Clear Communication: Building Trust and Preventing Misunderstandings

When a team grows and new long-term members join, communication becomes more complex. Expectations shift, responsibilities expand, and the risk of misunderstandings increases. Last week, we had an important discussion in our lab about communication, supervision, and project ownership. This conversation was triggered by the arrival of a new long-term team member, and it reminded me why these discussions are so valuable.

We finalized a document that outlines our routines and responsibilities, and everyone approved it. This might sound like a small step, but it is a cornerstone of how we work together. Why do we invest time in this? Because clarity saves time, prevents misunderstandings, and builds trust. When everyone knows what is expected and how decisions are made, collaboration becomes smoother and more enjoyable.

One principle I strongly advocate for is writing things down. Written communication is one of the most effective tools to avoid miscommunication. It creates transparency, provides a reference that can be revisited years later, and ensures that everyone agrees on the same version of what was discussed. In research environments where projects span years and involve multiple contributors, this is invaluable.

However, documentation is not the first step. Before anything is written, we start with a personal, face-to-face meeting. This initial conversation is essential for creating an open and safe space where every person feels heard and knows that there is no judgment. Ideally, we bring a pre-drafted document to the meeting as a basis for discussion. This approach helps structure the conversation while leaving room for input and adaptation.

These conversations are not about bureaucracy. They are about creating a low-barrier way to address challenges before they become problems. They help us set clear expectations for communication routines, supervision responsibilities, project ownership, and authorship. They also encourage transparency and fairness in collaboration. For example, we agreed that authorship should be discussed early, ideally in one-on-one meetings, and that contributions will guide the final author order. We also encourage team members to initiate review articles, as these can significantly strengthen a CV.

I like to have these conversations whenever new PhD students or postdocs join and the group grows. New people bring new ideas, and adaptability is key to maintaining a strong and collaborative team culture. By revisiting and refining our communication practices, we ensure that everyone feels included and that our processes evolve with the team.

Clear communication is not a one-time effort—it is an ongoing commitment. It requires openness, adaptability, and a willingness to listen. And it works best when combined with written agreements that everyone can refer back to.

How do you ensure clear communication in your teams? Do you document agreements or rely on informal discussions? I would love to hear your thoughts.

Scientific Presentations: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly

Today, my husband's group and my group kicked off a mini-series focused on scientific presentation styles with our group members. We explored how presentation slides should be designed, what they should contain, and what to avoid. I firmly believe that no matter how thrilling your project is, if you don't connect with your audience and convey your excitement, you've lost them—this is the classic "death by PowerPoint."

Instead of delivering a traditional lecture, we encouraged reflection and guided our members to discover their own presentation styles. We sparked discussions by showcasing example slides from our own presentations, ranging from our master's studies to PhDs and current work. There were definitely some "gems" on how not to do it, but it also highlighted how presentation style can make or break a project. There's no one right way to present—it has to fit your personal style.

A big part of supervision is helping our team members develop their skills and confidence to navigate the academic world. Our experienced lab members did a great job analyzing, but I am also extremely proud of our newest team members, our current bachelor's students. They joined the discussion and voiced their own opinions. It was a real discussion between our team members, and that was delightful to see! It was a fun and engaging session, especially seeing some of my own examples that were really, really questionable (though I was really proud of them in 2017 😄).

Reflecting on the session, I realized how crucial it is to foster an environment where everyone feels comfortable sharing their thoughts and ideas. Supervision isn't just about guiding research; it's about nurturing growth and confidence. By encouraging open discussions and allowing team members to express their opinions, we help them develop critical thinking skills and the ability to navigate the complexities of the academic world.

Seeing our bachelor's students actively participate and contribute to the discussion was particularly rewarding. It reminded me that effective supervision involves recognizing and valuing the input of all team members, regardless of their experience level. Their fresh perspectives often bring new insights and ideas that can enrich the entire group's understanding.

In the end, the session was a great reminder that scientific presentations are not just about conveying information—they're about connecting with your audience and making them feel your excitement. There's no one-size-fits-all approach, and finding your own style is key to delivering impactful presentations.

Welcoming the first PhD student of our lab

I am absolutely thrilled to announce that Mostafa has joined us as the first PhD student of our lab! This is a significant milestone for us, as he is our first long-term member. His selection not only sets the pace for the future of our lab but also marks the completion of my first independent hiring process.

During this process, I spent a considerable amount of time reflecting on what I expect from a future PhD student and how I can assess that. My approach to selecting team members is twofold. Firstly, I consider how well the individual’s personality aligns with the existing or envisioned team dynamics. Secondly, I evaluate their critical thinking skills by discussing a scientific paper to understand their potential. While expertise in the field isn’t a prerequisite for prospective team members, the ability to learn and a critical mindset are incredibly important to me.

Mostafa demonstrated exceptional aptitude in both these areas. Our conversations led me to believe that he would be an excellent addition to our team. His ability to quickly comprehend complex concepts and provide insightful critique during our discussion on a scientific paper was truly commendable.

I firmly believe that while I guide my students, they also have much to teach me. This mutual exchange of knowledge makes me even more enthusiastic about our journey in the coming years. I will be there to support Mostafa as he shapes his own PhD project, encouraging him to take ownership and responsibility. I eagerly anticipate the fresh insights and perspectives he will bring to our team.

This is just the beginning of our journey, and I am excited for what lies ahead.

Stay tuned for more updates as we continue to grow and learn together.