A recent blog article in Nature raises some good points regarding the age old question of whether or not we as scientists can have a work/life balance, and just what needs to be sacrificed while balancing that equation. While some of the tips author Elisa Lazzari gives might seem like common sense, they are good to keep in mind.

It’s important to address the issue of work/life balance at the cultural level, not just at the individual. Grant agencies and individual group heads must move towards an understanding that investing in happy, well-rested and balanced individuals leads to better science as well. So what do you think: can successful scientists really have a work/life balance? And if so, what are you doing to promote these values at your institute?

This excellent article in Lateralmag explores the same phenomena we have been noticing and exploring. It’s becoming increasingly clear through anecdotes and surfacing data that the problem is pervasive, and the problem is big. Dialogue about the issue must occur if something is to be done about this.

This is an article by Dacher Keltner, one of the founders of the Greater Good Science Center and one of the leading psychologists today who studies emotions such as empathy, compassion, and awe, and the effects they have on individuals and groups.

The article correlates rise to leadership with empathy. Though perhaps it should be taken into account that in our industry, leadership is determined by grants, research, and publications; this correlation between leaders and empathy might not exist in our culture. However, this quote from the article struck me as important:

“Team members led by empathetic managers — who listen, hear, and take in what others think and feel — work in more productive, innovative, and satisfying ways.”

If this also applies to scientists, it is in the best interest of a group, institute, and funding body to promote empathetic PIs and group leaders. But there exists what Dacher calls a power paradox, in which leaders find it harder to be empathetic and can even lose their ability to do so after they’ve gained power. It is interesting to wonder if this also applies in science, and explains some of the bad mentoring stories we’ve heard. We’d love to hear your opinions on the topic in the comment section below.

While not new, we thought we’d add this article to our collection so that it could be in our repository for others. The Guardian details the story of a Princeton professor who bravely published his CV on twitter with a list of his failures, including positions he didn’t get and papers that got rejected from top journals. We think it’s a refreshing view on the career path of an academic and a move towards breaking the myth that people who make it to the top do so only on a ladder of successes.

An interesting article came out in Science recently detailing the “mysteries,” and uncertainties of the Postdoc career track. The comments section of the article is also generating an interesting discussion as to how Postdocs view themselves and their future careers.