "hands on" experience in a clearly designed study and to be able to publish data in a shorter period of time. You may gain valuable experience through the ongoing study that will improve your thinking and ultimately your own ideas and future studies.
Q: I am a postdoc who came up with the idea for a project for which I have outlined specific aims and methodology. My mentor sees it as a feasible grant and has me working on it but wants me to be the co-PI. She believes this will increase our chances of getting funded. I am not fully convinced. Do you think I should agree to this? If I do, what are the ramifications for my career?
See Answer

A: In my view, the answer depends upon the scope of the project (complexity, duration, cost) and where you plan to submit for funding. If the project is big and/or submitted to the NIH or a large foundation, then I agree with your mentor that the likelihood of funding is greatly increased if she is the PI. And the ramifications for your career are only good ones (ie, you have the benefit of being PI on a NIH grant and you remain eligible for early career funding). If you go this route, you should negotiate ahead of time to be first author on the major outcomes paper. If the project is small, it might make more sense for you to be PI -- especially if you could use it as the basis for early career funding (eg, a K award or similar grant from another organization).
Q: I'm now an assistant professor with independent funding at the institution where I received my graduate and postdoctoral training. What can I do to change my relationship with other faculty members when going from being a trainee to a colleague?
See Answer

A: This process may take a combination of patience and appropriate assertion. It starts with your accepting your new status as a colleague and not a student and recognizing and asserting the rights that goes along with your new position. Realize that it may take time, sometimes even years, on the part of the faculty to think of you as an authority and their equal. Although great emphasis is placed on promotion and titles, ultimately, professional respect is gained through substantive work and accomplishments. Buckle down, produce quality work, and be a good scientist. And if collegial respect doesn't happen with time, then it may mean that you need to move on to assume your new identity and status elsewhere.
Q: I suspect that my new research assistant has been making inappropriately biased remarks to potential subjects that might be discouraging them from consenting to participate. How can I investigate and address this without violating personnel rules? And who can advise me about appropriate responses as his supervisor?
See Answer

A: An investigator is responsible for a study and ensuring that staff follow agreed-upon protocols. In addition, it is through the investigator that staff are hired and paid to carry out research. For these reasons, the investigator has the right to train and observe staff to ensure that they are dealing with potential subjects in appropriate ways and making an accurate and fair presentation so that subjects are giving informed consent. If an investigator feels that research staff are not meeting expected standards, this matter should be addressed. It might be appropriate at this time to reiterate the importance of screening people and review the proper approach. All parties have agreed to carry out the work in an ethical manner, and as long as that is the case, the staff should not have a problem with how the supervisor expects the study to be represented to a potential subject or observing them when they meet with potential subjects. These steps should not violate any personnel rules.
Q: The relationship with my mentor has taken a bad turn, and I'm uncertain about what to do. Are there certain people I should discuss these concerns with, or should I just keep quiet and try to tough it out?
See Answer

A: Keeping quiet and toughing out a bad mentoring relationship is probably not the best tactic for people who are in the developmental stage of their career. The first step would be to find a confidante, perhaps another faculty member, to help you think about the problem and assess whether it's a substantive issue worth addressing and approaches or measures to take if needed. The bottom line is research productivity, and it's important to determine whether interpersonal difficulties can be resolved so that productivity isn't compromised. In some instances, a bad relationship with a mentor may necessitate negotiating one's way out of the situation and leaving, moving to another content area within the institution, or bringing the problem to the attention of the departmental chair or other senior people. To avoid this pitfall, always try to find out beforehand what other people have to say about working with the mentor and whether the mentor is known to be difficult.
Q: I've spent months working on a database research paper, but my mentor is the principal investigator (PI) on the project. He says that he should be the first author even though I wrote the majority of the paper and he only provided edits. How do I determine who deserves to be a coauthor on my paper and the sequence of authorship?
See Answer

A: Ideally, authorship should be determined in advance but seldom is. There are certain times when it's appropriate for the PI to be the lead author, for example, papers in which the primary hypothesis is being addressed with respect to a specific funded study or the study hypothesis and design originated with the PI. Still, there are times when PIs need to step back and promote their junior faculty. Be assertive if you feel you are being overlooked or treated unfairly. A constructive step would be to identify with the mentor another paper where you might serve as the first author, for example, an offshoot of the main body of research or some reconceptualization of the project. If you feel it necessary, tactfully start pursuing the institutional avenues to address the issue, perhaps going to a departmental chair or a vice chair first and then to the dean's office if the issue has not been satisfactorily resolved. Most academic institutions have policies and procedures for resolving this type of conflict.
Q: When are review articles a good opportunity, and when are they to be avoided?
See Answer

A: It may be a good idea to commit to a review article when you are preparing a grant application and already have an extensive literature review that you just have to add to a bit. If you're getting ready to submit your first grant application or heading in that direction for your K award, having a scholarly review published in a well-regarded journal shows that you've done your work and may help your grant application. A review article may also lead to a new collaboration or working in a different but complementary area. Barring these circumstances, it doesn't make sense to invest the time if the review article is going to be buried in the back of a book or appear in a journal with limited visibility, the topic is off focus, or the work will sidetrack you too much. Involve your mentor in this decision process, especially if the request to write the article comes from your mentor.
Q: I have a project that could be either an R34 or an R01, and my mentors disagree on what I should do. How do I figure out which grant mechanism is actually best?
See Answer

A: When mentors disagree about which mechanism to pursue, it's worthwhile getting them together to discuss the matter. The discussion may clarify some issue that the mentee did not fully appreciate, such as a fiscal concern or a content concern about the level of sophistication of the current model or lack of pilot data. If meeting doesn't resolve the issue, all 3 people should get on the phone with a project officer to further address the issue. Try to speak with someone likely to provide valuable input. You may suggest sending the project officer a 2-page summary and then having another conference call to discuss the project officer's recommendations.
Q: I have more than 1 mentor and have received conflicting advice from both of them. I don't want to alienate either of them; what should I do? At the same time, they've both given me high-priority assignments, and I'm not sure how I will be able to complete all the work. Is it possible to balance all these competing demands?
See Answer

A: Communication is key when working with more than 1 mentor. Although the mentee may automatically agree to all work assignments, he or she needs to take responsibility for speaking up when overloaded with work that is impossible to finish on time. It may be helpful for the mentee and mentors to meet together regularly to discuss the mentee's work assignments and deadlines. That way, the mentors will have a clear idea of the demands being placed on the mentee and can discuss any conflicting advice being given and establish work priorities. Be sure in choosing to work with more than 1 mentor that the arrangement will be constructive and synergistic. It may make sense to involve the primary mentor in choosing a secondary one. That way, the mentee has some assurance of a good working relationship between them.
Q: My mentee is not listening to my advice. How can I get him or her to focus on my suggestion?
See Answer

A: This situation suggests problems in the mentoring relationship rather than content issues per se. The problem may be one of communication, a lack of concrete direction, or some other oversight. Not addressing and correcting the issue can have serious ramifications for the future of the mentoring relationship. A mentor might open the discussion as follows: "It's clear something's going on in this relationship because it isn't working. I'm wondering if you're dissatisfied with the kind of input you've been receiving and so haven't been following up on my recommendations. I'm invested in correcting that, if that's the issue." If the problem lies with the mentee, he or she may need to be reminded of the terms of the mentee/mentor relationship and the requirements of his or her funding. The discussion should conclude with a clear outline of the problem and mutually agreed upon steps to address it.
Q: My mentee is smart and has good ideas, but writes poorly, both in terms of logic and style. Should I rewrite her K application?
See Answer

A: The mentor should never assume primary responsibility for writing a mentee’s grant application; taking over the grant application may help the mentee in the short term but doesn’t address the long-term problems the mentee will face in writing papers or future grants. Good writing is essential to an academic career. It’s more productive for the mentor to critique the strengths and weaknesses of the writing and encourage the mentee to improve his or her writing skills through writing workshops and/or professional tutors. The expertise a mentor can offer is to point out elements missing in the application and address stylistic and organizational issues. Helpful comments include such statements as "This isn’t clear; restate," "Use simple sentences," or "State your hypothesis clearly."
Q: My mentee keeps getting advice from different people and keeps changing his mind each time he speaks to another person. How can I get him to focus and to integrate this information to come up with a concrete plan?
See Answer

A: In the early stages of formulating research questions, it's to be expected that people will seek input from others. However, mentees may be overly influenced by advice they receive from a national or international authority who may only hear briefly about a project and may not comprehend the day-to-day aspects of getting the work done. Mentors can put this advice in perspective. Mentees should recognize that it is the primary mentor who is providing them with everyday leadership and resources and is closest to the intricacies of their work.

Questions: Other Topics

Q: Are specific institutions known for having stronger mentoring programs than others? If so, is there some way I can find out which institutions those are?
See Answer

A: First you should talk to people. You will learn things that are not written down anywhere. A good place to do this is at national conferences like the AAGP. NIMH staff members also can be of assistance in this--it is perfectly OK to phone someone there (George Niederehe, Jovier Evans, or Enid Light are the obvious choices, but there are others) and ask them about possible mentoring environments in the area of your interest. There are some specific NIH grant programs that support mentorship activities: the K12 (institutional) and K24 (individual) award programs. You could search the NIH awards database (called CRISP, at http://crisp.cit.nih.gov/) for active grants.
Q: I am in a junior faculty position at a very large and reputable university, close to home. Being close to home and at a big name university were major attractions for me when I came on board, but it turns out that I am lost in this super-sized, respected institution. There is no support from senior colleagues and no focus on mentoring. As a result, I feel that I am left to find my own way without any help. Should I try to transfer to a smaller organization? What would be your advice so I do not get into the same situation again?
See Answer

A: Answered by: Dr. Streim
Before you give up and start looking for a new job, be sure you have accessed all the available resources within your current institutional environment. The first step should be to discuss your need for mentoring with your direct supervisor (section head, division chief, or department chair). If you have not already done so, see if you can work together to identify someone who can make a commitment to work with you as a mentor.
You should also be aware that your institution, as a large research university, probably has policies or programs at the medical school or department level to support or encourage junior faculty development and promotion, and these are often described in a faculty policy handbook or similar document. If your department or medical school employs a full-time faculty affairs coordinator, this may be the person who is charged with helping junior faculty navigate the requirements for promotion. It is also common for faculty development initiatives and programs to be described in a departmental "5-year plan" or strategic planning document. Specific resources to support junior faculty development may be described in memoranda or policies that are available from the faculty affairs coordinator or from the office of the chairman. You should familiarize yourself with the institutional policies regarding faculty development.
If there is a serious discrepancy between what you were promised at the time you were hired and the level of support you have actually received, or between the written policies and programs of the school or department in which you are appointed and the institution”s adherence to those policies that pertain to faculty development, then you should consider discussing this with your direct supervisor. If your supervisor is unhelpful or unresponsive, then you have the option of discussing your situation with staff in the office of human resources or an ombudsman, who may be able to advise you on next steps.
If, after trying to engage the available systems for faculty support, you are still not on the road to developing a relationship with a mentor, then it may be time to search for a new job. If you choose to initiate a job search, be sure that, during the interview process, potential mentors can be identified, and the department commitment to junior faculty development is clearly evident. It is often helpful, during a second interview visit, to meet with potential mentors to discuss ideas and prospects for career development. Ask specific questions about policies and programs to support junior faculty advancement. It is not so much the size of the institution, but the institutional commitment to junior faculty development and promotion--and the availability of a suitable mentor who is willing to make a commitment to work with you-- that matters most.

Answered by: Dr. Reynolds
It sounds as if our junior faculty colleague needs to find a mentor either at home or in another institution. When s/he was being recruited, were potential faculty mentors identified? Were there any discussions to build upon? Could s/he seek the advice/help of a lab chief, division chief or chairperson about an appropriate mentor?
It is vitally important to be proactive now and, if need be, evaluate opportunities, mentors, and role models elsewhere. Size may be less important than culture: some universities promote mentoring, others "eat" their young. How to tell the difference? The answer is to examine whether junior faculty succeed in establishing their own careers. Our colleague should make it a point to talk with other junior faculty colleagues at home and elsewhere to understand who the good mentors/role models are, and whom to avoid ("tormentors").

Presentations

Career Development
Joel E. Streim, MD; Martha L. Bruce, PhD, MPH; Gwenn Smith, PhD
Mentor/Mentee Relationships
Gwenn Smith, PhD; Stephen J. Bartels, MD, MS; Maureen Halpain, MS
Authorship and Publication Strategies
Joel E. Streim, MD; Martha L. Bruce, PhD, MPH; Jürgen Unützer, MD, MPH, MA