Scientific expertise alone doesn’t make a great leader. The Vienna BioCenter Leadership Program helps researchers develop leadership skills that strengthen teams and improve research outcomes, as Daniel Gerlich and Joanna Jachowicz share in this interview.
Daniel Gerlich: As scientists, we are selected for leadership positions, not by leadership skills, but by being experts in our research field. But when you take on a leadership role, you have to enable others to be good at the task you did before. And that’s not a simple thing. In science, the daily tasks of leading are often unrelated to the skills you needed to become a leader.
Joanna Jachowicz: New group leaders often lack clear guidance when starting a research group. In the Vienna BioCenter Leadership Program, workshops, retreats and courses teach researchers how to lead – all within the context of the Vienna BioCenter.
Joanna Jachowicz: I’m feeling more confident in my role because I now know how to reach my goals for my team. In the workshop we could see – in addition to the content itself - how the trainers would structure, organize and lead the group. This has helped me improve how I organize my lab meetings and develop our team’s values.
Daniel Gerlich: I think we group leaders tend to give advice from the expert’s point of view. Instead, we should support our team members to perform well at their tasks. The question is: How can we help people become better scientists, rather than just doing the next experiment well? Empowering others to find solutions, rather than providing the solution, develops people towards independent work as scientists. In the lab, we are ideally asking questions so that people figure out the next step in their project. This is the difference between expert advice and coaching.
Daniel Gerlich: My calendar is full of meetings. Very often a group comes together, but the reason for the meeting is unclear. It can be unsatisfying. As part of the leadership program, we learned different techniques for managing effective interactions. Flashlight and frame-setting are techniques that have improved meetings by equalizing participation and clarifying goals.
Joanna Jachowicz: Flashlights are a great example. We started doing flashlight rounds in our meetings and discussions because, indeed, it gives everyone a chance to think about their contribution.
Daniel Gerlich: Since the training, I appreciate better the emotional components behind discussions. My lab’s success entirely depends on the success of the people in my lab, and communicating openly about the priorities and goals in our research is crucial, but not enough on its own. I practice active listening, a form of empathy that deepens our understanding of each other’s needs, challenges, and ideas. By recognizing these experiences, I can offer the right resources and guidance to overcome obstacles. This, in turn, allows the team to perform well and advances our research. In fact, I liked the training so much that I plan to have a lab workshop retreat, together with one of the coaches.
Joanna Jachowicz: The leadership program is only in its second year, but it may be changing the culture on campus. Great science and great papers are important for advancing science, but cannot happen without open communication and an understanding of leadership.