In my efforts to encounter long-term and stable employment, I have found no shortage of people who seem to make their living through career and brand development tools. My goal in writing this blog and any efforts that have been done online have all been for the single purpose of securing dependable employment where I can use my training. However, not many people hire specifically for PhD level chemists who have a primary background in theory and computation.
With the number of views that this blog gets (or does not), I hazard to guess that anyone who is reading this is specifically looking at information about me and considering me for some position. So, I will attempt to plead a case for hiring someone with my skill set.
I spend my time thinking about how things work and how to make them better: Just like I do when doing academic research, work is never done just because it is quitting time. I hate not understanding how something works and feeling like I do not have a solution. Because of this, my mind goes constantly until I find some aspect of the problem that I can solve. It is as if my brain were a computer with background processes and applications constantly churning.
This comes from the results-oriented nature of research training. You get no recognition for the hours you spend working on a problem: the only objective measure is results. I do not mean just the incremental work that pads a CV or resume. What I am referring to is handing someone data garnered through integrity that has become part of you. It may sound strange to think about projecting yourself through exciting insights that you just gained from going through literally thousands of numbers, but when it happens, it is magic. You can just call this software aptitude with excel or the piece of scientific software you were using, but it is different. Nearly anyone can use a piece of software and mimic a conclusion. That is why there are so many posers out there that make it difficult to gain the trust of employers. Problem -> solution, google this, get that answer. Most robots could replace them.
The difference between them and someone like me is that they are constrained by a pattern that they have seen before. Like the voice recognition software that cannot understand a different accent, novelty throws them for a proverbial loop. They will say that it cannot be done because no one has done it before. There is nothing that brings me more joy than refuting this way of thinking.
Researchers such as myself are akin to trailblazers who finds solace in the unknown wilderness and wakes up excited at what they get to discover that day. A typical employee states that it is above their pay grade and they find ways to reduce their effort while demanding more from you. To them, problem-solving and being in unfamiliar situations is more effort so they avoid doing it--To me it is the reason that I go to work with a smile.
So, why me and not someone else? They may claim that they are dependable, honest, reliable, trust-worthy and promise you the moon. The difference is if I promise you the moon, then after meeting with me, you will sleep comfortably with the knowledge that you will be owning a natural satellite soon.
