Tools & Strategies

Finding the Right Fit and How to Get There

banner-copy

A busy year adjusting to a new career is evident when a blog post is more than a year overdue. This tardy post is appropriate, though, as it includes identifying an optimal career path and networking to set yourself on that path.

In November of 2015, I gave a talk at the University of Washington as part of the Bioscience Careers Seminar Series entitled, “Finding the Right Fit, and How to Get There.” The PowerPoint-free presentation focused on the three steps that in my experience, and from the experiences that have been shared with me, are essential to networking and finding a good career fit. The guidance focused on academics looking to leave academia but the principles are universal. The three general steps are:

  • Step 1: Know your community
  • Step 2: Know yourself
  • Step 3: Know the “stuff”

Step 1 includes going outside your comfort zone to broaden your contacts and advice on meeting with people for professional networking. Step 2 built on this with specific exercises to help guide your search and also a gentle suggestion to do some honest self-reflection. Step 3 refers to knowing the language and technologies or products of the field you want to enter. Some of the more specific ideas I included came from an earlier blog post: Five Networking Tips. There is also a downloading video of my entire talk available See the talk.

untitled

The meat of the talk was followed up with discussions of small vs. large companies, startups, and consulting based on my experience, my observations, and the advice I have accumulated.

However, during the question and answer session, I realized the following gaps in my knowledge: 1) potentially out of date specific information on the career track at large consulting firms (such as McKinsey) for entry-level PhDs, 2) limited information on PhD-level scientists leaving academia for banking, and 3) I have no idea if STEM PhDs that then continue on for a JD enter law firms through a different career path.

Coming back to this after a year away, it’s time to update all my information. I am reaching out to my network, but if a reader of this post has anything they would like to share, please comment below.

Additionally, I’m continuing to collect personal experiences of academic journeys out of academia, as well as tidbits of useful advice. Contributions are very welcome.

What’s my Worth?

Feats of strength can substitute for negotiations

When negotiations fail: arm wrestle (Boston College Festivus 2010, Me and Megan Kelly).

For many of us, evaluating our worth in the professional world is daunting. This intimidation keeps us from negotiating and then leaves us asking, “what if…,” long after sealing the deal. For women, there may even be guilt associated with mishandling negotiations since no one wants to perpetuate the ominous “salary gap.” Women in Bio, San Francisco, offered a negotiation helping hand February 26th at Nektar to remove some of the fear from getting what you are worth.

First, let’s take away some of the pressure. We have all heard the statistic that women make $0.77 for every $1 that a man makes. Early in 2014 Christina Hoff Sommers addressed this misleading statistic in U.S. News and then revisited the the idea as Feminist Myth 5 in TIME later that year. The statistic is based on average income for men and women and when you control for specific jobs, the gap nearly vanishes. Based on the career adjusted statistics, the real emphasis should be on choosing more profitable college majors if women want to earn more, not more aggressive negotiating.

Mary Haak-Frendscho, the event’s moderator, did bring up an interesting statistic from a Pew Research Center article. According to the article, women, on average, earn 93 percent of what men earn until they are 35. After 35, the average earnings shift to the 77 percent statistic. What happens at 35? It is something to consider and I guess I will find out this year.

Now that we are able to negotiate guilt-free since the future of women-kind is not on our shoulders, how do we prepare to come to the table? BioCentury Executive Editor, Simone Fishburn’s advice to do extensive, “soul searching before you walk into a negotiation,” is the lynchpin of preparation. We have to know our priorities.

When I first went on the job market after my postdoc, I had a long and detailed list of “priorities.” After some soul searching, and some experience, it was clear everything fit in four points: 1) a professional environment; 2) a collaborative, supportive, and respectful team; 3) a flexible schedule; and 4) part of my job is something I would do as a hobby. Number 4 may sound unusual, but examples for me are roles with a writing component (this blog is for fun) or forming partnerships (I enjoy networking and talking shop). A simple set of priorities helps with evaluation of and negotiation of roles.

Dilbert on the art of negotiation

There is always something to negotiate.

We should also enter a negotiation with realistic goals. Startups are going to be very different then Pfizer, which is different than non-profits. Dorian Hirth, Senior Vice President of human resources at Nektar, and Mimi Hancock, Partner at Spencer Stuart, both emphasized reasonable expectations several times. As far as salary, there are some online resources like Salary.com, Glassdoor, and SimplyHired, but much of their information is self-reported and they tend to inflate industry standards. In biotech, I have not found them to be very useful. The Radford guidance is ideal and what human resource professionals consult, but it is a pay service. “Your network is one of the most important things you can do,” according to Hirth. Your network is ultimately your best tool for industry information and advice on setting expectations around your priority list.

A few negotiables that I had not considered that came up in the panel discussion were promotion schedule, conference attendance, and opportunities to interact with higher management or partners. It is a phenomenal idea to use negotiation time to secure opportunities and emphasize priorities. It may give you more leeway than the typical salary/vacation/equity route. For me, since a flexible schedule is important, negotiating early mornings in exchange for free evenings and conference attendance to keep me talking shop and networking are options.

With our priorities and a realistic plan, it is time to go to the table. Here our greatest asset is, “confidence in your skill set,” says Hirth. We should not be afraid to ask as the worst they can say is no. However, avoid being obnoxious. Emphasize your desire for things to work out and put forth solutions suggests Fishburn. Hancock advises to, “look for cues and clues,” that you may be souring the relationship and to be open, honest, and transparent.

Realism and practicality in negotiations

Stay true to your priorities and be prepared to walk away.

Finally, Fishburn reminds us that negotiations are still part of the interview process so, “listen to the things they are not telling you.” This will provide important insight into what the working environment will be like and the personality of the future boss. If you feel you are not being valued or that you will have to compromise on your priorities, walk away. The situation will not improve when you are with them 40+ hours every week.

The take away is: in a negotiation be informed, relaxed, and confident and get what you are worth, or walk away, something else will come along.

Five Networking Tips for Graduate Students and Postdocs

Metazoan signaling network

These are not the only networks (Korcsmaros, et al., PLoS ONE, 2011)

As PhDs prepare to leave the hallowed halls of academia, most are immediately confronted with the glaring fact that they have absolutely no idea how to find a job. We were told it’s all about the network, but we didn’t need to network, we were busy for the last five to ten years building all these amazing skills and now industry is going to fall over itself to recruit us, right? Perhaps, but it will be a slow fall that takes many months and a lot of pushing.

There are clear reasons for this lag that may not be obvious to the academic. First, most of your skills were developed using the cheapest, most MacGyver-ed method possible that your PI perfected 30 years ago. These methods are probably carried out on the the same equipment he used, too. This is because he refuses to admit someone developed something better in the intervening decades and he has one R01 for 15 trainees. Second, you chose your project, (insert crazy-specific thesis title that only you, your PI, and maybe one other person cares about), based on your passions and not on developing the skills that industry needs.

My thesis on IMC proteins in Toxoplasma gondii

A little casual reading…

There was no reason to consider industry, though, because you were going to be a PI, just like the 60 other students who started grad school with you and the thousands across the globe. Third, you know no one outside of academia and have no “real world” experience (pre-grad school counts very little). Even those PhDs lucky enough (or prescient enough) to work with current generation equipment and the most up-to-date methods in the sexiest fields may have trouble overcoming the lack of experience. Finally, get ready to fight the stereotype. Employers have assumptions about the PhD personality and the ability of PhDs to assimilate into cooperate culture.

PhDs increase while the number of academic positions stay the same

There are more PhDs for a stagnant number of academic positions (Schillebeeckx , et al., Nature Biotechnology, 2013)

Based on my observations, postdocs are averaging a year or more to find their first industry position. Under- or unemployment for more than a year is common. Here in the San Francisco area, many PhDs go to startups that are willing to take a risk and then find themselves jobless again within a year or two.

However, this is a hopefully and encouraging blog post! There are simple things graduate students and postdocs can do to expedite the future job search, protect against fluctuations in industry, and show themselves to be more than the stereotype. The most important is networking. It takes time, but it’s an investment that will pay off.

Increasing number of life science PhDs unemployed

The red line is on the rise. (Jordan Weissmann, The Atlantic, 2013)

Below are my top five networking tips, from one PhD to another.

  1. Attend networking events outside your comfort zone and network

Conferences and meeting in your field of expertise are important, but will not suffice. You must leave your comfort zone and diversify your connections. Start by taking a tour of events, attending several types of events hosted by different groups. Try happy hours, talks, and short courses by societies, meetups, and companies. Pick the ones that you enjoy and are most productive for your goals and then become a regular. People should start to recognize you.

In general, the events you pay for are higher quality and will bring in more people from industry. Free events draw people on a budget, i.e. graduate students, postdocs, and the unemployed. You can make great connections at these events but remember, investing in your network is investing in your future so pony up the registration fee.

At first it is ok to just show up. This is a tough first step for most people. After a few, though, don’t just grab a drink and try to blend into the wall. People are all at these events to mingle so pick a group and introduce yourself.

If this is particularly difficult, considering volunteering with a professional organization. It will provide a purpose for your interactions, will not feel like shallow small talk, and will give other members a sense of what you are like to work with, which is important for future recommendations and introductions.

  1. Talk to everyone

When out and about, make an effort to strike up conversations. You never know who is on the yoga mat next to you or in line behind you at the grocery store. This has the added benefit of making you more open and your conversational manner more natural at professional events.

For the same reasons, accept all networking meetings that your schedule and energy will allow. Prepare for meetings and come with an agenda. Be ready with enough information to engage in deeper conversations and to make efficient use of everyone’s time. At the end, “get to the next person” by asking for specific introductions to expand your network.

  1. Don’t over do it

You are now attending events and meeting with contacts and it is very easy to get overwhelmed. When I started building my network I was attending events and taking meetings everyday and sometimes twice a day. The burnout was quick and defeating. I learned my magic number is three career-building activities per week. It forces me to prioritize and allows me take full advantage of the most productive activities.

  1. Build a brand 

In order to increase networking efficiency, you need something accessible where contacts can get a sense of who you are before they meet you. It should also allow potential connections to evaluate if you are worth their time (it’s harsh but true). It’s an added bonus if this presence brings people to you.

LinkedIn is the most common first step for professional brand building, but it’s more stagnant and dry than Twitter and Facebook (see Belle Beth Cooper’s Fast Company article here).

Social media use statistics

The majority of LinkedIn users are inactive (Belle Beth Cooper, Fast Company, 2013)

To build a brand, start tweeting and making public Facebook posts based on your passions. Focus on the field you plan to build your career in and maybe a hobby or two. For example, I’m a molecular biologist interested in infectious disease, microbiomics, and next-generation sequencing, so my tweets and public posts are focused on industry news, research findings, and media related to these areas. To prove I’m still human, I toss in yoga and fitness tidbits, as well.

Blogs are an excellent tool, too. They come in all flavors and can be as focused as you desire. I use this blog to record my professional growth and share my current professional interests and thoughts. However, do keep personal and professional blogs separate. Updates on your toddler’s potty training show your humanity but do little to promote future employment.

  1. Follow up

This is the most important tip: follow up on every discussion. Your network will cease to grow if the people that make up your nodes do not feel appreciated or respected. After every event, reach out to the people you met; LinkedIn connections are the easiest. Try to include some reference to your discussion to show you were invested and not just collecting business cards.

After meetings send thoughtful thank you’s. Again, include something that shows you were engaged and internalized the conversation. Provide any additional information discussed during the meeting and ask for introductions to the next person or people.

Networking is a skill and it takes practice to get comfortable, efficient, and effective. Even if you stay in academia, with academic-industry collaborations becoming the standard a diverse network is priceless. Furthermore, the interpersonal skills you exercise through networking will translate into your personal and everyday life.

It’s a win-win investment so get out there and meet people.

Why I Love Contract Science Writing, an Evaluation

Science Writing for Everyone

As an engineering consultant, I knew I was busy, solving problems, slogging through tedious environmental regulations (CFR Title 40 still gives me the willies), and enduring round after excruciating round of report editing; but I never considered why I was doing these things or what skills I was gaining. I did not appreciate the value of my circumstances. Years later it become obvious that what I was really doing as a consultant was developing amazing technical writing skills; acquiring a keen attention detail; learning to manage projects, teams, and clients; learning how to sell products; and, this is the big one, learning how to take relentless critical feedback and integrate it without any sense of personal attack. If I had realized this at the time, how much more could I have grown? How many opportunities did I waste?

I like to think I learn from my mistakes, and since I prize the efficient use of time, it is now standard practice to reflect on any project and evaluate: 1) what am I learning, 2) what skills am I developing, and 3) how can I gain as much transferable experience as possible?

Over the last two years, I have taken on several technical writing contract projects and love them. Below are my reflections on the “why” and the general criteria they meet:

1) Exercise an existing skill: technical writing skill

Neglected skills atrophy the same as unused muscles, regardless of the number of years invested in developing them. I spent five years learning Italian and how much can I speak now?- nada..or is it niente? Contract writing for multiple companies provides excellent skill reinforcement since each project is different. It hinders recycling a formula from project to project and requires active thought and growth.

2) Expand an existing skill: scientific communication to a broad audience

Scientists talk a great deal about the importance of communicating science to the general population, but most of us never do. A poster or a talk at a general interest conference doesn’t count. The closest I had come was writing due diligence reports to business people with Oxbridge Biotech Roundtable (OBR).

This is not Science Writing

Tucker Martin, Worchester Polytechnic Institute

When I started writing service descriptions for Science Exchange (SE) I learned what it meant to write for anyone. Describing “science for the people” forced me to distill concepts to the basics and to ask for feedback from naïve audiences. It became clear that examples of when to use a service are most important and reinforced the idea that analogy is usually the best tool for disseminating knowledge to uninformed audiences.

3) Develop new skills: learn novel techniques and fill-in knowledge gaps

Writing service descriptions and especially grants for different companies requires learning about new fields and techniques outside the narrow focus of my research. It forces me to stay up to date on current science and technology trends. Contract writing can bring to light any gaps in knowledge, as well. I have had to fill-in plenty of holes in my areas of expertise.

4) Lead to additional opportunities: other contract projects

Learning the theory behind new fields helps me find opportunities to gain technical experience in areas outside my existing expertise like next-generation sequencing. It also provides conversational knowledge for conferences and networking events. Through engaging people in deeper conversations other opportunities arise that allow me to stay on that exciting slope of the learning curve and keep cycling through the list above.

Deer Mountain: the basis of my first writing contract

My first paid writing project in 2nd grade entitled “3 miles that became 6” tells the harrowing tale of my family’s hike on Deer Mountain. Critical acclaim has been slow in coming.

Perhaps these general criteria will provide something to mull over the next time you evaluate a project and consider stepping a little outside your comfort zone. Always keep asking, “what am I gaining and could I grow more?”

Connect with me on Maven

Citizen Science brings humanity and the microbiome to the world

                                               

                                              Badge from Beware Comics

Outsourcing is the reality of modern science. I’ve written posts on contract research organizations (CROs) and the pharmaceutical industry’s move to innovation hubs, but these are dry, corporate initiatives. They are important to our understanding of the business of science today, but where’s the humanity in a CRO? Where’s the joie de vivre in an innovation hub? 

Citizen science is the beating heart of science today. It’s inclusive outsourcing.  

No field of biology has embraced citizen science as enthusiastically as microbiome research, and the reception from the world community has been reciprocally enthusiastic. The success of projects like uBiome and American Gut illustrate the power of community involvement. Both the commercial uBiome and academic American Gut took universal engagement another step to additionally address the research-killing paucity of funding by crowdsourcing.

Give us your fecal samples, your skin swabs, your mouth swabs, yearning to be sequenced

uBiome raised over $300,000 on Indiegogo offering microbiome sequencing services similar to 23andMe in exchange for donations starting at $79. In addition to the monetary donation, they gave participants the option to relinquish ownership of their anonymous sample and results for development of population statistics and future research. After Indiegogo, uBiome continues to offer sequencing commercially with the same option to transfer ownership. They now have control over thousands of samples and a treasure of data that make scientists like me salivate. Unfortunately, we need to swallow and wipe our chins since uBiome is currently keeping their data close.

American Gut is the largest citizen science campaign to date. They have raised over $500,000 in one year on FundRazr and have over 3,000 fully sequenced samples. Working off the same principles as uBiome, they offer contribution levels starting at $99 and going up to thousands. Currently the highest donation has been $3,750 for a Functional Feces characterization.

                

Examples of American Gut donors, part of their “All the cool kids are doing it” approach (from left: author Michael Pollan, ultramarathoner Dean Karnazes, and Mrs. USA 2011 Shannon Ford)

Unlike uBiome, American Gut is making their data publically available through the open-source Earth Microbiome Project and through the European Bioinformatics Institute (EBI). They plan to publish their findings in several papers and hope other researchers apply these data ad libitum

Biased data or no data?

Crowdsourced microbiome initiatives are facing the same criticism of biased data as other crowdsourcing campaigns. Recently Steven Novella reviewed CureCrowd for Science-based Medicine (ultimately concluding it is too biased) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) published “From Conservation to Crowdsourcing” in 2011, which touches on the bias issue. It is true, citizen science data are biased to individuals who can afford to contribute financially, are aware of these initiatives, and are motivated to join in citizen science. However, we now have data where we had none before; data that did not rely on tax dollars or single-source private benefactors to generate; both routes that empirically take significantly longer and are lower yield than commercial efforts (e.g. NIH Human Genome Project vs. Celera) or now crowdsourcing (e.g. NIH Human Microbiome Project vs. American Gut). As a side note, according to American Gut’s website, it appears they are closely linked to the Human Microbiome Project.

As long as researchers acknowledge the bias, are committed to addressing the issue, and accept that their findings may require reassessment as less biased cohorts become available, then this is not an end game issue.

The larger issue is the proper application and analysis of all these heaps of data being shared. Elizabeth Beam’s Harvard Science Review article, “DATA: The bigger the better? A survey of analytical traps and tricks,” concisely summarizes this issue.  

Engagement beyond money and samples

The appeal of the microbiome to the general population goes beyond crowdsourcing. Manipulating your microbiota is all the rage and DIY projects abound on the internet. There are recipes for probiotic yogurts and other foods, and plenty of diets to alter and optimize your gut bacteria. However, the most impressive is the DIY fecal transplant on The Power of Poop. I hope never to need to self-administer this procedure, but I’m glad to know there is a step-by-step guide openly available should the need arise.

               

               Fecal transplant shopping list from The Power of Poop

 This DIY prevalence circles back to the humanity of citizen science and the positive implications of investment by the greater community in research. Crowdsourcing is a successful, if not perfect, route to doing valuable science while educating people and removing the image of scientists behind locked doors, hunched secretively over arcane experiments.

Citizen science is the proactive science of today and tomorrow. 

Science writing tips from former Nature editors and OBR

               image

          Minard’s graphic of Napolean’s Russian Campaign. Purported to be near perfect. 

Why is a blog post on a scientific writing workshop so difficult to write? Perhaps it’s the vision of a reader slowly nodding with a slight smirk thinking, “I love the author’s ironic inclusion of mistakes in a post of pointers,” when in truth, I’m not that witty? Publicly posting writing of any kind, scientific or personal, makes the author vulnerable. Writing on writing tips only exposes the author more.

With that introduction I have already ignored several of the tips presented by Richard Gallagher and Natalie Dewitt to 50 graduate students and postdocs eager to improve their science writing skills Monday February 24th at the University of California, San Francisco. The event was hosted by Oxbridge Biotech Roundtable and moderated by Ben Cohn. Below are some of the tips from Gallagher and Dewitt, who are the founders of Accendo Editing and former editors at Nature.

               image

Know your audience

Employ the following advice always keeping your audience in mind.

Titles

Avoid clichés, colons, incorporation of acronyms into words, and inform.

In my first conference abstract of graduate school I broke two of the rules above with: “Forging a Genetic Tool: The Quest to Increase Homologous Recombination Efficiency in Toxoplasma gondii”. My graduate lab loved catchy titles. Fortunately, my “forging a genetic tool” isn’t overly cliché, returning few relevant Google results. On the other hand, Dewitt’s example of “mending broken hearts stem cells” returns over 90,000 results!

               image

Colons are a technical issue as they interfere with some search engines and importing titles with colons can result in weird changes to the title structure.

The incorporation of acronyms into words like “Grb-ing receptor activation by the tail” experiences a love/hate reaction from readers. Is a catchy title worth decreasing readership over or increasing criticism from irritated readers? 

Acronym incorporation can also be at the expense of informing your audience.  Titles like “Death by Numbers” and “An Open and Shut Case” provide no indication of an article’s content and may be overlooked.

Clarity

Use short words, short sentences, and short paragraphs. Graphics are important. Tell a story and don’t show off!

Anglo-Saxon language is the language of the people and the language of short words. It is concise and sharp. Anglo-Saxon dialect selects “use” over “utilize”, “by” over “via”, and “help” over “facilitate” as pointed out by Dewitt. Carl Zimmer’s “The Index of Banned Words (The Continually Updated Edition)” is helpful for eliminating superfluous language as well. Short sentences and short paragraphs will follow suit as you are mindful of clarity in your writing.

Well-crafted graphics can say more in a small space than words can in an equivalent space.

The Inverted Pyramid of News Writing is an example of such a graphic and it lays out a good method for telling a story in science writing. If your writing doesn’t flow and tell a clear story you will lose or confuse your readers.

                     image

If you stick to short words, sentences, and paragraphs you will avoid the showy vocabulary or sentence structure better suited for Victorian fiction. Another trap scientists writing about science fall into is the need to prove their expertise through excessive detail. Stick to only what is necessary for the audience. If this pains you, try adding links for additional reading to the end of an article.

Minimize bias

Include alternative viewpoints and quotes from external experts and minimize hype.

Often I lazily overlook the inclusion of alternative viewpoints and quotes from people not involved in the subject of an article. For instance, in my blog on contract research organizations (CROs) I did not include the drawbacks of CROs. In my article on Mundipharma I neglected to include quotes from people outside of the patent acquisition deal. Such inclusions would strengthen the articles.

Odds are you are not working for Fox News so avoid the impulse to tell us how kittens are unwittingly killing us. Verify the hype surrounding novel discoveries through quotes from outside sources before reporting it. Excessive hype will only decrease clarity and perceived competency.

Engagement

Gotta have soul.

Gallagher defines the objective of science writing as, “To communicate knowledge that has been gained through scientific investigation in an accurate, engaging, and instructive fashion.” Accurate and instructive are easy enough for a diligent, detailed, and informed scientist but engaging is an art and something with which I struggle. The advice from Gallagher on adding soul into your science writing and keeping it vibrant is to include the human aspect of science. Did a novel discovery come about because of a researcher’s personal experience?  Who will personally be affected by a new regulation and can you include a quote from them?

Finally, a “hook” to bring readers in, perhaps by drawing a parallel to something universal or emphasizing the broad impact of your subject, is helpful.  Be careful with metaphors, though. See Philip Ball’s Nature article “A metaphor too far”.

Social media

Blogs, Twitter, and social media matter.

If you aspire to be a science writer you need to show an active interest and have an accessible example of your work. A blog meets both of those needs.

An active Twitter feed is equally valuable for showing your interests to potential employers in any field. Carol Stephen’s post “Twitter by the Numbers” provides some good guidance on how to manage your following to followed ratio. I use Twitter as a professional tool and manage my following numbers by not following my Facebook friends unless they maintain an active scientific/professional presence on Twitter. I also keep my tweets inline with my resumé and focus on professional development or interests listed on LinkedIn. As an engineer, I love congruence and clarity so keeping everything in my network reflective of and supportive of each branch is important.

And finally The Hook:

Why should busy scientists care about science writing and invest the time in improving? An article by Andrew Balas in the Journal of American Medical Informatics Association identifies the lag between significant discoveries in the lab and adoption into routine patient care as 17 years on average. Much of the burden to accelerate adoption falls on the discoverers and their colleagues to spread the information rapidly to a broad audience. If all scientists put forth the effort to improve their scientific communication and invest time in using instantaneous tools like social media, how much faster could people’s lives be impacted? This is why scientists should care. 

Advertising an event: emails and social media

My first responsibility as part of the Women in Bio planning committee has been to advertise for an exciting upcoming entrepreneurial event, “Beyond Financing: From Incorporation to Exit”. This is the second in WiB’s “Meet the Experts” series and has an impressive panel of venture capitalists, innovation center members, and corporate attorneys to answer questions. What has really struck me is how responsive people have been to my cold-call emails asking for help getting the word out. Despite how busy everyone is and the triaging of inboxes to optimize their time, the vast majority of people I have contacted have replied and sent out mass emails with the event information. In addition to emails, I’ve asked many of them to tweet the event or comment on their LinkedIn sites as I’m curious how many registrants we can get from these social media outlets. In my own tweets about the event I’ve mentioned several women-focused entrepreneurial groups and all of them have retweeted the information, showing just how quickly and unobtrusively you can spread the word using social media. The event will be great and I’m certain it will be a full house.  

Event Info:

Wednesday September 18, 2013
6:00pm – 9:00pm
UCSF Mission Bay Campus
Byers Auditorium – Genentech Hall
600 16th St., San Francisco, CA 94158-2517