Well, I'm coming up on a year in my new job in big biotech. Overall, it hasn't been that different from what I expected, but a few things are noteworthy.
First of all, I don't really mind working in a cubicle so much. Sure, I have the annoying, gossipy girls who will sometimes gather in the next cube and draw my wrath. But...it does have its advantages over the lab (where I never had office space). For one, I have my own private space that I can keep as messy as I want. I'm also not constantly being exposed to all of the carcinogens and mutagens that everyone around me happens to be using. I might get carpel tunnel syndrome or a sore neck, but that's about it.
I'm also not bothered as much as I thought I would be by the "cog in the wheel" feeling of industry. Again, there is the downside that I don't feel super-important or especially needed. However, I feel like I'm much more a part of something important. I collaborate with tons of people on different aspects of different projects. We are all working together to produce something--unlike the lab, where I always felt like everyone was scurrying around to publish data that might never amount to anything significant.
Most importantly, I can see how the work I'm doing is actually improving people's lives. You can be cynical if you want and say that we're just trying to make a buck, but who makes any money in the long run if the product doesn't help people? Not every product I work on will make it to market, but I can guarantee that every project I worked on in grad school will never matter to anyone. So, overall, I'm pretty happy with my decision.
I also have an idea that I've mentioned to a couple of you before. Everything in our society is market-driven, right? So, why don't people in academia get paid much? Two reasons--they aren't producing much that's marketable, and there is a great abundance of workers to do the work. Now, that being said, I wouldn't say that academic research is worthless by any means. Most (if not all) of the important discoveries that lead to treatments came from research initially done in academia. But let's be realistic--how many millions of taxpayer dollars get wasted every year on research that just isn't important to anyone, possibly even the people doing it? Academic research is driven by the number of publications one can produce and the amount of grant money one can accumulate. So, what ends up happening? The people who get the money and the publications aren't necessarily the ones doing the best research--they're just the best salesmen and/or politicians.
The quality of the research itself also suffers relative to industry. When labs desperately need publications and preliminary data for grants to stay afloat, anything publishable gets published, regardless of the quality of the data. By contrast, every minute step of every procedure in a good company is checked and double-checked for quality before any data is used for any purpose. It can only hurt a company to get a product to market that hasn't been thoroughly investigated. If someone dies or some unforeseen side effect occurs, that company not only loses all of the money they spent developing the drug, but will most likely lose more in lawsuits than they made selling the drug. So, what if an academic investigator fudges some data or inadvertently mixed up some compounds in an experiment or uses the wrong statistical analysis? Quite often, those results still get published, and not necessarily in a bad journal. Sometimes the fraud gets discovered, but not always. The end result--publications and grant money supersede discovering the truth.
Unlike some people who just like to complain, I'd actually like to propose a solution to this problem. I think it begins with more people moving into industry. There are plenty of jobs in industry that serve all different types of interests (including lab work). In the short term, people who are "poor and passionate" in academic research get rewarded more handsomely for their efforts and get the satisfaction of knowing that their work is part of something that is making a difference in people's lives.
Over the long term, a number of other changes occur. My theory is that most people who end up in academia just do it because it's the "safe" thing to do, and they just don't know enough about what else is out there. I know plenty of people who have left academia for industry and are quite happy with their decision. I'm sure there are some examples out there, but I don't personally know anyone who has done the opposite. What would happen if a mass exodus from academia to industry occurred? Supply and demand happen. Suddenly, the scarcity of academic researchers drives up the premium for personnel. Lab techs, grad students, post docs, and principal investigators can all demand a higher salary for their efforts because they're more in-demand.
What about the quality of research? Fewer labs producing fewer results mean that every piece of data can be more carefully scrutinized. Who can actually say that they are abreast of absolutely everything in their field right now? That probably wouldn't change in an absolute sense, but the people involved in research in any given field would be less inundated with useless information. Fewer manuscripts submitted also means that several less reputable journals in any given field would go out of business. Admittedly, more competition for fewer journals would likely make political connections even more important than they already are, but it also means that each published paper would be reviewed more thoroughly. Any journal getting caught publishing enough low-quality articles would lose respect in the community and would lose advertising money.
Even if the overall amount of grant money remains unchanged, investigators get more money at a time. That means investigators can spend more time running their labs and less time writing grants. That also means that the drive for publications and grants gets diminished to the point that investigators aren't struggling to publish every scrap of data they have. They are more free to pursue quality over quantity.
So, making the move into industry not only boosts your earning potential, but actually contributes to the overall quality of research.
In their 40-year history, the New Orleans Saints have won just 2 playoff games. They have made the playoffs only 6 times. Last season, the Saints were 3-13. As of yesterday, the Saints are now only one victory away from going to the Super Bowl.
