Your door is always open, but the same person is always in there!
January 14, 2018 4:16 AM Subscribe
My lab is having problems with favouritism: excessive amounts of supervisor time are being spent on one person, a non-researcher, in my opinion at the expense of research trainees in the lab. This is hurting lab morale, and relations with the supervisor. How can I bring this up with the supervisor in a way that is likely to be productive?
I work in a lab in southern Europe. Like any lab, we have personal tensions, but generally we work respectfully together, and are on personally friendly terms. Our PI has resources, likes to give his trainees opportunities to attend workshops and meetings, and in general encourages us to follow own own ideas. He meets with each of us regularly, and also encourages us to drop in whenever we'd like to discuss anything.
Lately, we've run into problems with this. One member of the lab is present in a more administrative capacity, and she's been ramping up her time in meetings with the PI. These meetings now take place almost every day that they're both in, sometimes for hours. The door is sometimes closed, and I don't fully understand the language, but these meetings are very clearly not only about work (sometimes the apparently non-work talk takes place in her shared office instead, leading me to believe that there's nothing inappropriate going on). This has been going on for at least a year, but seems to have been getting worse in the last few months.
The lab member in question is a perfectionist about her work - in the past, she's come to ask one person their opinion four or five times about different minor wording changes to the same sentence in something that she's writing. So one possibility I see is that she's asking for similar amounts of feedback from our PI, exacerbated by her lack of background in what we do. If this is the case, he doesn't seem to mind: she's already had her contract extended a couple of times, and has been here for over a year.
But either way, this has turned into a source of frustration for the rest of us. Our PI already spends less time in the lab than he used to because of increased administrative duties; he still manages to meet with each of us, but the fact that he is so often unavailable because of this one lab member means that other people keep their meetings with him short and focused on their immediate tasks now - rather than having the longer, more general conversations about scientific questions or their careers that would be beneficial to all of us. If the lab member in question were a scientific trainee, it would be easier to swallow; but as it is, the impression is that a disproportionate amount of our PI's time is being spent on, at best, issues that aren't essential to the lab's functioning. It's become common to answer the question, 'Is [PI] free now?' with an eyeroll, or something sarcastic along the lines of, 'Guess who's in there.' There's been a half-joking remark about his hand being on her knee. So I feel that this needs to be addressed. I am a postdoc, I have my own funding and am generally on good terms with the PI, which I think puts me in a better position to say something than the grad students; though I haven't published a paper from this lab yet (if I had, I'd feel even better placed to bring up this kind of concern).
- Am I right in wanting to address this situation? What other professional explanations should I consider, that I may not be aware of?
- If I do address this, what's the best way to do so? I wouldn't like the PI to feel that I'm accusing him and the lab member of an inappropriate relationship, and I would like the PI to keep his open-door policy for meetings in general - just, keeping meetings with this one person to reasonable levels, so that others will drop in more often as well, and share more openly with him, rather than keeping their own counsel.
- Is it not worth trying to address this, and should I just keep my head down for the remainder of my time here?
I work in a lab in southern Europe. Like any lab, we have personal tensions, but generally we work respectfully together, and are on personally friendly terms. Our PI has resources, likes to give his trainees opportunities to attend workshops and meetings, and in general encourages us to follow own own ideas. He meets with each of us regularly, and also encourages us to drop in whenever we'd like to discuss anything.
Lately, we've run into problems with this. One member of the lab is present in a more administrative capacity, and she's been ramping up her time in meetings with the PI. These meetings now take place almost every day that they're both in, sometimes for hours. The door is sometimes closed, and I don't fully understand the language, but these meetings are very clearly not only about work (sometimes the apparently non-work talk takes place in her shared office instead, leading me to believe that there's nothing inappropriate going on). This has been going on for at least a year, but seems to have been getting worse in the last few months.
The lab member in question is a perfectionist about her work - in the past, she's come to ask one person their opinion four or five times about different minor wording changes to the same sentence in something that she's writing. So one possibility I see is that she's asking for similar amounts of feedback from our PI, exacerbated by her lack of background in what we do. If this is the case, he doesn't seem to mind: she's already had her contract extended a couple of times, and has been here for over a year.
But either way, this has turned into a source of frustration for the rest of us. Our PI already spends less time in the lab than he used to because of increased administrative duties; he still manages to meet with each of us, but the fact that he is so often unavailable because of this one lab member means that other people keep their meetings with him short and focused on their immediate tasks now - rather than having the longer, more general conversations about scientific questions or their careers that would be beneficial to all of us. If the lab member in question were a scientific trainee, it would be easier to swallow; but as it is, the impression is that a disproportionate amount of our PI's time is being spent on, at best, issues that aren't essential to the lab's functioning. It's become common to answer the question, 'Is [PI] free now?' with an eyeroll, or something sarcastic along the lines of, 'Guess who's in there.' There's been a half-joking remark about his hand being on her knee. So I feel that this needs to be addressed. I am a postdoc, I have my own funding and am generally on good terms with the PI, which I think puts me in a better position to say something than the grad students; though I haven't published a paper from this lab yet (if I had, I'd feel even better placed to bring up this kind of concern).
- Am I right in wanting to address this situation? What other professional explanations should I consider, that I may not be aware of?
- If I do address this, what's the best way to do so? I wouldn't like the PI to feel that I'm accusing him and the lab member of an inappropriate relationship, and I would like the PI to keep his open-door policy for meetings in general - just, keeping meetings with this one person to reasonable levels, so that others will drop in more often as well, and share more openly with him, rather than keeping their own counsel.
- Is it not worth trying to address this, and should I just keep my head down for the remainder of my time here?
Assuming the supervisor=PI, do you know what their role really is? A supervisor generally has an administrative role, not usually just a senior researcher. I know my role as a supervisor is to make sure my people have training opportunities but I don't train them. My senior staff do it. I have senior staff that distribute the work, etc. I solely do administrative work and spend most of my time with staff who screw up. I've been accused of being a bad supervisor because I don't spend enough time stroking everyone's feathers.
It sounds like something is broken in your office but the gossip about who should be doing what and perceptions about favoritism is the biggest part of the problem.
posted by JJ86 at 7:03 AM on January 14, 2018
It sounds like something is broken in your office but the gossip about who should be doing what and perceptions about favoritism is the biggest part of the problem.
posted by JJ86 at 7:03 AM on January 14, 2018
What happens if you interrupt them an hour into the meeting to ask when he will be available, or if you schedule a meeting to talk about the bigger-picture stuff? Why are you harming yourself by cutting your own scheduled meeting short? As a postdoc, what are his expectations in terms of you training the grad and undergrad researchers? The “administrative stuff” is usually what keeps the lights on, and many senior PIs with successful labs expect postdocs and/or scientists to do the bulk of the guidance, writing help, etc.
I would cut any gossip about their relationship off hard; true or not, that is the kind of stuff that will destroy her career but not his, and he is the one with all the power here.
posted by tchemgrrl at 8:12 AM on January 14, 2018 [4 favorites]
I would cut any gossip about their relationship off hard; true or not, that is the kind of stuff that will destroy her career but not his, and he is the one with all the power here.
posted by tchemgrrl at 8:12 AM on January 14, 2018 [4 favorites]
The only thing relevant here is if you get the facetime you need with this person. So simply schedule time with him. If ‘scheduling’ is not something you all do make it known in the morning you’d like half an hr of his time that day, when would be a good time? Then you stick to that. If she happens to be there at that time you interrupt, ask if you’re still meeting at this time or would he like to reschedule. Repeat as required. If you really can’t get the facetime you need then you can raise that. But at the moment you have nothing to raise.
posted by koahiatamadl at 8:33 AM on January 14, 2018 [11 favorites]
posted by koahiatamadl at 8:33 AM on January 14, 2018 [11 favorites]
I agree with koahiatamadl: schedule the time you need and if your other colleagues are having the same problem, suggest they do the same. If you have difficulties, follow the steps above.
The key here is to keep the focus on you and your own professional needs, not on what your supervisor is or isn't doing to support a colleague. For all you know there could be serious issues on the administrative side of the operation that require his intervention.
And please shut down any gossip or hints that there might be something inappropriate going on with this colleague. That will hurt her most of all, but will also reflect poorly on you and your supervisor. If he finds out you and your peers have entertained that kind of chatter, he will not be happy with any of you.
posted by rpfields at 12:22 PM on January 14, 2018
The key here is to keep the focus on you and your own professional needs, not on what your supervisor is or isn't doing to support a colleague. For all you know there could be serious issues on the administrative side of the operation that require his intervention.
And please shut down any gossip or hints that there might be something inappropriate going on with this colleague. That will hurt her most of all, but will also reflect poorly on you and your supervisor. If he finds out you and your peers have entertained that kind of chatter, he will not be happy with any of you.
posted by rpfields at 12:22 PM on January 14, 2018
OP has a good point about power in the lab. Are you the only post-doc in the lab? If so, you may be the only one that can say something and it sounds like the grad students may not be getting adequate time. I would consider approaching it from a "you seem very busy right now, how can I help you make sure the grad students are getting the support they need" standpoint. Yeah def schedule the time you need but your PI (and you to a much lesser extent) have a responsibility to the students to provide them supervision, coaching and mentoring. I wouldn't mention the admin at all.
posted by stewiethegreat at 1:54 PM on January 14, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by stewiethegreat at 1:54 PM on January 14, 2018 [3 favorites]
Do not do not do not appoint yourself lab spokesperson and go to the PI with a group complaint. That is likely to lead to negative repercussions for you.
Listen to koahiatamadl and focus on scheduling for yourself.
posted by medusa at 7:41 PM on January 14, 2018
Listen to koahiatamadl and focus on scheduling for yourself.
posted by medusa at 7:41 PM on January 14, 2018
This thread is closed to new comments.
(I have to admit I’m not comfy with this kind of office gossip. I’ve seen women— mostly women— get savaged unfairly by this kind of talk. )
posted by frumiousb at 4:35 AM on January 14, 2018 [7 favorites]