Movers and Shapers - II

[The first past of the following post can be found here.]

Starting a new faculty position is no joke.  Books have been written on it, it is a hot topic on multiple blogs/websites (for example, see here and here) and many institutions conduct orientation programmes for new faculty.  You have become a PI with complete responsibility for your research group, you are on the other side of the class for the first time and you are performing a lot of laborious administrative tasks.  Joining a new institute where you will move labs/offices at least three or four times (either move from one building to another or readjust within the same building as new members join at high frequency) adds further layers of complications.  Even with the best of planning, things can go wrong.

For example, at IISER, through the “moving and shaping,” all sorts of difficulties came up.  There were delays in ordering material and in clearing customs.  Sometimes, enzymes thawed and were refrozen during transport: this caused unexpected results in experiments!  There were sudden pressures, for example, preparing a lab (practically overnight) for a new batch of students.  Sometimes, after a move, people would realize that the power requirements were much higher than anticipated.  Sometimes, there would be water shortage.  In a new building, there could be unforeseen damages due to heavy rainfall.  With many members sharing limited space, there would occasionally be differences and vocal exchange of views. 

All colleagues I spoke to acknowledged setbacks.  But, every single one of them also insisted that they do not retain any bitterness about it.  Many felt that their efforts towards meeting personal research goals created positive energy and this helped them to see difficult experiences as enriching.

M. Jayakannan from Chemistry (joined. 2007) mentions that by the summer of 2009, labs were sufficiently equipped for active research work at IISER.  The first few publications from work done at these labs started coming out by 2010 and since then, all the research groups in chemistry have been productive.  The early faculty hires were very active in publishing, averaging about 4 papers per group every year.  This gave confidence and healthy peer pressure to those who joined later.

My colleague Thomas Pucadyil joined the Biology group in 2010.  As of today, Thomas has a thriving research lab that includes 8 student members. Recently, a publication from his lab, “A high-throughput platform for real-time analysis of membrane fission reactions reveals dynamin function,” authored by Srishti Dar, Sukrut Kamerkar and Thomas Pucadyil has appeared in Nature Cell Biology. 

During a fun conversation over a cup of coffee, Srishti (the first author of this paper and one of Thomas’s earliest PhD students) and Thomas described how they set up the lab and the “assay system” leading to this publication.  For Thomas, the experience of starting his lab with students was full of surprises.  It  required multiple managerial skill sets, which he acquired on-the-go.  Early preparations for this work were started in Sai Trinity Building in 2011: this included visiting a goat market and slaughter house one early morning to acquire the brain of a goat.  They started off with an attempt to extract and isolate a specific protein from the goat brain.  While at Sai, they succeeded in it and knew that their project had passed the litmus test.  This motivated them to develop assays that would help to better streamline the role of this protein in facilitating cellular processes.  A detailed explanation of their work can be found here.

Thomas feels that the composition of his graduate-student-heavy lab played a crucial role in choosing and persisting with this project.  With postdocs, one tends to get results sooner, but postdocs are only present for a short stint.  On the other hand, graduate students are present for a much longer time and this gives you more room to experiment and set something up. In this case, their project took more than three years to develop and the results finally started coming together in 2014.  By this time, they had gone through two relocations, first to G1, a prefabricated lab building in the permanent campus in 2012 and the second, to the main building in 2014.  Their lab is now well settled with its core facilities in place and work done by his group has exceeded the expectations of the institute.

Thomas feels the strong camaraderie among the biologists helped him to move beyond the challenges and establish himself at IISER Pune.  Similar sentiments were expressed by others.  Girish Ratnaparkhi, one of the master planners behind the multiple relocations of the Biology group, mentions that when he joined, he felt energetic and very happy to help.  He remained very involved with the functionality of the department.  Be it preparing indents, supervising the packing and moving, receiving/hosting institute guests or organizing a conference, no work was shunned.  Everything was done in the spirit of service to the institute.

Talking to these colleagues made me wonder: can such an attitude of positivity and service to the institute be developed superficially? Or is it something that stems naturally from a deeper feeling of personal empowerment, which in turn comes from research productivity?

Movers and shapers - I

Last week, I got an opportunity to talk to some of my colleagues from Biology and Chemistry who joined between 2006 and 2008, that is, within the first two years of IISER.  The people I spoke to are H.N. Gopi, M. Jayakannan, Mayurika Lahiri and Girish Ratnaparkhi.  They shared some fascinating stories from these early days: stories of adjustment, setting things up, moving, expansion and readjustment.  This post and the next are based on their inputs. 

IISER started functioning from one floor of NCL Innovation Park in 2006.  Due to limited space, several faculty members shared what they call “hot desks” in the same office.  From 9 am to 6 pm, they designed curricula, taught classes (many for the first time), cleaned and prepared teaching labs themselves as there were no lab attendants, made purchase indents for lab equipment and held regular meetings to design their future labs/offices.  After dinner, many returned for a “second shift”, during which they corresponded with their collaborators or students from former work places, wrote papers and made grant applications [1].  The second shift could continue into the wee hours of the morning.

People could walk into our director Professor Ganesh’s office anytime they needed to [2].  Many a times, they would enter feeling worried, but would come out of the office with a big smile sharing his dreams about the future of IISER.

Professor Shashidhara (Shashi) walked from his place of residence in Panchwati to the permanent campus, Innovation Park and Sai Trinity Building every single day to oversee the progress at each point (and give things a good push whenever needed).  He patiently taught new faculty members from scratch how to work through administrative rules and regulations for acquiring equipment and setting up labs as many were fresh out of postdocs and were doing it all for the first time. 

When a potential faculty candidate visited for a job interview in those days, it was easy to get discouraged at the state of affairs: no research labs, no offices and no PhD students.  Apart from generous start-up grants, some of the things that attracted the early people to join were clear communication from the leadership about future plans, love of teaching and personal ambition.  The sense that they were building the institute and were equal contributors to every stage of development gave them a feeling of personal empowerment.  My colleague Mayurika mentions, “When I first visited for my job interview in 2007, I only saw the floor at Innovation Park and empty spaces in Sai Trinity building [3].   Shashi told me that things would be ready before I joined and I instinctively believed him.  Sure enough, things were ready by the time I joined in March 2008.  I did not feel any negativity around me. ” 

The central wing of the Sai Trinity building was inaugurated in January 2008 and was adequately ready for the biologists within a couple of months.

That was the time when experimental faculty had to spend maximum time in acquiring equipment for the labs. While doing this and allocating lab spaces, they decided upon a few healthy practices, which continue till date: first was the practice of shared labs.  Except a handful of cases where the nature of research is highly specialized, spacious common labs were to be shared by multiple members.  This not only reduced wastage of resources, but also taught faculty to treat resources as shared facilities rather than individual possessions.  As a colleague puts it jokingly, the tendency to act as “estate builder” was cut off right at the beginning.  Second was the practice of looking ahead: in any lab, some extra space was kept aside for future faculty.  When people ordered equipment and material for themselves, they ordered in extra quantities so that a new faculty would have enough workspace and resources to get started immediately upon joining.  This was very crucial because the Sai Trinity years witnessed a burst in hiring. 

In the meanwhile, the right side of the Sai Trinity building was acquired for chemistry and the chemists started moving there.  At one point of time, 11 faculty members and 40 students shared a lab space of 1800 square feet.

Around that time, Biology and Chemistry started looking for suitable PhD students.  The first advertisement for PhD went out from Chemistry in January 2008.  There would be at least three more rounds of advertisement and selection procedures before 4 students were selected in July 2008.  Biology also got their first few PhD students in August 2008.  These students took course work for a year and also actively helped with setting up the labs in Sai Trinity building.  By summer of 2009, the labs were well equipped and ready for active research.  Publications based on work done at IISER started coming out by 2010.

One of the reasons my early colleagues did not cave in to disappointment or exhaustion from frequent moves is that from the very beginning, no one lost sight of the final product, the permanent campus.  Gopi describes the happiness they felt while they witnessed the official land transfer of the permanent campus land to IISER in a ceremony at Pride Hotel in 2008: “We knew this informally, but were really thrilled when we saw it happening officially.”  Jayakannan mentions that even before all the moves across temporary locations happened, they started planning for the permanent campus.  Sometimes, they would wear construction hats and spend time at the construction sites.  “We adjusted to what was available with belief and sense of involvement in what was to come.  The institute always came first.”

But, Girish has a simpler explanation for the (more or less) high spirits: “Nothing big broke during the moves.  This kept everyone happy.”

[Stories of further moves and other groups coming up in future posts.  The second part of this post is here.]

[1] It would be a while before publications started coming out from work done at IISER. 

[2] We still can: it’s just that we don’t need to do so all that much anymore.  I only discovered the location of the director’s office last month, when a group met there to plan our 10 year celebrations.

[3] An office complex in the heart of Pashan, which was to remain our temporary campus for a long time.

Life begins at 10

Today morning, while working through some calculations done by a PhD student towards her project, I rewound 10 years ago to the end of 2005, when I was in the final year of PhD.  I had my task cut out that winter: start writing the first draft of thesis, prepare CV and research statement and apply to about a 100 places for postdoctoral positions.  As I carried package after package to the post office in the dreary winter (many places were still not accepting online applications), I speculated about where I would go next, next after the next and where in India could one apply.  I liked my grad school very much and hoped to eventually work at such an institution, one that is not just a (research) institute or a (teaching) university, but a combination of both [1].

At around the same time, the scientific advisory committee to the Prime Minister of India and the Ministry of Human Resource Development in India were taking concrete steps to lay the foundations of five such science institutes in India, namely the IISERs.  Two among these IISERs, IISER Kolkata and IISER Pune, started their academic programmes in August 2006 and are now in their tenth year.  Thanks, therefore, to a perfect combination of right opportunities and right timing, I am now based at IISER Pune, an institute that has given me everything I hoped for in a faculty position [2].

For a young institute, a decade is a good time to celebrate its accomplishments, reflect on future directions and engage with the larger public about its values, purposes, science and education.  My colleagues (especially the ones who joined in the very early years) have seen the development of our campus from a desolate, unused piece of land into a beautiful, fully residential campus, whose view they can enjoy every morning from their balconies with a cup of coffee.   

In a series of upcoming blog posts, I hope to document various important milestones in the growth of IISER Pune, memories of colleagues, alumni and current students from earlier years as well as  perspectives on where we are headed.  I will also update you about various programmes that we are organizing in the coming year to celebrate our tenth birthday.  Stay tuned.

[Update: the first post in the 10 year series can be found here]


[1] A place with mild winters would be an added bonus.
[2] This includes life in a city with not just mild winters, but also mild summers.

A meeting with the Prime Minister

There have been reports in the media of a meeting of the Prime Minister with around 30 scientists at his residence on 19^th August.  This blog is about my experience and impression of that meeting as (possibly) the youngest person present in it.  As the meeting was organized by the Department of Biotechnology, I thank Professor VijayRaghavan for this truly awesome opportunity. 

Disclaimer 1:  This post is not meant to be a comprehensive report about the event (one can read the news reports for that), but solely my own perception of how it played out.  A lot of it is from memory and some hurried notes I took during PM’s speech: so, I can only paraphrase his statements and not quote them verbatim.

Disclaimer 2: This is going to be a long post.

Although I am not very interested in politics, I have been very curious about Modi government’s thoughts and policies on science in India.  Sadly, be it mainstream or social media, our intellectual elite or journalists, the discourse on anything related to our Prime Minister seems to fluctuate between two extremes: one side considers him as the savior who will solve all of India’s problems in no time and the other side is extremely critical and suspicious of him.  It is very difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff in reading prevalent opinions.  At the same time, as a scientist at a new institute, I cannot help but notice the pressure under which our administration is functioning due to severe budget cuts.  Are the current science funding policies of the government formulated with a view to control the overall government expenditure across the economy or does it have something to do with how high (or low) they place science on their priority list? How does the present regime view science, science in India and the scientific community?  These are questions to which I have been unable to get reasonable answers through our biased (and may I add unscientific) media discourse.  Therefore, when I received an invitation to attend this meeting, I was very excited at the possibility of meeting the Prime Minister and hearing directly his views about science in India.

The agenda of the meeting had been designed carefully.  The PM wanted a discussion on the current state of Indian science and from what I understood in a smaller preparation meeting before we headed out to RCR, he had conveyed his eagerness to hear diverse viewpoints.  The secretaries of the science ministries (mostly scientists themselves), therefore, were to play a moderating role and let the other invitees from the science community do most of the talking.

Around 14 people, representing various fields of science, were to give presentations about the progress made and challenges ahead in their respective domains of expertise.  The meeting was to be conducted for two hours and therefore, speakers were requested to respect the time limitations so that there could also be adequate time for discussion.  Before heading out to RCR, some of the invitees wondered if the PM would be able to follow the numerous presentations and if someone should further summarise the main points of the speakers at the end.  As it turned out, however, Mr. Modi not only listened attentively to each and every presentation, but also kept asking very pointed questions from almost all the speakers.  For instance, when the first speaker presented data about the number of research papers that were published in India every year, Mr. Modi immediately asked how big or small this number was, in proportion to our population.  The very low number of scientists in our country was briefly discussed.  

As the presentations continued, he made several remarks, but I only remember a few.  For example, one of the speakers mentioned that in India, once a faculty member becomes a full professor, the only further possible ``promotion” beyond that is to become a senior level administrator.  This hinders research productivity and he therefore suggested that we create more positions, equivalent to VCs/directors etc, but in which one would only do research.  The PM caught on to this suggestion and requested the speaker to prepare a detailed proposal.  There were several other talks on topics including biomedical research, agricultural research, research in universities, physics, mathematics, research in industry and research in the north east. 

My personal favourite was Professor Spenta Wadia’s talk on physics, in which he beautifully outlined, in simple language, India’s recent contributions to several areas like string theory, high energy physics, condensed matter and materials science, statistical physics and physical biology[*].  I also liked Professor Gagandeep Kang’s talk on biomedical research.  Prof. Mythily Ramaswamy gave a talk on mathematics.  

(* A previous version of this blog post just mentioned string theory.  This is because (as I have stated in the disclaimer), I was writing from (limited) memory and in no way did I mean to imply that he only talked about string theory!  As a mathematician with an interest in modular forms, string theory stayed back in my memory.)

Among his many questions, Mr. Modi had one for mathematicians: he wanted to know if mathematics could solve the problem of call drops in mobile conversations!  Later, when the presentations got over, I made a comment about applications of cryptography and coding theory in communication problems, but that this field is underrepresented in most Indian institutes [please see addendum below for the mathematics behind call drops].  It was only after returning home that I came to know from my brother that the issue of call drops is, in fact, a very contentious issue nowadays and has also been raised in the parliament. 

In most presentations, the presenters explained and emphasized the need for sustained funding in science if we were to continue the progress and not slide backwards. 

After the presentations were over, it was time to elicit comments from the rest of the audience: by this point, we ran out of time.  But the PM continued to listen to the comments and personally called out the names of people who indicated that they wanted to speak  (either his vision is very strong or he had the seating plans laid out in front of him!). 

Since it was well beyond 6 pm, I thought with some disappointment that he would leave and I would not be able to hear his views on science issues in India.  But, he did speak, and from that point, Modi, the orator, took over.

 After addressing us as ``Aap Diggaj Log,” he started his talk with the observation that we cannot make much progress in the current scenario.  The lack of  openness between the cabinet and scientists as well as overwhelming administrative regulations hindered science.  He recognized that research needs flexibility, and while there had to reasonable checks and balances, one could not expect scientists to keep, in his own words, ``pai pai ka hisaab.”   This generated some laughter and applause.

The next point he made was that there was a lot of overlap between the work done by different science agencies, which do not communicate adequately with each other and are unable to work towards common scientific goals of the nation.  He emphasized, as the news reports mention, that instead of working in isolation, scientists have to come together and take a multidisciplinary approach to solving problems.

One point that the PM kept making repeatedly was that the solutions to most of the problems, be it coordination of resources or addressing specific needs of the nation such as Swachh Bharat, cleaning the Ganges, low agricultural productivity, the contradictory problems of malnutrition and food wastage, better utilization of solar energy, the solutions would have to come from the scientists and not the bureaucracy.  ``Can you do it?” he asked us directly.

He also made some remarks about a disconnect between writing research papers and translating the research into technology.  One of the examples he mentioned was why agricultural research has not addressed the problem of poor yield of pulses in India. 

Towards the end of his speech, he said that he has noted our complaints to him: those of science policy, budget and administration.  But, he too has a complaint, namely the scientific community is not broadminded about optimum sharing and utilization of resources.  His wish list for us was sensitivity to India-specific problems, better coordination among science workers and a multidisciplinary approach. 

 All in all, I certainly understood the PM’s attitude towards science better than before.  It was heartening to note his awareness of science challenges in the country and that his thoughts on science are not restricted to Ganesha and plastic surgery, as many journalists would have us believe.  But, I am writing as an assistant professor whose research work is mostly of a solitary nature and who does not have to deal (much) with administration and bureaucracy.  People in positions of responsibility, who deal directly with the consequences of budgetary cuts and lack of a coherent science policy would have higher expectations of this meeting and its consequences. 

Speaking personally, I came back with a strong feeling that this government perceives the science community as underperforming and wants it to produce more.  Therefore, it is absolutely essential for us early career scientists to keep improving our performance so that we do not feel unempowered in front of any administrator or bureaucrat.  For a scientist, empowerment comes only with productivity.

  -----------------------------     

Addendum: 

My comment is not entirely accurate.  Professor Vijay Chandru (Co-founder and Chairman, Strand Life Sciences), who was also present at the meeting, pointed out the following in a private correspondence:

``While cryptography and coding theory are at the foundations of computing and fault tolerant communications, the problem of call drops is driven more by cellular transmission capacities (# of cell towers and energy considerations) and protocols for handoff between cells. 

The multiple co-existing cellular technologies GSM, 3G, LTE would also add a layer of complexity. I believe the math disciplines involved would be more like stochastic dynamical systems and congestion modelling.

Anurag Kumar, D. Manjunath and Joy Kuri have authored a nice book “Wireless Networking” that makes these connections."

In distinguished company

Today’s Sunday edition of Mint newspaper carries a profile of six young mathematicians by Dilip D’Souza (who writes a regular column, “A Matter of Numbers” for the Mint).  The Sunday Mint also carries an editorial by R. Sukumar on the slightly uneasy relation between journalism and Mathematics. 

Moron alert

Overheard the following conversation between two academics, a man and woman from two European countries:

M: So, how long are you here for?

W: A couple more months.

M: Where will you go after this?

W: I don’t know yet.

(A normal person will leave it that that. But this gentleman continues. It gets  worse after this.)

M: Have you applied for jobs?

W: Yes.

M: But you don't have an offer?

W: (Laughs)

M: Are you staying in the residence here?

W: No. I stay elsewhere with my children.

M: Oh, you have children. Where does your husband work?

W: I don't have a partner. 

M:  Oh. I am married and my wife stays with me.

Hats off to the woman for maintaining her composure through this conversation. I would have replied, “sorry to hear that”….(and then regretted afterwards of course).

Home is where the office is

I am now a resident member of IISER Pune.  I’ve been longing for this day ever since I first stepped into IISER Pune and saw the construction site of the faculty housing.  For the last two and a half years, I have looked at it wistfully while driving into campus every day and imagined the good life post-moving-in.

Just imagine the possibilities: I can walk to my office every day, work as late as I like without any safety concerns about returning at night, my father will worry about me a little less, I will not have to navigate painful Pune traffic every evening and my building residents will not ask me if I can tutor their children (!!) in Mathematics.  I can now enjoy life in two of India’s best campuses and so can Abhishek (although something tells me that his enjoyment will be mostly centered around the milk shakes at Shiv Sagar, our on-campus food joint).  Oh yes, one more thing: I will not have trouble receiving Amazon packages.

I have already written before about the smooth manner in which house allocation was done.

The move today went off without any major glitches.  The movers were polite and sincere: but the supervisor tried to fool me in many ways.  He had asked for a certain sum (higher than what he quoted to my colleagues) with the assurance that he will bring good packing material: but that did not happen. The electronic items were wrapped in bubble wrap and the kitchen utensils, including coffee maker and other fragile stuff were wrapped in newspaper (which I provided!) and brought in open plastic crates.  His justification: “the quality lies not in the packing material, but in the handling.” Later, the household luggage did not fit into the vehicle brought by him and the supervisor stayed back with the remaining stuff while I followed the vehicle to IISER.  The vehicle then returned for a second trip and the guy very cleverly extracted some extra money saying that local labourers had demanded “Mathadi.”  I knew he was lying (since this has not happened to anyone in my former residential society), but I was alone and completely dependent on these people for unpacking and unloading.

After unloading at IISER Pune, he told me that his boys would be unpacking only major items like furniture and I would have to do the rest myself.  I requested him to empty all the boxes and put the things in the appropriate rooms, and I can take care of the arrangement later.  He argued a little, but gave in.  Finally, he demanded an extra two thousand rupees as tax.  Since this was not in the original quotation, I refused to pay.  Another little argument, but he gave in.

This happens to me a lot: people assume that I am nice and can be fooled easily. (They are right occasionally:  I can’t believe I paid an extra three thousand rupees for a handful of bubble wrap.)

Nonetheless, by the end of the day, everything was in the apartment and in its proper place.  No glass items are broken, but I will only know in the next two days if there has been any damage to the electronic items.  His boys were certainly very sincere and did all the packing and unpacking as per my instructions.   They also did not damage any furniture. 

 My lesson from this is that if one really wants to be free of worries and wants finesse in the handling of items, it is safest to go with a reliable, big name mover (the movers who brought my items from Canada to Mohanpur and later to Pune gave me no cause at all to worry).  With local movers, one has to be really watchful as they will try to cut corners.  But, they do the job eventually and the end product is not much different from what a big mover would have done, at least for an intra city move!

During the unpacking, an agile, middle aged lady rang the doorbell and before I could respond, walked right into the house, unpacked some of the boxes and arranged many items in the kitchen and store room.  She is now my cook and domestic help, my very own Mrs Doubtfire.

Anyways, the reality is that I am on campus, tired, but very happy.   I wanted to take a long walk on my first evening here, but could not do so as my feet are hurting a lot from standing and carrying things all day (may be I need to make my strength training routine a little more intensive!)  I hope to enjoy a nice walk tomorrow morning.

Meanwhile, here’s how I celebrated … on campus of course!

Finally, a picture of faculty housing as it looked at dinner time: