Science and Public Policy: Marie Vodicka

Marie Vodicka, Ph.D. is the Associate Vice President of Scientific and Regulatory Affairs at the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America in Washington, DC.

How did you choose your career? Was this an easy or hard process for you? If you struggled, how did you overcome these struggles?

I view my career as an evolving process. Although I have always had a career plan or path, when it comes to taking the next step, I often end up going in a different direction than I had planned five years before. I think non-linear careers are more the norm these days than not. I have never regretted any individual decision or step, but I am always looking for the next step. I am looking for what is intellectually interesting and challenging, where I feel like I make a positive contribution and where I can use my technical background, rather than a specific technical area. I also realized that I get bored after three–five years doing the same thing and I like to change directions throughout my career. This is the hard part for me — figuring out what the direction should be and then convincing people that I would be good at something I've never done before.

What kind of training, both formal and informal, did you receive to prepare you for your career? If applicable, how did you select where to attend graduate school? How did you choose your postdoc? How about any additional training? How did you choose what additional training to pursue and how did you choose where to do it?

College and graduate or professional school were always part of the plan, but I had the childhood career goal of becoming a veterinarian, which changed during college because I got really interested in basic science. So I ended up in graduate school in Molecular and Cell Biology at UC–Berkeley because I wanted a program strong in developmental biology (my research interest at the time) and broad enough so that I would have more than one option of labs and PIs. Also, geography was a consideration because I thought I would be pursuing an academic career and one's geographic options are often limited when searching for faculty positions.

By the time I started thinking about next steps for my postdoc, I had become interested in infectious diseases and took an additional virology course at UCSF because Berkeley did not have that program. From the learnings of this course and consultation with the faculty, I narrowed down my postdoc quest to a handful of retrovirus labs. I chose a lab that works on HIV, a dramatic switch from my dissertation research on vertebrate embryology.

To make the shift from the bench to policy, I took an American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Science Policy Fellowship and worked at the US Department of State.

How competitive and/or rigorous was the training for your career?

I attended competitive undergraduate and graduate schools and the AAAS Fellowship program is also competitive.

In general, how much did the training cost? Was the investment worth it?

Interestingly, except for college, my other "training" was all compensated because it was also "work." However, the thing no one tells you when you are spending all these years in graduate school and as a postdoc, not making any real money, is that it puts you way behind in terms of your lifetime earnings, including retirement savings, building equity, and even social security. So there is a huge cost, I have not calculated it, but I am sure some economists have, to delaying entry into the workforce in a non-fellowship position. I was 37 years old before I had my first professional job that wasn't a "fellowship" position.

How long did it take you to train? Was it shorter or longer than anticipated? If you had any setbacks, how did you deal with them?

It seems to be a lifelong process.

What was the process like to apply for your first job after your training was over? Was it easy or difficult? How did you cope with any difficulties? Did that differ from subsequent jobs you've had?

The hardest thing for someone transitioning from a technical or academic career to a more generalist setting is describing your translatable skills and showing how you can use your technical background in a different way. What I have learned about all job searches is that it is much more about having a personal connection with someone to get you "in" than it is about your specific qualifications. For the most part, you must have the qualifications, but that is rarely enough.

What advice would you give to someone interested in following a similar career path?

First, I would not advise anyone to follow my specific path to get where I am. But for those interested in science policy, I think you need a strong science background and some demonstrated ability/success in your scientific discipline. I think it is possible to make the switch into policy at almost any stage of a scientific career. The AAAS Fellowships are a great way to learn, but the plethora of professional and advocacy organizations in Washington, DC. often have internship or fellowship opportunities as well. I think it is hard to be really engaged in policy without spending some time in Washington — though you don't have to stay because while there are fewer opportunities outside of DC, there are science policy opportunities all over the country. This is all US-specific, but I assume parallel courses could be followed in other countries and corresponding capitols, etc.

What would you have done differently in preparing for your career?

I am really not sure. Each of my individual experiences has contributed to getting me where I am today. Different steps may have taken me in different directions that might have been equally as good, but different.

How much do you like what you do? Why? Is it what you imagined it would be? If not, how have you adapted?

There are aspects of what I do that I really like, and there are certainly many things that I have done that I wouldn't trade for anything. It is fun and rewarding to see or hear your words and ideas incorporated into US law or spoken by the Secretary of State, knowing that you have in some way influenced this public policy direction. On the other hand, I spend a lot of hours on the computer and on the phone and scheduling meetings. Office work is simply not as varied as lab work and I certainly miss the bench, but I don't regret the decision to leave it.

How do you achieve career-life balance? Is this easy or hard to do? How many hours do you typically work per week?

I don't have great career-life balance, but this has always been true. I think most people fall into certain patterns regardless of their job or how much time they put into work and how much into other activities. For the environment I work in (Washington, DC), I would say I am about average.

What strategies have you figured out over time to help you succeed?

One should be intellectually and factually honest. One's integrity will be more valuable in the long run than any short-term gain from cutting corners. However, diplomacy is also important. I think people should also challenge themselves to try radically new things professionally — even if it's just for a short program. You may discover a lot of abilities you did not know you had.

How do you see your field changing in the next 5–10 years?

Science and technology are becoming more and more intertwined with public policy and there is an ever-growing need for better scientific literacy amongst policy makers. So there is a lot of opportunity here, but there is no single path to follow.