16- Dr Amy Lam- Hunting for treasures

Dr Amy Lam is an intellectual property and commercialisation specialist for medical and life sciences, who made the leap from working as a neuroscience researcher. She has now extensive experience in her field. She reflects on the past, the choices she made and her transition into IP.

Through listening to our discussion, you will be able to think about:

·      Why asking the question “What are you going to do next?” to ourselves or those we supervise, is always helpful not just at endpoints

·      What types of activities an IP specialist actually does

·      How considering the experiences you gain through each role as a treasure hunt is a helpful metaphor in navigating careers

·      Where you live and work- can you make this an active choice instead of feeling that circumstances are forcing you into restricting options

·      When do you know that you need to transition to something new in your professional life

Get in touch with Amy: https://www.ip-pragmatics.com/bio-page/?bio=3968

Shownotes for this podcast episode can be found here: https://tesselledevelopment.com/research-lives-and-cultures/huntingfortreasures

Access all podcasts and show notes from: https://tesselledevelopment.com/podcast

Register on our mailing list to receive Podcast updates: https://tesselledevelopment.activehosted.com/f/5

Get in touch for questions, queries or to suggest a brilliant contributor: sandrine@tesselledevelopment.com 

Transcript

Sandrine: All right, let's make a start. Good morning. Good afternoon. Good evening, everyone. Today, I've got a new invitee on the podcast and it's Amy Lam, who is based very far North of the UK in Scotland, and I'm really looking forward to the conversation. Amy is the head of intellectual property at Pragmatics Scotland. I understand intellectual property is something that I knew very little about.

I'm really interested to hear from Amy how she got into IP, like we like to say, and the world of commercialization, and how she moved from being a PhD researcher, into something that's still a bit of a mystery to me, and to many others in research. Amy, do you want to start by telling us where did you do your PhD? How did it all start?

Amy Lam: I did my PhD at Glasgow University. As you can tell, I'm not Scottish. I come from South of London, decided that there was a particular program of research that I was really intrigued by. At the time of my PhD studies, stroke research with a really big area. That's when I went into neuroscience, and it was very much looking at ways of protecting against neuro damage and trying to figure out how we could limit the damage that people suffer as a result of stroke.

Stroke is still one of the big three killers. It's always been given that tag of a silent killer because you don't know it's happening until it's too late. The thing that particularly excited me about this PhD was it was a industrial studentship. It was aligned very well with the research and translational activities of big pharma, whose portfolio included neurosciences as a key area for them.

That's what I spent for three, four years doing. I'd started out previously as a pharmacologist. That was my first degree down in London. It was really an expansion of my initial studies, and the goal at the time I guess was to work in industry.

Sandrine: Some PhD programs, the project itself is part of a collaboration with industry, was it the case that was a project link with the company, or was it slightly different?

Amy: Yes, I was absolutely linked with the company. I had my industrial supervisors down in Surrey. My PhD was heavily dependent on the medicinal chemistry that was coming out to their labs, and trying to work out what was going on with these particular agents. Our group in Glasgow had specific in vivo expertise that you didn't find routinely. There was that advantage for them to be able to work with us.

Sandrine: As part of your PhD, did you also spend time in the company that your PhD was linked? Was it doing research into settings, the academy lab and the industry level?

Amy: Yes, most of my work was mostly in the academic lab, but I did spend a good few months down in their own labs to-- Certainly, there were other techniques I needed to learn. There was a lot of knowledge exchange that way and collaboration. While majority of the work took place in Glasgow, I would go down to the labs, learn the new techniques that I needed to take back.

Basically, we were able to set up a whole new lab facility in Glasgow on the back of that as well, but it gave us a a bigger breadth of activity, and another notch in the belt as it were to, in terms of what we could do.

Sandrine: How do you think that your experience differed from people who didn't have this link to industry? I remember when I worked at the University of Sheffield, sometime the challenge is that PhD students whose projects failing to industry, in term of the way they were able to present at conferences, where often they fell quite inhibited because they had to go through so many loops in term of getting the agreement from the industrial partner in term of presenting papers at conferences and so on, it felt really challenging. In your experience, what was really positive, different, and maybe challenging in the experience?

Amy: Yes, I found the experience really positive. I didn't experience some of those delays, things always moved quite smoothly. The challenging thing was actually getting a hold of the drugs. Their own development processes took longer than they thought it would. That was the frustration for me when I was an excited bright-eyed new PhD student, trying to get on with some research, but not having any active agents to work with.

Where does that leave you in terms of being able to progress your own studies? That was the biggest challenge for me, but I guess coming back to your question, I think it gives you just a different outlook. It automatically opens up another door in terms of how people work in research that is different from what happens in the academic setting. That's something I've always been quite mindful of is having that exposure.

Sandrine: During your PhD, what were the experiences that really triggered your career direction, because we all start PhD with certain ideas, and the experience of actually doing the research can completely reshape the way we seeing the future. How did the experience of actually doing the research shift your way of thinking about your future in a different way?

Amy: Yes, this is quite an interesting. Well, I've never set out to do a PhD, never. It wasn't something that I had a particular drive to do. When I started out with my undergraduate degree, I wanted to work in industry and that was, that was the thing that was driving me at the time I had industry experience then, so before the university, I did some holiday jobs for drug companies, and as part of my undergraduate. Again, that had an industrial component to it.

Then, they recruited me afterwards to work for them after I finished my degree. It was only through talking to people there in their own experiences, and always asking me, "What are you going to do next?" Sometimes, you just don't know at that stage, it's so early. For me, it was really that head scratching. I don't know, I'm not really sure I'd like to work in industry. Everybody had, I think, without fail everybody I spoke to had said, "Well, you should think about doing a PhD," because again, just in terms of where you position yourself in industry there, it opens up a lot more doors, and you can move and progress up within the company environment.

Whereas, their view was always, if you finished with a good first degree, yes, you can get a good job in industry, but there's always going to be a bit of a ceiling in terms of where you can go. It was only at that point that the idea of a PhD really seeded into my brain to think, actually, this is maybe something I need to look into. Yes, it wasn't ever that well-planned, I would say. It was a bit of an accident.

I guess when you look back, because it's been a long time since I've been in the lab, you look back and things happen. You feel that things do happen for a reason. I think the PhD had interesting challenges and it took me into academia again, and not immediately into the industrial setting that maybe I had imagined previously.

Sandrine: What were the opportunities that you took during the course of your PhD that either way positioned you well to transition into the type of work that you ended up doing? Often, as PhD student, there is a fine balance to manage, and also for postdocs, between doing the research work and taking opportunities. I've spent so many years working as a researcher [unintelligible 00:08:59] telling people, "Don't just sit in the lab just doing that." Although it's a core part of what you're there for, but at the same time, all of these other opportunities are really the things that are going to shape the transition into what you will be able to do. In your case, where were these opportunities that you took or decided not to take?

Amy: I think for my PhD, it wasn't an easy PhD. I had a lot of negative results. I still got some really good peer reviewed articles out of it, but it was hard going. That really made me think about, is this really for me? I think the opportunities came, I guess when I wanted to give research a bit more of a go as a postdoc, and some of those opportunities were-- It was in the US. They were just a little bit more forward thinking at the time around this support early-stage researchers got.

You can go off and try different things. I remember in our lab, we had a PhD, a new graduate student who was an ex-banker, and he basically retired from banking, and his wife was so sick of seeing his face at home. She just told him, "You need to go and do something." He decided to go and study for a PhD. This man was in his 50s. It's just a different attitude.

As part of that, there weren't a lot of opportunities to find out what other people did outside of your own narrow research field.

I think you can get a little bit. You do side sometimes of the greater world and what's out. Yes, I've got exposed to lots of different people. I took opportunities like, judging for science fairs, with high school students, mentoring, again, students that wanted a STEM career right from 10, 11-year-olds, through to 16, 18-year-olds and then university graduates. Those opportunities were there to be able to help get a broader sense of who you are, and what you can do.

Also, my mentor [unintelligible 00:11:24] was very good about delegating things like reviewing articles, and so again getting used to communicating science and analyzing data in a way that's not just your own research area. All of those things were opportunities that you were able to get involved with if you wanted to. Equally, there'll be people who would say, "No, that's not for me. I'll just continue what I'm doing."

Sandrine: How did your shift into knowledge transfer and intellectual property, I don't know what's the right umbrella term to talk about it, how did this happen?

Amy: I decided that career in research, whether it be in academia or doing bench research and industry, really, which is something that I didn't see myself doing in the long term. It came about just trying to-- I don't actually know where the seed of what I do now came from. I had an interest in intellectual property, and this was through, again, some of the opportunities I had for postdoc.

We got to meet people from different walks of life who had used their research training in slightly different ways. It was purely my own need to find something else to get my teeth into that I would enjoy. I was lucky. I had other people around me who were wanting to make that same transition. Definitely, having a support network around you of like-minded people who feel, that whatever it is, you've all got a common goal in terms of where you want to either move next or thinking about career moves and things, having that ability to talk through things, bouncing ideas off each other, and really trying to understand what it was I wanted to do.

I wanted to be able to make use of my scientific training in a slightly different way. I think my time in industry also allowed me to see that whole development path of what it took to get a new drug to market and how long that process is. I recognized, for me, I didn't like the detail of doing research. That's simply-- I enjoy science, but I didn't like this detail of doing the same thing over and over again.

What I really enjoyed was seeing exciting new innovations, developments, how some discovery might change a particular treatment paradigm in the future, but you knew that step between those two things, it's a long buildup. I think what I do now allows me to tap into that. I get exposed to a lot of clever technology, clever ideas, and clever ways in which that can help solve a problem. I don't have to do the actual research. I just get to see what's going on, and see how that might change things for the future.

Sandrine: What first step did you take, because often, that's what people find extremely challenging is, some people may have done several postdocs, and pull their hair out in term of making a decision of what it is that they want to do next. When they identify, "Okay, maybe I could try that," then convincing yourself that you can actually start applying and finding a way of articulating what you have to offer, because in a way, you may not be convinced yourself that you can get a job into intellectual property, based on having been a post-doc. What was the journey maybe within your own mind to actually tell yourself, "Yes, I can do that, and I'm going to start applying and that's the way I'm going to go about it."?

Amy: It's a really big step. Having that support network within our group, it was always the same, "Oh, will I regret doing it? Am I going to miss the research side of things?" There's all these doubts that are in your head about, whether is it the right thing to do? Am I going to be judged badly for it? These are all things that can just eat away at you, but ultimately, it does come down to go, taking that big breath and going, "I am going to do it." You have to set yourself up mentally to take that jump.

What's the worse that can happen? I think that's the mantra I live by quite often is, what's the worst that can happen? You might get rejected. I got rejected many, many times for my first role, but for so many companies and organizations, they always need new staff members to come in. It's always going to be competitive, but you have to mentally prepare yourself to make that that leap.

If you want it enough, you're going to make it happen. If you're sitting on the fence a little bit-- Well, maybe you haven't figured that out on your own mind yet. Maybe, you still need to take things a bit more slowly for yourself until there will become a tipping point I think for you as to when you prepared to make that jump. For some people it's much quicker than for others.

We have staff members in our own company that are fresh graduates and others who are fresh PhDs, and others who have some postdocs. They all come from an academic setting, but they wanted to do the work that we do. It's that continuum of, at what point do you think you need to make that jump?

Sandrine: How did you knew once you had taken that first step that, that was the right thing for you?

Amy: It was quite easy. I suddenly felt happy in one work. I think research can be very lonely, for one. It can be very competitive. It depends on your personality. What I enjoyed particularly was, being able to talk to other people about their research, and being able to share the passions that they have for their research, and to find to be able to, for me, I like to be able to see that translation of how that research can be applied.

It ticks all those boxes for me. Also, it's still-- Even now, I've been doing this for about coming up to 20 years. I'm still learning every day. That's something that I really enjoy about my role is that, I'm constantly learning new stuff all the time.

Sandrine: Can you take us on a journey of understanding of what that type of role really entails?

Amy: The role I have now is I worked for a consulting company called IP Pragmatics, and we're quite boutique. There's about 12 full-time consultants that we have split between London, Edinburgh, and Australia. What we do is really help universities and companies move their technology forward. That early stage commercialization, and a lot of it is technology heavy. As part of that, there's a lot of IP involved with it.

Depending on who we're working with, our activities can be anything from carrying out research for them in terms of the market, is there a market need for what you do? What that market is? What are some of the drivers for that? Are you meeting some of those unmet needs? What's the competition look like? How do you stack up against that competition? What does your intellectual property look like? Have you got strong IP? Again, who are you competing with? Is there any IP that you need to be aware of within that landscape? That kind of market research, giving competitive intelligence for companies and universities.

Also, doing things like plotting out routes to markets for them. Particular therapies or medical devices, diagnostics they've got so far and our clients really trying to understand what's the best way to get to market. What certain considerations that they need to consider as part of that, so we help them with that. Through to other clients who want us to help with partnering for them, so they might be looking to acquire companies.

Who are some of the target companies they should be looking at? What they might want us to help them with license negotiations? Again, just actually the transactions of their intellectual property and their technology and their expertise. How do you structure a deal around that? They may be looking for investment, for example, and they need to have a sensible conversation with investors, how much is their IP worth?

We will undertake those IP valuations. Again, help frame some of the key points with them in considering how to move those discussions forward. That's just some of the things that we get up to day-to-day, but in the base of that is having that scientific background and being able to analyze, and ask sensible questions to take things forward.

Sandrine: What do you think makes the difference for people in a way to do well within that field? What are the qualities? Competency? What do you need to be really good at that sort of role?

Amy: I think we like well-rounded individuals. We like to see people who have other experience that might not be directly related to the job that shows us that they have an ability to work in a different way, whether it's volunteer work or coaching work, sports activities, something else that shows that they can apply themselves in different ways, because what we do changes so quickly, we're often put outside of our comfort zone.

We deal with particular projects where I won't be the subject technical experts. I'm working with the technical expert, but I need to be comfortable enough in that situation to be able to deliver what they want. I'm bringing certain expertise that they don't have, that would enable them to move their project forward. There's always a lot of uncertainty around what we do.

Having individuals that show that they're flexible, adaptable, having experience of doing different things is always very good. The communication side is another key area for us. Being able to articulate yourself well, your research, being able to talk to people from different spheres of life. We work with a lot of different professionals, so we span the academic researchers, really high well-respected profs down to students, PhD students who are setting up their own companies.

Really smart people, but very focused on the research side. We work with CEOs from companies, chief financial officers, right through to commercial lawyers, IP lawyers, patent attorneys. Then, we also work with people who have just one-man band, who have invented something and they've come to us for a bit of help, and they come from all walks of life.

Just being interested, I guess, in the people around you, and being curious is very important for what we do, but researchers have a lot of those skills already,

Sandrine: You did a master in intellectual property after your postdoc, and that's something that often comes up in discussion with PhDs and postdoc, when they're thinking about their transition, often they have a feeling that they absolutely have to retrain and do another degree, another master or whatever. Is this really necessary?

Sometime I feel it's almost a way of stopping themselves from taking the next step of actually applying for jobs in the specific field that you are in. Can people actually get their first job, or do you see a lot of people doing another course before they're able to transition?

Amy: Yes, I agree with you that is not necessary, you can get your first job without it. I certainly got my first job without it. The training, the formal master's piece of it only came when I was working there. It sometimes can be an artificial barrier people put up in front of themselves to make that jump, definitely you can use it as a crutch. I think if you were a good, are well qualified, have something to offer, and you can show a company that you've got something to offer them, they'd be happy to recruit you, because a lot of that job, recognizing these entry level positions, you're going to get all the training on the job anyway.

It's about getting over that fear of needing to have that initial training. I think for some, yes, there's absolutely a minimal level of training, but again, certain companies say in communications, they will provide some of that training for you, and they will have an active cohort of people who will go through all the training together. For many jobs, it's on-the-job training, and it's about putting yourself forward for why you're good for that role, what you think you can offer.

What is it you've done? What interests you have about that particular role that-- How you can back that up to give the recruiting teams that additional bit of information to say actually, "Yes, let's take a chance with this person," because ultimately, everybody needs that first break. I had to go through exactly the same thing. You had to go through exactly the same thing, you make that transition from research, you just have to take that step. Everybody gets a first break. It might not seem like it when you're going through it, but you will get there.

Sandrine: Can you share with us a project that through all your years working in this field that you felt like that was the most exciting, joyous, where I felt that really made something happen?

Amy: God. It's so hard to-- It feels unfair to pick one thing out and leave out so many others. A lot of what we do is very early stage. It takes some years to see the effects of that. I guess a couple of things really stick out. I'm always in awe of oncologists, and the research they do to make new cancer therapeutics. When I've worked on programs that involve particular oncology as a whole, I'm just always-- I have always so much respect for what they do, and they're always the loveliest people to work with as well.

Not only are they doing amazing science and developing really potentially life changing therapies, they're absolutely wonderful people as well, [chuckles] which is, it's just lovely to be able to have the privilege to work with people like that.

Sandrine: Can you tell us what's the the career path for somebody in this field? How have you navigated the career paths within that discipline?

Amy Lam: Yes, interesting question. Again, looking back, you used the word "navigating", that makes it sound it's quite well planned. [chuckles] I would say, for me, I guess I would probably use a metaphor of, my career is probably been more like a treasure hunt, and it's how am I navigated my way through it? With every role that I've had, I've taken new skills from it. I haven't stuck to the same thing.

What it's allowed me to do, is just build up my experience in lots of different areas, because in what we do, there's such a wide range of roles even within that. There are people who just look after patent portfolios. There are patent attorneys whose roles are focused on drafting, prosecuting, litigating intellectual property. There are lawyers whose roles are purely on the legal side.

There are commercial people whose roles are on external innovation and finding partners for trying new technology that they want as part of their portfolio. Even within the sphere of what I do, there are so many different aspects you could focus on. I guess when you look back at my CV, I've gone off and done, specialized in each one of those. Each role has focused on one particular area and given me an ability to go slightly outside of that, and there's other peripheral activities around it.

Then, the next role will have filled in a gap that I didn't have before, and seldom [unintelligible 00:30:14] Actually, that's where it's led me to now for a consulting company is because I've been able to spend those last 15 years gathering up new treasures in terms of my experience. It now puts me in a position where I can speak to clients, and be able to advise them in a way that maybe if I'd come to that company 10 years ago, I wouldn't be offering quite the same background and experience.

It would be different for everybody. It'll be different for everybody in terms of what they want to focus on, what they enjoy. For me, early stage commercialization is something I've really enjoyed doing, and I get pleasure from it every day. I still really enjoy my work. I have no regrets about having made that change. Yes, it's been fun, and hopefully, it will continue to be fun.

Sandrine: I really liked your metaphor of the treasure hunt in some way, so a really nice way of thinking about it. In your own experience, what's been the trigger in making a decision, okay, I've done this role for two or three years, now, I'm going to go and get working in a different area, or I'm going to apply for something else. Was the trigger to make the decision, because for some people, the comfort of doing in a role and having a sense of, "I know what I'm doing. I'm doing this well," but they end up maybe staying too long in a role, but in your case, what's the trigger to hop onto the next thing?

Amy: There's been a number of different things, I guess. There's been a mix of things, right from the fact that within certain roles, there was no obvious progression and I wanted to progress. The only way I can make that happen was to leave. I may well have been very happy in that role, but I would be stuck there for the next X many years, and that wasn't what I wanted.

That's a very active a decision to say, "Actually, okay, I just need to seek out any opportunities." There's been been roles where that's happened, other roles, where there are things that I wasn't able to control, change in staff, change in strategy, change in management, those outside forces then make you reflect as to, "Okay, do I want to stay here under this new environment, or is it time to move on?" Yes, it's always been those two main things that have led me to seek out new opportunities.

The other thing is also lifestyle. What kind of lifestyle do you want? I grew up in the South of England, but when I came back from the US, my job was in London, and I didn't want to live down there anymore. I didn't enjoy-- I love London. I love the role I have now, pre-COVID meant that I could go down and catch up with family and things, because our head office is down in London, so I traveled down to London quite a bit, but I couldn't see myself living there for any longer.

It was a personal lifestyle choice as well. How did I end up in Edinburgh? I have no ties here whatsoever. For me and my husband, we just said, "Right, we need to move away from London." Actually we're open to anywhere. There were certain requirements that we wanted to have access to open spaces, being able to access to the countryside and things like that.

At the time, I was very fortunate in life. My husband worked for a company that allowed him to work remotely. He was very supportive and said, "Take your pick, go wherever you want, and I'll come and join you. I can basically work from wherever." That's how I ended up in Edinburgh, and I've been here for about 15 years now.

Sandrine: These are very important consideration. People often say, "Well, I don't have a choice," but we actually do have a choice in many ways. Also, at different stages of our life, we are happy with certain work conditions, certain environment, while at other point, we just want something slightly different and enacting our choices, I think is important.

Amy: I think that's a really important point. I remember having the same thoughts that I didn't have a choice. I couldn't leave research. I'd invested so much of my life into pursuing that career path that, would it be sensible to move away from that? Also, my family also would not understand why would you leave all that behind you when you worked so hard for it?

You're grappling with all of these different questions and doubts, but you do. Yes, absolutely you have a choice. Still, now I probably keep in touch with a few friends who are very unhappy continuing in the career path they've continue down, and they're still grappling with that. Well, I've invested too much in this now to move away.

Ultimately, that's a decision for you and if you can live with that, and can manage and navigate your way through that, then that's for you, but for the others you might go, "Well, actually I need to take that step." I need to take that move sideways or completely outside of science, which other people have done, and make the leap.

Sandrine: I like to finish with you asking your best five tips about navigating your career out of research, or navigating your carrier within the professional environment that you're in.

Amy: I'll try and give you five. [chuckles] The first is, there is just so much information available to everyone now. I'm of the generation I still remember the pre-internet days, and we're just spoiled for choice. In some ways, we have too much information and trying to get through the rubbish information and finding the gems is probably the harder bit, but there is a wealth of information out there, so seek it out.

There's always going to be some interesting post or blog or network or some activity that you'll be able to make use of. If you're looking to navigate and make a move away from a research career, what tip could I give you there? If you're still undecided about where you want to go, because there is such a wealth of opportunities in terms of different types of roles, think about what you really enjoy doing.

Think about things you find equally important. Think about the things you really hate, what are the things that really make you miserable? That will give you a clear idea of what maybe then matching up against particular industries or roles that might suit what you want from or what you want to get out of those roles. Speak to people. People are very happy in the most part to tell you a little bit about their roles, make use of those networking opportunities.

We're all on LinkedIn these days, there are so many communities out there, and I'm always getting feedback from young researchers saying, "Oh, well," they've been surprised by how willing people within the industry they want to get into have been with their time. We're always happy to do that, because if you're interested in getting into that line of work, we're always happy to help you try to make that move, if that's what you want to do, and give you a bit of a steer around that, because it's not an easy decision to make.

I would obviously coming back to that point that, try and get some experience. If it's volunteering. If there are opportunities that you can take that will give you some element of what the job role might entail, seek it out. Lastly, is when you make that first move from a research position to a different career, don't be upset by the number of rejection letters you get when you apply for jobs. It's a long, hard slog, just stick in there and you'll get there.

Sandrine: That's brilliant. Thank you so much. Lots of really good ideas there for people. I think that first step, that first transition step is is always difficult. Then, I think that once people have done it once, it gets easier. I think that's often the case of the process of letting go of the research identity and getting into an identity that you are a professional and you don't belong to just one place.

For me, I've seen with the researchers that I've worked with that, that thing of letting go and embracing a new professional identity is a really important element.

Amy: Yes, it is. Definitely, it's a big one to get over.

Sandrine: All right. Well, really a great pleasure to have you on the podcast. Thank you.

[music]

Amy: No, it's been a pleasure to talk to you. Thank you for inviting me.

Sandrine: To finalize, I'd like to make three points for the discussion with Amy. These three things which I found really interesting. The first one is about being mentally prepared when we are in periods of transition, whether professionally, or personally. The mental framework that we have about what the transition is about is really important.

Another point that Amy made which I really loved was this idea of the treasure hunt, becoming the treasure hunter in the way that we seek skills, professional experiences, in the way that we transition from one world to the next. Often, we focus on the notion of skills, which I find pretty tedious personally, so the idea of becoming the treasure hunter is a really lovely way of framing what we acquire in each position that we hold, and how we can take our treasure from one job to the next.

The final point is about keeping asking the questions, "What are you going to do next?" Whether we asking this question to ourselves, or whether we're asking the questions to the people that we supervise or manage, in helping them to make the most of their current position, in preparing them to move into their next role. Helping others to gather their treasures for their next role, and helping ourselves to gather our treasures. These were really, really lovely points. I hope you've enjoyed the conversation, and I will see you on the next podcast.

[00:42:13] [END OF AUDIO]