Being an excellent scientist does not automatically prepare you to lead people.
Many researchers build successful careers by being analytical, technically strong, focused and persistent. Those qualities matter enormously in science.
Then they begin leading a lab or research team, and the job changes. Success now depends partly on how well you understand other people.
How do you motivate someone who thinks differently from you?
How do you support somebody who is struggling?
How do you give useful feedback?
How do you deal with difficult issues before they become bigger problems?
And how do you create a team culture in which people can contribute, collaborate and perform well?
Some scientists make that transition naturally. For others, the people side of leadership requires a very different set of skills from those that helped them succeed as researchers.
Why can the move from scientist to manager be difficult?
Scientific careers involve years of developing deep expertise.
That training understandably focuses heavily on research, analysis and technical capability.
People leadership often receives far less attention.
Yet once you begin leading others, you may find yourself managing people who respond differently from you, are motivated by different things and need different forms of support.
Emotional intelligence becomes increasingly important. So does the ability to recognise that the approach which works well for one person may not work for another.
Scientific expertise remains valuable, but leaders also need to understand how to bring out the best in people who think, respond and struggle differently from themselves.
Why does evidence matter when developing scientific leaders?
Scientists are trained to question.
That should not suddenly disappear when the subject changes from science to leadership.
Over years of working with scientific and research organisations, I have found that two questions come up repeatedly:
Is it true?
And:
Does it work?
That is why leadership development for scientific audiences needs credibility.
If we talk about psychological safety, engagement, motivation or team culture, people should be able to understand the evidence behind the approach rather than simply being told that a particular model is useful.
That evidence does not replace practical application. It supports it.
The approach we use is therefore to explain the research briefly, provide access to further evidence for those who want to explore it, and then focus on what leaders can actually do differently in their teams.
Scientific leaders need practical tools as well as theory
Leadership development only becomes useful when people can apply it.
One example from the programme is a simple feedback model developed by my colleague Joanna, CEEC.
It uses four steps:
Context: What is the context for the conversation?
Evidence: What example do you have of the person's behaviour or performance?
Effect: What impact has that behaviour or performance had?
Change or continue: What would you like the person to do differently, or keep doing?
It can be used with direct reports, colleagues and, where the relationship allows, when giving feedback upwards.
Participants practise using the model during the programme and often tell us afterwards that they have already applied it in real conversations.
If feedback is an area you want to explore further, Giving and Receiving Feedback looks at this in more detail.
What changes when scientists become more confident leaders?
Confidence matters because it changes what leaders are prepared to address.
Organisations we work with commonly report that participants become more confident in:
Setting goals
Giving feedback
Running one-to-ones
Shaping the culture they want within their team
Influencing and building stakeholder relationships
Tackling difficult issues earlier
That final point can be particularly important.
In the video above you’ll see an example of a PhD student whose underperformance had continued for two years without being properly addressed.
That situation was not good for the individual, the group leader or the wider lab.
Addressing problems earlier, understanding what motivates people and improving collaboration can all help the team work more effectively.
You may also find Having Difficult Conversations with Confidence useful here.
How can leadership affect research and innovation?
Leadership does not sit separately from the science.
How people are managed affects how effectively the science can happen.
When team members are motivated, issues are addressed earlier and people collaborate more effectively, the conditions for productive research improve.
The same applies across teams.
Research organisations often contain enormous specialist expertise. If groups operate in isolation, some of that expertise remains disconnected.
Better leadership can help people work across boundaries, share knowledge and reduce silos.
That matters whether you are leading a small research group, a growing biotech organisation or a much larger research institute.
What should HR and L&D look for when developing scientific leaders?
The content matters, but so does the approach.
Most leadership programmes will cover familiar topics.
What makes the difference is whether the facilitator can work credibly with the people taking part and whether the programme reflects the environment they actually work in.
For HR and L&D teams, I would consider:
Does the provider understand scientific organisations?
Group leaders, principal investigators and scientific managers should recognise their own challenges in the examples, discussions and case studies.
Is the approach credible to analytical participants?
People should be able to question the thinking and understand the evidence behind the methods being introduced.
Can the programme be tailored?
A biotech start-up may be moving rapidly through growth and change.
A large research institute may be more concerned with collaboration between specialist groups or reducing silos.
The same standard programme will not necessarily fit both.
What happens after the training?
Leadership development should not become a one-off event that disappears as soon as the workshop ends.
Consider how participants will practise the learning, access further resources and embed new behaviours afterwards.
HR and L&D should look not only for appropriate content, but for a provider who understands the organisation, can work credibly with its scientific leaders and will partner with the organisation rather than simply deliver something off the shelf.
Why tailoring matters in scientific organisations
Scientific organisations vary enormously.
A growing biotech start-up may be dealing with constant change, rapid recruitment and evolving responsibilities. A larger research institute may have deep expertise distributed across multiple teams and disciplines. The leadership issues will therefore be different.
The starting point is to listen.
What is the organisation trying to achieve?
What problems does it want leadership development to address?
What would a successful outcome actually look like?
Our Leading Your Lab programme can then be adapted around those needs while retaining the evidence-based principles and practical tools that sit underneath it.
Where should a scientist moving into leadership start?
You do not need to become a completely different person.
The analytical strengths that helped you build your scientific career remain valuable. The task is to add to them. Think about where leadership currently feels most difficult.
Is it motivating different people?
Giving feedback?
Managing underperformance?
Setting expectations?
Influencing stakeholders?
Building culture?
Working across teams?
Then consider what kind of support would help.
That might be reading and research, coaching, feedback from colleagues or structured leadership development.
The important point is to choose something relevant to the challenges you actually face and an approach that feels credible enough for you to engage with it properly.
Supporting scientists as they become people leaders
If your organisation is developing group leaders, principal investigators, lab managers or other scientific leaders, Leading Your Lab is designed specifically for that transition.
It combines evidence-based leadership development with practical tools that scientists can apply to real issues involving feedback, motivation, team culture, difficult conversations, collaboration and performance.
You can also view the Leading Your Lab course content for more detail on the in-person and virtual formats.
Kate Jennings