Discussion Thread: How to Deal with Conflicts in Lab

[QofQuimica]

---

Members do not see this ad.

People seemed interested in discussing the issue of how to deal with "bad chemistry" ( 😀 ) in the lab. I thought it would be a good idea to start a thread about this topic. So far I think we can all agree that bursting into tears is probably NOT the best solution. 😉 Anyone have any thoughts, stories, suggestions, etc. on dealing with a PI, post doc, fellow student, etc. that you just can't get along with? When is it time to dig in and work harder, and when is it time to move on?

 

[totalcommand]

People seemed interested in discussing the issue of how to deal with "bad chemistry" ( 😀 ) in the lab. I thought it would be a good idea to start a thread about this topic. So far I think we can all agree that bursting into tears is probably NOT the best solution. 😉 Anyone have any thoughts, stories, suggestions, etc. on dealing with a PI, post doc, fellow student, etc. that you just can't get along with? When is it time to dig in and work harder, and when is it time to move on?

In my experience, communication is absolutely key. In the beginning, you do not want to shut the person out. Try to confront each other and work out your differences - don't silently brood about the other person. If you stop talking to each other, things will likely build to a point where one of you will have an outburst (yep maybe even tears).

Every problem that I have had with a PI, post doc, or fellow student can be traced to a lack of communication about problems early and often. If the person is higher up than you, ask them what their expectations are of you and try to see things from their side, and do this early before things spin out of control. It's hard to live up to expectations if you don't know exactly what they are, and the expectations are probably more reasonable than you think.

When you do meet with a higher-up to voice your concerns or problems, one of your greatest assets will be to remain calm, cool, and controlled. Once you bring emotions, ie tears, angry phrases, etc. into the mix, you'll start to come off as unreasonable. In fact, if your higher-up is the one who becomes emotional, your calm words will carry more weight in the discussion. Always use sentences that use personal pronouns - "I" - rather than "you". Say what you feel and what you think, and at all costs avoid directly or indirectly verbalizing your assumptions about what your PI/postdoc is feeling and thinking. This is a sure way to make the person angry and get them to write you off.

This also goes with problems with fellow students. Try to work it out directly with the student, without getting a higher-up involved. If this doesn't work, try to setup a meeting with a third party, such as your PI, where you can discuss the issues. There's a little more leeway here since if things are absolutely impossible to work out, you might be able to minimize contact with the person.

If, after trying acknowledging your differences you still can't get along or fix the problem (give it some time first after your discussions!), I'd say it's time to move on.

 

[Flanigan]

I think all of those suggestion are great.
I think it is also important to realize early that fellow students and/or the PI may not even know there is a problem. So, communication is a must.

On the other hand they may be entirely aware of the problem and may not care to resolve it in an amicable fashion (i.e. they really have it in for you). If this is the case, and esspecially if the PI is involved remember that you are the student. Once the student-PI relationship breaks down it is time to move on. Assuming that nothing illegal has occurred (unethical or simply mean-spirited does not count) it is almost impossible to fight above your head in an academic setting.

Don't let problems drag on. Its better to find a new PI after a year of hard work and trying to deal with the problem than it is to work in a "hostile environment" for 2 or 3 years and then trying to move on.

If there is a serious issue with the PI, find a new advisor quickly and quietly. A new PI, especially an untenured one, will not want to become involved in an ugly political situation with one of his/her collegues.

Be professional. Try very hard to understand your own contribution to the problem. The "Everyone else is wrong and I am right" attitude only works if you have tenure. Hehehe....

Also remember to deal directly with the person with whom you have the issue. Don't place your fellow students in situations where they might have to choose between you and the PI or you and everyone else. Being a grad/med student is difficult without having to deal with someone elses sticky problems.

If an issue does not effect your work is it really necessary to spend time fighting? Back down or let it go. Its just not worth it.

On the same token if someone else comes to you with issues, direct them to the person with whom they have issues or to the dean's office. Don't become associated with someone else's issues.

The Dean: the only person that can speak for you and be heard (other than a lawyer). This should be the last resort. I have seen people who do not have the option of changing PIs use this method (students in the last year or two of their degree program). This is essentially a declaration of war and there is no going back after this occurs. Don't bother the dean with petty issues and make sure that you are right. Also, the dean is not likely to become involved in scientific issues.

All in all, it can be tough to find yourself in a non ideal situation when you are a graduate student. Ironically, professors are often shocked when they hear that problems occur becuase they did not have any when they were students...

Think about that last one.

The morale of the story is to avoid problems and remember that the first day is very important...

 

[1Path]

I've been involved in academia on some level (undergrad, graduate, employee) for most of the last 18 years and I'll have to disagree about getting "higher ups" involved in lab conflicts. You learn real fast that the "research world" is VERY tiny and a great way to blackball yourself into a 10 year PhD program is to go over the head of your PI. If the probelm is so bad that this is the action you want to take, I think it's easier and better for you politically to just find another lab, because at the end of the day, politics trumps everything.

In the "real world" you absolutely MUST learn to deal with conflict without being a tattle tale and as a double minority, I've had more than my share of crass occurances to overlook and overcome. IMHO, the single most important factor in being successful in the face of adversity in a research environment is to not be afriad to stick up for youself and/or back up whatever position you're taking (with solid stats/data of course). I can't count the number of times doing so has not only turned a bad situation around, but made the experience highly rewarding and positive.

I also think that personality issues don't just come out of nowhere. Often people ignore their instints about a PI made in the first few meetings BEFORE you join the lab because she/he has a lot of funding/publishes a lot, ect. This is a HUGE mistake. A LOT of problems could be avoided if people took thier time before selecting a lab, making these informal meetings as much about interviewing the PI and it is about them interviewing you.

 

[MSTPbound]

Hi 1Path... I'm mostly looking to this thread FOR advice... not to provide it 😉 So I just want to acknowledge a couple of things you've written that I can relate to directly.

I've been involved in academia on some level (undergrad, graduate, employee) for most of the last 18 years and I'll have to disagree about getting "higher ups" involved in lab conflicts. You learn real fast that the "research world" is VERY tiny and a great way to blackball yourself into a 10 year PhD program is to go over the head of your PI.

I totally agree, and one of the reasons I was finally able to resolve my issue is that I was able to navigate these turbulent political waters carefully and effectively. In retrospect, I'm kind of lucky that my problem was with a post-doc and not the PI!

...IMHO, the single most important factor in being successful in the face of adversity in a research environment is to not be afriad to stick up for youself and/or back up whatever position you're taking (with solid stats/data of course). I can't count the number of times doing so has not only turned a bad situation around, but made the experience highly rewarding and positive.

Yep. I'm not sure if you mean what I think you mean here, but if you do, then I submit that one of the reasons I've been able to handle this situation is that I directly, if diplomatically, addressed the person causing me distress in an e-mail, copying appropriate parties, and citing evidence that I was prepared to present in e-mail history, notes, and even eyewitnesses. Yes, I may have been "new" to bench research, but my (4-year) stint in corporate financial services taught me how to protect my assets.

I also think that personality issues don't just come out of nowhere. Often people ignore their instints about a PI made in the first few meetings BEFORE you join the lab because she/he has a lot of funding/publishes a lot, ect. This is a HUGE mistake. A LOT of problems could be avoided if people took thier time before selecting a lab, making these informal meetings as much about interviewing the PI and it is about them interviewing you.

And this was exactly my critical mistake, although technically it was the first meeting with the post-doc that left me uneasy - not the PI per se. Thanks for the reminder - and I can assure you that I have learned this lesson well, and am carrying it into the next lab.

Thanks again everyone. KEEP POSTING! YOUR OPINION MATTERS!!!

Take Care,

MSTPbound

 

[1Path]

Yes, I may have been "new" to bench research, but my (4-year) stint in corporate financial services taught me how to protect my assets.

I'm sure if you survived coporate america for that long, protecting your assets is second nature to you!😉

 

[Hard24Get]

I have few policies for dealing with others, and most of it boils down to "killin' em with kindness". I have definitely had a number of sourpusses to work with in my time - you know, the ones that leap upon you like a wild tiger should you leave a speck of chemical on the scale and take it as a personal affront if you didn't include a control they would have liked to see. If you smile and can laugh at yourself and remain cheerful, there is nothing more they can do to you and will either suffer or cheer up, themselves.

If it is a real conflict like others traipsing onto your turf project-wise, you simply set up a meeting designed to make sure neither of you re-invent the wheel. As previously pointed out by totalcommand, many problems come from silence. If you address things from the get-go and don't let things build up, it should all work out.

If you feel like things are so bad you would bring someone else into it, talk to as ombudsman that will keep things between the two of you before you consider talking to higher-ups (which should be reserved for getting out of the lab). Those who run to the PI for every conflict are universally hated as cry babies, often even by the PI.

Major conflicts with the PI can be avoided by selecting the right one. In general, PIs are easy to negotiate with because they have good negotiation skills. I have had problems with my PI, who didn't want to publish, and I would just leave a manuscript in her box, and then say I am not willing to move on to another project without publishing.

When people think of grad school and PhDs, they imagine shy mousy people in glasses. What I have learned is that grad school will either drive you out or make you assertive - it is a lot more like corporate America these days. I have become WAY more assertive and communicative by doing a PhD, and you will as well.

 

[QofQuimica]

You guys have given some great advice. I don't really have much to add to this conversation except to say that I want to emphasize the importance of listening to your gut when you meet with a potential PI, and not being seduced by "cool" research. I think that nothing is more important than getting along well with your PI and making sure that you both agree with his/her expectations. I also always advise new grad students to check the graduation rates from a lab they're considering. If that PI isn't regularly graduating PhDs every year or two, that's not a lab you want to pick.