The above links will take you to the Center for the Health Professions site.

SCIENCE AND SOCIETY INSTITUTE LEADERSHIP WORKSHOP TESTIMONIALS

BARBARA GERBERT: Since I launched my research career in 1980, I have conducted research that would have practical implications for improving health care providers’ practices and patients’ health outcomes. To that end, I have designed and implemented studies with public health and public policy implications. Over the years, I had success conveying my findings to the media and policy makers. I also could list failures and even embarrassing moments. At this senior stage in my life’s work, the Media and Public Policy Training Program seemed just the impetus I needed to jumpstart the remainder of my career. The training proved to be even more instrumental than I had anticipated. The content of the training, the trainers, my fellow participants… the entire experience was energizing and inspiring. With the confidence and skills that the training instilled in me, I had a piece on domestic violence and health care (one content area I focused on during my training program) aired on our local National Public Radio within weeks of returning home! The message reached the audience I hoped for!

MARJORIE OETTINGER: I applied for the SSI in response to my incipient mid-life crisis. I was looking for a way to have an impact beyond the bench, to bring science more broadly to the community, and to make science a more attractive option for the next generation. I hoped that I’d also learn to manage my lab more effectively so I’d have the time to devote to these other arenas. What I got out of the SSI was infinitely more than I expected. Beyond the concrete help in developing projects of long-standing interest to me, and coaching on how to get a message across clearly and concisely, there were eye-opening insights into people and management and how the world works. In the leadership training I became much more aware of how group dynamics work, where and how things go awry and, given my style of leadership, how I might better manage the lab. These leadership skills are never taught before we become PIs. In addition to trying to apply them for myself, already with clear benefit in my lab, I find myself consciously trying to pass on what I have learned to my group. In the media training/ society interaction part, I was stunned to find that in true Pew style, we got to practice our skills through real live interviews with first rate reporters (from the New York Times, NPR, etc.). Moreover, the energy and enthusiasm of the group and the first rate coaching helped me appreciate ways in which an individual scientist might have an impact in society, even through relatively small endeavors. Having become more aware of where there are opportunities to get involved, I am enjoying the novel challenges I face as I try to implement several new projects.

SANDRA DEGEN: The first session of the 1st Science and Society Institute was a very eye opening experience. The ten of us had an opportunity to learn more about our individual leadership styles, how they related to our personality types and how we could build the most effective teams. With the initial, very interesting panel discussion on the use of embryonic stem cells in medicine we were starting to learn how our styles could be used to effect scientific policy (and also what we needed to learn to do so)! I enjoyed all aspects of the meeting, including working with past Pew Scholars that are very bright, opinionated and leaders. I can't wait for the next session where we will get media training and learn more about the legislative process. This has been a wonderful opportunity to learn skills that have never been taught to me in graduate school and beyond.

TIM MANSER: I applied for the Pew Scholars Science and Society Workshop feeling that I could benefit from formal training in personnel management and interpersonal skills. Our business is one in which such training is, at best, provided indirectly and, at worst, simply ignored. I have found that a major source of stress and frustration in being a PI and a Group Leader arises from difficulty in motivating people to do anything beyond their personal research projects, and dealing with personality conflicts. Another concern was my difficulty in communicating effectively with editors, lay people and the news media. The workshop provided testing, presentations and training by communications experts, and peer interaction sessions that opened my eyes to not only how I could improve the performance of my lab and my group, but how the mass media and federal government view a research scientist and the scientific enterprise. Last, but certainly not least, the Workshop had all of the exceptional qualities of a Pew Scholars Meeting, i.e., great accommodations, food, entertainment and comradeship.

JANKO NIKOLICH-ZUGICH: Wow ! The whole experience was akin to waking up and realizing where and how we function. The approach was multidimensional and each aspect I found to be both revealing and useful. It was the combination of personality trait survey of us as individuals and as group (laboratory or larger) leaders, and the interactions between the group that I found the most revealing. This should be part of any serious graduate training, and is precisely one area where most of laboratory scientists have had little to no training/insight. Best of all, lots of stuff we dealt with stayed with me and is a reservoir to draw from in both the laboratory and the outside world. Even the limited application of what we learned had positive and constructive effects on my group.

SUSAN PARKHURST: I was just reaching the stage in my career where I could look up from the bench and begin to think more broadly about what else I could (and probably should) be doing to help shape the future of science. The Science and Society Institute is an excellent (and timely) initiative that has allowed me to gain a clearer idea of the kind of issues I would like to tackle and, importantly, the skills/background/support to take the first step! The Institute's Leadership Workshop provided insight into successful leadership attributes, an assessment of my current leadership skills, and ways in which to use/improve/broaden these skills. The Public Policy Workshop provided invaluable tools for successful oral and written communication, as well as feedback on and exercises to hone our own styles/effectiveness. This workshop also provided many glimpses into policy processes we are likely to encounter such as political lobbying and scientific reporting/journalism. The benefits of participating in the Science and Society Institute have been both immediate and far-reaching. I am enjoying immensely the current phase of bringing these newly-realized skills and perspectives to immediate application by implementing a strategic plan to address particular areas of science policy both within my own institution and in the greater scientific community. Like a good set of experiments, it is proving to be gratifyingly challenging!

JAMES SHERLEY: I left my first Pew Science and Society Institute Workshop with new insights to my approach to scientific leadership from several different perspectives, including those of my mentors, my colleagues, my trainees and research staff, and myself. I found the Workshop exercises and leadership analyses to be remarkably empowering, because they gave me a broader, more sophisticated view of my past and present movement through my scientific career and a set of new ideas and values for improving my effectiveness in accomplishing my career goals for the future. In addition, since the first workshop, I have not stopped thinking about the charge given to us to begin thinking about how we, as able scientists, might provide needed leadership on particular issues of societal importance. So, I excitedly look forward to the next Workshop in the series that will focus attention on knowledge and approaches for effective public leadership.

Pew Charitable Trusts