(MUSIC) 

VOICE–OVER: This is Alumni Aloud, a podcast by Graduate Center students for Graduate Center students. In each episode we talk with a GC graduate about their career path, the ins and outs of their current position, and the career advice they have for students. This series is sponsored by the Graduate Center’s Office of Career Planning & Professional Development. 

(MUSIC) 

TANYA NAPOLITANO, HOST: I’m Tanya Napolitano, a PhD candidate in the Biochemistry program at The Graduate Center. In this episode I sit down with Dr. Juliette Gorson. Juliette earned her PhD in the Biology program at The Graduate Center in 2018. When we spoke, Juliette had just finished her last day at a science communications firm as an Account Executive and will soon start as an Assistant Professor at Hofstra University in September 2019. In this episode Juliette tells us about her experience in a non-traditional PhD career path, the important of being open to opportunities, as well as the benefits of being proactive and how important presentations truly are. I’d like to just start off with a general question. What is your name and what do you do for a living?  

JULIETTE GORSON, GUEST: My name is Juliette Gorson and before today I was working as an Account Executive at Russo Partners which is a science communications firm. And starting September 1, I will be an Assistant Professor at Hofstra University.  

NAPOLITANO: Wow that’s really interesting. So before we talk about how you switched professions, let’s talk a little bit about your experience at your science communications firm. How did you come to find that job or how far along were you into your graduate studies when you started considering career paths and what led you to this job?   

GORSON: So I’m a super proactive person so I actually started pursuing jobs probably in my third or fourth year of my PhD. And the first internship I had actually landed was at a patent firm. I kind of wanted to see what it was like working with science and law and patent law seemed to be a really great fit. So I started doing informational interviews in which I would reach out to patent attorneys, try to get them to go to lunch with me and then just inquire about their job. And the first internship I had at a patent firm was actually in finance because I also had an interest in finance as well. Eventually I realized that that wasn’t the career path for me so when my internship was over I started the search again. There’s a really great resource that I don’t know enough grad students know about it. It’s called Drop Out Club or DOC which I love. And it’s for those researchers that are maybe not interested in pursuing academia or industry but are looking for an alternative career path. So they have positions on there like financial analyst in the healthcare sector or jobs like the one that I got at a science communications firm.  

So while I was just about to start writing my dissertation, so at the very end of my PhD, I started reaching out to some of the job postings on this website. I immediately got a call back from this science communications firm and they wanted to hire me immediately after a successful interview. I told them “I can’t, I’m still finishing up my PhD.” And they said “well why don’t you work part-time for us while you finish the PhD.” So I worked part-time for them for 6 months. So instead of working as an adjunct professor and teach lab, I worked at this science communications firm. I of course got it ok’d with the department and with my advisor. And then that way by the time that I had defended my dissertation they asked me to come and join them full-time. 

NAPOLITANO: That’s very proactive of you. So it seems like you got a job very quickly after you graduated. How do you think you managed to get it so quick? 

GORSON: So I think probably the most important thing was being proactive and reaching out to people. And a lot of the time I wasn’t reaching out to people saying “hey, do you have a job for me?” But I was just saying “hey, could you teach me about the job that you’re currently in.” And during that conversation a lot of times people would say “you should apply here, it sounds like it would be a really good fit for you.” So I think my success in getting a job so quickly after defending is that I was proactive and also my advisor let me be flexible when I was in the last 6 months of the PhD. She did let me work part-time at this science communications firm which really helped me land that job as soon as I was finished with my defense.  

NAPOLITANO: That’s great! So could you tell us what a typical day in the office is like for you? 

GORSON: So what’s really cool about the science communications firm is you do use a lot of the skillsets that you use when you are a researcher. You’re of course not doing wet lab work but you are using the same mental capacity that you would in a lab setting. You’re working everyday with C-suite executives of biotech and biopharma companies. Which is a really neat space. So I was working with the CEO of a start-up company that is trying to develop CAR T-cell therapies. That’s a really hot topic so I was really in the center of cutting-edge technology when I would have these discussions with C-suite executives. The day-to-day depends on what your clients need. I was working with about seven different companies at any given time. One of those companies might be in a crisis because one of their clinical trials just failed. And it’s our job as a science communications firm to help them with any media relations or needs. So if it an outlet like The New York Times picks up on the failed Phase III trial, then they’re going to need help dealing with the media, providing statements to the media. Assuming there’s no crisis every day, my day-to-day is generally writing news releases to announce data or to announce an upcoming presentation at a conference. We do a lot of content development. So we’ll write the content for clients’ websites or for their corporate deck when they’re trying to get investors to invest in their company. 

NAPOLITANO: What is the atmosphere in your workplace?  

GORSON: I would say it was what I would picture as a pretty traditional workplace. And I think that was one of the things I disliked the most about the science communications firm. Is that it’s relatively traditional so they expected you to be in the office by 9am and then you left the office at 6pm. We had a relatively short lunch breaks and a lot of people would eat lunch at their desk because your day is filled with work. And they’re trying to make it a little bit more unique. Because now that we have millennials entering the workforce, it’s important to have certain perks that weren’t offered twenty years ago. So they did provide us with lunch once every week, they had a plentiful amount of snacks that we could got, lots of healthy snacks that we could get. They also had unlimited Perrier in the fridge, which I loved, that was a huge perk for me. And what was really cool was the firm was made up of PhDs as well as former journalists, former TV producers. And it was a very young crowd so I will say since it was my last day yesterday that the thing I’ll miss the most about being there is the friendships that I’ve made because I was very close with all of my coworkers.  

NAPOLITANO: What do you think was the least exciting thing about your job? 

GORSON: I would say the least exciting thing was probably the fact that it wasn’t very flexible especially with work hours. When you come from being a lab researcher and you can get into the lab, you can leave whenever you want as long as you’re getting your work done. There’s a little bit more autonomy. And I didn’t love the fact that there wasn’t as much autonomy working in industry which is one of the reasons that I wanted to shift back to academia. But I will say I loved the pace at Russo Partners. Because when you’re in academia it takes a year or even more to get a paper published as you know. And I loved the fact that here your deadlines are one day, two days, maybe a week. But you’re churning out things very quickly and you’re working with seven different companies all at the same time. So if you’re a little bit stuck thinking about how you’re going to handle something with one company, well you have six other projects going on. So you’re able to shift on to another project, work on that a little bit until you’re ready to go back to that original project. So it’s really nice these fast timelines. That’s something I really appreciated but the non-flexibility in your work hours was a little bit tough for me, someone coming from such a flexible workplace.  

NAPOLITANO: How did your PhD in Biology help you in a science communication firm? 

GORSON: That’s a great question because I’ve gotten that question a lot once I started working there. It helped because we were only working with biotech, biopharma companies. So it was impressive to the CEO of a start-up that they had a PhD that was going to be helping building the content. The CEO knew that they wouldn’t have to explain their mechanisms of action to a lay person because I already had the scientific knowledge to understand what they were doing. So that was definitely very, very helpful. And then the other thing is really just…and the reason that they hire PhD’s…is just the mindset of aa PhD. So the fact that PhD’s are problem solvers and the fact that they like to work independently. The fact that they like to do research. So instead of asking a question immediately, a PhD is more likely to dig into something to learn about, to do research and then come back with an answer. So the firm is really happy about having PhDs not just because we understand the scientific knowledge but also because of the way that we think. 

NAPOLITANO: So what other PhDs did they hire at this science communications firm? 

GORSON: They had PhDs in...there was one that was in engineering, another one that was in neurology, and then a couple of cell biology, I was an ecology, and then another biologist. But along with having PhDs, like I said, they also had two former producers from ABC News, they had a former radio host who has just a wonderful voice. They have a lawyer. So it’s really kind of just a mix of different capabilities.          

NAPOLITANO: What led you away from the science communications and what made you decide to start looking for academia-type jobs? 

GORSON: I think I started looking for academic jobs because I was ready to be a weird snail girl. So my PhD research was in snail venom and I kind of just missed that quirkiness and really making a difference through my research. I also really, really missed mentoring students, whether it was teaching in a classroom or mentoring undergrads in my lab. That was something I really enjoyed doing and I didn’t really have that opportunity at the science communications firm. I also got this position at Hofstra, I did my Master’s at Hofstra. So I knew the faculty at Hofstra and when this position opened up it was almost like they reached out to me, I reached out the them and it was just this perfect fit that happened so smoothly. If it wasn’t such a perfect fit I don’t know if I would have left Russo Partners because I wasn’t in a hurry to leave. But it was just a perfect opportunity that I couldn’t say no. 

NAPOLITANO: What made it so perfect to you? 

GORSON: I was excited to be starting my own lab which means that I get to do my own research. Instead of working underneath someone which I had been doing for my PhD, for my Master’s and even as an undergrad, I finally get to choose my own research path. And I get to manage my lab and how I go from point A to point B. So I’m really excited to be completely autonomous and completely independent on this research project. And some things that are completely un-related is that the University of Hofstra is only ten minutes away from where my husband works out on Long Island. And it’s only about twenty minutes away from my house. I already knew all the faculty there and I get along with all the faculty. So kind of all of these things came together to really make the perfect position. 

NAPOLITANO: Nice. What was the interview process like at an academia position versus your science communications firm? 

GORSON: The science communications was what I would say is pretty typical for an interview. So I applied through the website, the Drop Out Club, I got an email back within 24 hours and they set up a phone interview with me. I spoke with somebody on the phone for about an hour and they decided that they wanted to bring me in for an in-person interview. And that was an all-day interview so I essentially met with eight people that already were working at Russo Partners and I met with each of them for about thirty minutes. And it was a lot of give and take. They would ask me questions but at the same time I would be asking them questions. And then at the very end I had to do a writing test which was new to me but of course I am proactive and I had done a ton of research. And I knew to expect a writing test.  

And it was essentially testing my abilities to know what a good news outlet is when we’re talking about the biotech and biopharma industry. It was asking me to write news releases based on a certain amount of data. So all things that I was ready for. The academic position was very different. It is most likely different form other people as well because the faculty did know me because I got my Master’s there. I had also done a presentation at Hofstra in April so they already knew what my research was like. So that was actually just an hour-long phone call and then I was offered the job 24 hours later so I was really excited about that. But generally the academic positions have a day-long interview where you’re interviewing with all of the professors and at the end you are either doing a class in the classroom or you are giving a presentation. But like I said I had already done that at Hofstra which is I think that my interview process was expedited. 

NAPOLITANO: That’s very interesting. Were there Graduate Center-specific resources or experiences that helped you prepare for your current job? 

GORSON: So I had actually reached out to the Office of Career Planning when I was about a year away from defending. Because I did kind of want to get a better idea of how to reach out to new job opportunities because I was going from academia into industry. And I wasn’t exactly sure how to make those introductions. And they helped me and they were actually the ones that gave me the idea to do these things called informational interviews. Because most people don’t turn you down for an informational interview because essentially it’s just you asking questions about their job. They’re not going to say no to that. As opposed to you emailing people asking if there’s a job opportunity available. So it’s just like a more natural way to see if they do have any job opportunities for you. And I found that to be a really wonderful resource, the career office. 

NAPOLITANO: Is there anything you know now that you wish you knew as a graduate student? 

GORSON: So I would actually say no. It’s funny that now that I’m going back into academia, a lot of people would say “well don’t you wish you would have just applied to an academic position right after your PhD.” And my answer is no. I think that everything that I do and everything that I have done so far is the reason that I am where I am today. So if I hadn’t gotten that job at the science communications firm then I most likely wouldn’t have found out that I miss academia and I want to be back in academia. And also I now have this new skillset that I’ve learned so I think for me it was really important to kind of go on this path, this journey, to find out exactly what it is that I wanted to do. And now I end up back in academia which is funny because that’s originally what I wanted to do when I started my PhD. Then I thought “nah I don’t want to be in academia, it’s too political, it’s too slow.” I join this science communications firm and I realize “wow I really miss academia” and now I’m back. So I think it was one of those situations where I really needed to step away to realize what I was missing. But I wouldn’t have changed anything. There’s nothing that I wish I had known during my PhD that I know now because I think that I would be a different person and I wouldn’t be here. 

NAPOLITANO: So clearly you enjoy research, teaching, and deep thinking? Are there things you like in your current position that draw on your passions in these areas? 

GORSON: So that was one of the things that I think I liked the most. Using all of those skillsets in the science communications firm I liked. I think that the research was probably the most interesting. So at the science communications firm you are really working with super cutting-edge technology. Now I will not name any specific clients, but some clients I know that when I’m reading their data or reading their proposed product, it doesn’t excite me. I’m like “that’s not that cool, that seems insignificant.” But man, some of the clients I was working with have really, really cool technologies and I felt lucky to be a part of their team trying to get their message out to the public so people knew about the work and the research that they were doing. So being interested in science, right, which is why I got in the PhD program in the first place. That same interest in science is what I loved most working at Russo Partners. I’m learning about the new science that these start-ups are working on. And I should say not all the companies we were working with were start-ups. Some were large companies, some had $250 million Series A financing so they were actually pretty big companies. But working with the start-ups was my favorite because I feel like with a start-up you get to be more impactful. 

NAPOLITANO: So now that you’re joining academia and want to be the “weird snail girl” again, what do you think you’re going to research and teach in your new position? 

GORSON: So I’m starting out by teaching introductory biology. And I’m in a unique position where they’re actually revamping their curriculum for their intro biology classes so I get to be a part of that curriculum building. Which I think is a really cool position to be in. And then next semester I’ll be teaching cell and molecular biology. So classes that I am very capable of teaching. I am hoping to eventually introduce a bioinformatics class for upper-level students so maybe in my second year at Hofstra I’ll be able to do that. And as far as research goes, my research was in the ecology and evolution of snail venom toxins. And I was very focused on one family of snails and a lot of the work that I did was on the computer through bioinformatics but I also did a lot of wet lab work because we were building genomes and building transcriptomes for these venoms in these snails.  

But what I want to do at Hofstra since I’m starting my own research program is actually use publicly-available databases for all types of venomous creatures. And I’m probably going to stick to invertebrates for at least the time being. But I think that it will really cut down on costs because I won’t have those wet lab costs for building transcriptomes and building genomes which costs thousands of dollars. And instead I’ll use these publicly-available databases that haven’t been mined for venom toxins. And I’d also like to increase my skills in machine learning, in AI, because I think that’s the way science is going. So instead of just using bioinformatics I would like to merge bioinformatics and machine learning to elucidate venom toxins from these publicly-available venom databases. 

NAPOLITANO: Wow that’s really awesome that you’re going to carry the torch in the venomics field and continue doing great research. Since you have so much experience in venomics and evolutionary biology, what do you think is the future of these research topics or these industries.  

GORSON: So like I said, I think that moving into more computer science-driven research. I think that’s going to be the way of the future. We’ve already started to do that a lot and I think it will just become more prominent in everyday research. And I think that’s one of the reasons why Hofstra was so excited to hire me as a professor because I am bringing this unique skillset that a lot of the older professors don’t have. And I don’t only want to start my own research lab but I would also like to bring in my bioinformatics skillset to the other professors. So when they’re trying to work on something and they don’t have the knowledge to use bioinformatics they can know come to me and say “hey this is what I’m trying to do, what tools can I use, can you help me accomplish this?” So I’m not only trying to start my own lab and have my own students but I’d also really like to supplement the research of the professors there. Because they have really great research going on and I assume that bioinformatics and machine learning will only enhance the research that they’re already doing. So I definitely think that anything on the computer or anything computer-based is the way of the future. 

NAPOLITANO: So I’m sure that in your PhD you learned a lot of bioinformatics from your research. But since you’re a proactive person, how did you start learning machine learning and using that in answering research questions? 

GORSON: So I haven’t yet used machine learning other than for a couple of pilot studies that I’ve been doing on my own time. But with being proactive I actually learned all bioinformatics and machine learning on my own. I’ve never taken a bioinformatics class, I’ve never taken a computer science class. When I joined Dr. Mandë Holford’s lab I knew that I was going to be doing bioinformatics so I just started to learn it on my own. And it’s one of those fields where if you kind of just jump into it, there are a lot of resources online, there are groups you can reach out to if you’re having any problems. And once you start doing it you get better at it slowly but surely. So when I started in my first year I had never even heard of bioinformatics and then of course by the end of my PhD I was the bioinformatics person on the entire floor here. And I was working with other labs to help them with their bioinformatics needs as well. 

NAPOLITANO: What do you think academia versus science communications firm look for in applicants? What do you think are the differences? 

GORSON: So I would say they are actually pretty similar because this science communications firm was looking to hire PhDs. Although I will say that the application process is much harder at a university. For the science communications firm I sent a cover letter and a resume, pretty standard. For the position at Hofstra I also had to write a teaching statement or teaching philosophy which is how I use diversity in the classroom and how handle problems in the classroom, etc. And I had to write a research statement because of course they know that you’re going to be bringing research into a lab. At the science communication firms, they don’t care as much about the publications that you’ve had or the research that you’ve been doing. It’s more about the way that a PhD thinks so they just want to make sure you’re going to be jiving with the rest of the people in the office.  

NAPOLITANO: Is there anything that you picked up or learned from your advisor when you were a PhD student that really helped you in your job search and ultimately landing two successful jobs? 

GORSON: Presentation. So I would say that what I’ve learned most from Dr. Mandë Holford is presentations and how important presentations of yourself as well as presentations are. And at the science communications firm, that’s why I got the job so quickly. They interviewed me and I presented myself so well, I was energetic, I was positive, that they offered me a job within 24 hours. And at Hofstra I actually gave a presentation there in April and as soon as the presentation was done they approached me. They said “wow that’s one of the best presentations we’ve seen, we love how you put it together.” That’s because my advisor had told me the best way to put presentations together. You have a few words, lot of figures, and of course you practice it enough that you know what you’re talking about but not too much so that you have everything memorized because you want it to be conversational. So honestly I learned so much from her about how to present myself and how to do presentations. And those were two huge sticking points at the science communications firm as well as Hofstra when they hired me.  

NAPOLITANO: Is there anything else we should touch on that we haven’t had the chance to talk about? 

GORSON: So one thing that I think I didn’t mention with regards to the science communications firm is the importance of social media. So it’s kind of silly because everybody thinks of like Twitter as a way to keep tabs on Kim Kardashian or Drake or whoever and I never had a Twitter because none of that interests me. But in science communications, social media, Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook are all really important. Because the fastest way to get news these days is through social media. So most of my clients had their own social media accounts, we would develop social media content for the social media accounts. That was one of the things that I would do in my day-to-day is develop these calendars. And that became really important. And I actually leveraged this skillset when I applied to Hofstra. I told them “hey if we want to recruit more students, maybe I can help work on the Hofstra biology department social media page.” So something that I never thought I would be interested in...social media…now I have my own Twitter but before I didn’t have my own Twitter account. Not only was it super relevant at the science communications firm, it actually ended up being what I think was a huge positive when I interviewed at Hofstra. So don’t ever discount things that you think are silly. I always thought social media was silly, it ended up being hugely important in both of the careers that I’ve been in post-PhD. 

NAPOLITANO: This was a very interesting story of how you graduated from The Graduate Center, when into science communications and now are working in academia. And it looks like we’re running out of time so I want to give you the opportunity to tell us anything else that you want to include for the graduate students that are looking for jobs. 

GORSON: I would say, be curious. And satisfy that curiosity. If you don’t know what you want to do, reach out to a bunch of people, people like me. People that are more than happy to talk about their journey. And be sure to explore different opportunities. A lot of graduate students might be nervous to leave academia because they think that their advisor is not going to be ok with them not continuing the legacy. And that was not the case at all with me at all. My supervisor was super supportive when I went into science communications. And of course she’s super supportive of me coming back into academia. But it was really important to just explore the different possibilities. I didn’t have to be pigeon-holed into academia, I could go into science communications. And it was an absolutely wonderful year and a half that I was working with them. I would tell people to just explore their curiosities. 

NAPOLITANO: Thank you Juliette for being a part of the alumni podcast and I hope to hear about what you do next in your new position in academia. 

GORSON: Thank you Tanya, it was wonderful speaking with you about my career journey. 

NAPOLITANO, VOICE-OVER: That’s a wrap for this episode of Alumni Aloud. I want to thank Juliette for coming on the show to share her experiences as an Account Executive at a science communications firm and her new career shift into academia. Remember to stay tuned for more episodes of Alumni Aloud, published every two weeks in the fall and spring semesters. Subscribe on iTunes and you’ll automatically be notified of new episodes. Also check out our Facebook, Twitter, and career planning website for more updates from our office or to make appointments with our career counselors. Thanks for listening and see you next time! 

(MUSIC)