Hi I wanted to ask this question — have you ever been in a lab where
-
PI won’t point you any (even rough) direction just say “it’s all flexible, do find something impactful to study!”
-
Serious internal competition. Like different people can work on the same project whoever getting good results first will publish first. So people will hide from each other or form small group chats.
-
When you finally come up with something looks reasonable to study PI says well this is not our interest or someone else in the same group has tried the same thing stop trying
-
But the lab will pay your funding until you finish even when you do not actively contribute. The only consequence is that PI will forgot about you.
I came from a culture where project’s rough direction will be assigned, expectations will be clearly communicated, and people are more willing to share. But recently learning the fact that this environment is not a norm.
How did you survive this environment and make the most use of the funding period?
(leaving the lab now is not an option).
Comments
What about joining another persons research to learn the dynamic?
Different people work best in different environments. You see a lot of comments the subredit of people who would LOVE to be in your situation (maybe you should give your position to one of them 😉 ). Are you able to find a mentor-collaborator, either a more senior person in the lab or someone from a different lab? Or have you tried looking to move to a lab that is a better fit for your work style?
Yes, and it was a complete waste of time. There was one big longitudinal data set that the PI needed to publish, so he put everyone in the lab on it. Whoever got the best results first would get to publish. It was this absurd situation where all the students were competing and stealing from each other, and the PI sat there like an emperor waiting to receive output, giving vague feedback like “not punchy enough.”
Golden children and scapegoats emerged. I was a scapegoat. Everything I presented garnered no response from the PI, then it would be stolen by a golden child and presented the next week to rave reviews. Continuing to work on the same path was met with accusations that I was impinging upon the golden child’s work. So I’d get results, idea would be appropriated by someone else, then have to start over with a new idea. Over and over and over.
Once I had a really good idea and a really good result, I quit. Unemployed, I confirmed the results and developed a narrative, then requested a meeting with the PI. I presented the results, and he was negative as always but said he’d read it if I wrote a paper. I knew there wasn’t much time. I had to write it quickly or it would be stolen. Sure enough, 2 weeks go by and a golden child emails me to ask for my code because “she had an idea” that happened to be the same as my project that no one but the PI knew about. I finished the paper, 3 weeks total, and sent a draft to the PI and the 4 others he insisted on including. It’s been 2 years and mine was the only paper ever published on this data set.
So the answer is, the only way I was able to “navigate” the situation was to quit so that I could work without the requirement of a weekly update that gave others the opportunity to steal my work.
The PI is not a good mentor. It is worth finding a good one and using the PIs funds to do something important with the better mentor’s guidance.
The team I was in grew, we went from what you described in the latter part of your story, to the former.
Overlap, uncertainty, unfairness, unprofessional, un coordination, toxic behavior with zero repercussions.
Get out. It’s not being managed and it’s a hazardous environment. Unless you’re very far in or very competent and independent, you could be investing your time in a professional work environment where your strengths are fortified and your weaknesses are complemented by team mates. It will be better for your publication record to establish positive working collaborations early, rather than petit competition between team members.