While pondering about Jessica Pearson, I thought to myself, what does success mean to me?
So here's a list (so I don't forget):
a) Success means that I should have no money worries- I should be getting the salary I deserve. I shouldn't have to make do with less just because there is no money in the company or where ever.
b) Success means that I have a team of people I can rely on- senior and junior scientists, motivated, energetic people who can carry a project on by themselves. I'd be there for brain-storming or troubleshooting, but I shouldn't have to be in lab all the time.
c) Success means that people associate me with high quality and reliable work.
d) Success means that I work with everybody at every level, be it private firms, government or NGOs. It doesn't matter if it is 1 test or a 100,000. We should be able to do it.
e) Success means I have a vast network- people in different fields, people who trust me and whom I trust.
f) Success means that I contribute to my society in terms of service and scholarship.
g) Finally, success means that I get done with work related stuff by the evening so I have time to spend with the kids. Travels once in a while is okay. But there is no success if I don't get to hang out with my kids at the end of the day.
Sunday, August 20, 2017
My life and "Suits"
This post was initially going to be about my disgust with some of the married men I see at our clinic who come for HIV check ups because they had an unsafe exposure. Their Whatsapp profile pics will be the picture perfect version of a happy marriage- unsuspecting wives kissing them on their cheeks, kids in the background and so on. Yet there they are, waving their d**ks around while on trips and then coming to me to get their blood tested for HIV. I am very nonjudgmental when they are in my lab. No reason why I can't be perfectly judgmental, full of self-righteous indignation and scorn over here.
It's all a question of commitment, isn't it? Commitment probably means different things to different people. And people probably argue about the degree of commitment needed as well. For instance, my ever-loving, ever exasperating husband yesterday accused me of not committing to my personal growth. What exactly he means by this, he refused to tell me. If you don't know it yourself, then there's no point in telling you, seems to be his credo (and they say WOMEN make statements like that. Ah hello, for every single time a woman says it, a man would have said it twice).
Anyway, in the off-chance that he might be right, I have been thinking about all the fields in which I might have to improve. I have also been hugely influenced by the show "Suits",so I'm actually thinking this is a good exercise to become more like say, Jessica Pearson.
Molecular Solutions right now is a bit like Pearson Hardman right before the merger with Darby- out of money, besieged by multiple external factors, including their own mistakes, and fighting to survive. PH survives by joining hands with Darby, getting a much-needed influx of money, fighting off the competition and then merging with Darby, albeit in a weaker position. Despite that, Pearson moves against the explicit wishes of Darby in a particular case, which actually ends up being the right move down the line.
Pearson does this by a) being very clear-eyed about their financial status (esp when they were with their backs against the wall) b) knowing the financials inside out c) doing what had to be done to keep the firm intact, even if that meant signing a merger deal from a weaker position d) refusing to make decisions under stress e) predicting next moves by Darby, Hardman and the rest of the sharks as well as by her own team's Specter f) She gets her team on board with her decisions, by persuasion or threats.g) Most importantly, she knows exactly what she wants and she does what she needs to to get there.
She makes a few mistakes, of course: doesn't recognize Louis Litt's value early enough, signs the confidentiality clause with Hardman, for some unknown reason, which comes back to bite her in the ass later, but she sticks to her guns when moving against Darby (and Specter) despite not knowing that it would turn out ok.
Okay, I'm becoming clearer-eyed about our financial status (it's very easy- we have no money). I think I'm getting to understanding the financials inside out. I have some ideas about how to keep the company intact, even if means doing something that I wasn't particularly keen on earlier. The bit about refusing to make decisions under stress is a bit difficult, but let me try anyway. My weakness is predicting moves, but it comes down to knowing what I want vs what each connected person also might want. I'll work on this some more. I am no good with threats- unlike Pearson, I really care about being liked by my business partners and everyone else. But I think persuasion is a good tool to use.
Am I just as good at knowing what I want? I hope so. I want my company to grow, do good work. I want it to be reliable, with a broad range of tests, and accessible to everyone.
In the end, I'm going to do one more thing that Pearson does not do- ask for help. My dad, my cousin-in-law, my business partner's cousin, my uncle-in-law... these are all people who have been helpful before and whom I am specifically planning to ask specific questions.
And hopefully, we can also do what Pearson does: turn the company around.
It's all a question of commitment, isn't it? Commitment probably means different things to different people. And people probably argue about the degree of commitment needed as well. For instance, my ever-loving, ever exasperating husband yesterday accused me of not committing to my personal growth. What exactly he means by this, he refused to tell me. If you don't know it yourself, then there's no point in telling you, seems to be his credo (and they say WOMEN make statements like that. Ah hello, for every single time a woman says it, a man would have said it twice).
Anyway, in the off-chance that he might be right, I have been thinking about all the fields in which I might have to improve. I have also been hugely influenced by the show "Suits",so I'm actually thinking this is a good exercise to become more like say, Jessica Pearson.
Molecular Solutions right now is a bit like Pearson Hardman right before the merger with Darby- out of money, besieged by multiple external factors, including their own mistakes, and fighting to survive. PH survives by joining hands with Darby, getting a much-needed influx of money, fighting off the competition and then merging with Darby, albeit in a weaker position. Despite that, Pearson moves against the explicit wishes of Darby in a particular case, which actually ends up being the right move down the line.
Pearson does this by a) being very clear-eyed about their financial status (esp when they were with their backs against the wall) b) knowing the financials inside out c) doing what had to be done to keep the firm intact, even if that meant signing a merger deal from a weaker position d) refusing to make decisions under stress e) predicting next moves by Darby, Hardman and the rest of the sharks as well as by her own team's Specter f) She gets her team on board with her decisions, by persuasion or threats.g) Most importantly, she knows exactly what she wants and she does what she needs to to get there.
She makes a few mistakes, of course: doesn't recognize Louis Litt's value early enough, signs the confidentiality clause with Hardman, for some unknown reason, which comes back to bite her in the ass later, but she sticks to her guns when moving against Darby (and Specter) despite not knowing that it would turn out ok.
Okay, I'm becoming clearer-eyed about our financial status (it's very easy- we have no money). I think I'm getting to understanding the financials inside out. I have some ideas about how to keep the company intact, even if means doing something that I wasn't particularly keen on earlier. The bit about refusing to make decisions under stress is a bit difficult, but let me try anyway. My weakness is predicting moves, but it comes down to knowing what I want vs what each connected person also might want. I'll work on this some more. I am no good with threats- unlike Pearson, I really care about being liked by my business partners and everyone else. But I think persuasion is a good tool to use.
Am I just as good at knowing what I want? I hope so. I want my company to grow, do good work. I want it to be reliable, with a broad range of tests, and accessible to everyone.
In the end, I'm going to do one more thing that Pearson does not do- ask for help. My dad, my cousin-in-law, my business partner's cousin, my uncle-in-law... these are all people who have been helpful before and whom I am specifically planning to ask specific questions.
And hopefully, we can also do what Pearson does: turn the company around.
Wednesday, August 2, 2017
Hitting a Century and Beyond
We crossed 100 samples at Molecular Solutions a few days ago! Hurray!
This is 100 HIV, HCV and HBV viral loads and drug resistance genotypes. About 75% of our samples have been from the NGO sector, with subsidized pricing.
Clearly, we need to get cracking on finding funding for these samples and at the same time amp up our full-price private sector patients.
But marketing aside, I spent the last weekend poring over this data. It is fascinating stuff. We are finding high levels of HIV drug resistance in our populations. While India has made amazing strides in its control of HIV, looks like the next face of the HIV epidemic is about to hit. Once drug resistance levels creep up, the whole world will have to grapple again with high drug costs, low availability and a need to triage out drugs only to the sickest. The debate on who gets to start what medicines will begin again.
This will be a short note, but worth considering. India made HIV generic drugs and saved the world. Now, for the HCV epidemic, Indian companies have signed a pact with Western pharma such that they will produce the branded drugs at a fraction of the cost seen in the US, but at a price that is still quite high. Pakistan and Egypt, which didn't sign this pact, have since developed drugs which are supposedly just as effective at about 1/10th the price that India manufactures it at.
When I am less pressed for time, I must sit down and reflect upon this milestone of 100 samples. It is a great thing, but with my technician gone, my mind is burdened with the stress of getting the remaining samples processed and sent out.
This is 100 HIV, HCV and HBV viral loads and drug resistance genotypes. About 75% of our samples have been from the NGO sector, with subsidized pricing.
Clearly, we need to get cracking on finding funding for these samples and at the same time amp up our full-price private sector patients.
But marketing aside, I spent the last weekend poring over this data. It is fascinating stuff. We are finding high levels of HIV drug resistance in our populations. While India has made amazing strides in its control of HIV, looks like the next face of the HIV epidemic is about to hit. Once drug resistance levels creep up, the whole world will have to grapple again with high drug costs, low availability and a need to triage out drugs only to the sickest. The debate on who gets to start what medicines will begin again.
This will be a short note, but worth considering. India made HIV generic drugs and saved the world. Now, for the HCV epidemic, Indian companies have signed a pact with Western pharma such that they will produce the branded drugs at a fraction of the cost seen in the US, but at a price that is still quite high. Pakistan and Egypt, which didn't sign this pact, have since developed drugs which are supposedly just as effective at about 1/10th the price that India manufactures it at.
When I am less pressed for time, I must sit down and reflect upon this milestone of 100 samples. It is a great thing, but with my technician gone, my mind is burdened with the stress of getting the remaining samples processed and sent out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)