4 ms·
I, too, wanted a Unicorn Job of this sort: http://pgbovine.net/unicorn-jobs.htm http://pgbovine.net/unicorn-jobs.htm After some trial and error bouncing around
by pgbovine 9y ago
I, too, wanted a Unicorn Job of this sort: http://pgbovine.net/unicorn-jobs.htm http://pgbovine.net/unicorn-jobs.htm
After some trial and error bouncing around in industry/postdoc/etc., I've found that being a PI in a field where I have to raise relatively small amounts of money (compared to Big Science labs) to be the best balance for me at this point. I agree with Fomite that unless I magically get amazing at grant-writing, there's no way that I could afford to sustain full-time staff ... I don't envision myself going down this path since I want to minimize time spent writing grants and maximize my research/teaching/service time.
- xaa 9y agoThe thing that distinguishes my situation from the type of "unicorn job" you are talking about is that I have some realism, and I compromise. Clearly it is ridiculous to expect I can do what I want 100% of the time without any of the responsibility that normally goes with being a PI. Instead, I accept a middle ground of autonomy and responsibility between postdoc/student and PI. Your article largely seems to be about why employers won't sponsor pure unicorn jobs. Quite true. That's why I have to continually make it clear what value I provide to the bottom line. But I have still done better than the 10-30% you talk about. It's probably 50-70%. I have found that science and life in general can be quite flexible if you know what you want and take concrete, realistic steps to make it happen.