Do you think it's better to attend a meeting on your own or with people from your lab? I see pros and cons to both situations.
Going with labmates can be great, particularly if they are good about introducing you to people they know. It's nice to have a guaranteed meal companion, someone to chat with during breaks, or to talk to when you get saturated and can't pretend to look at posters anymore. Beyond making a meeting experience less awkward, being with someone who knows people can certainly help you break into the conference cliques or get you introduced to potential collaborators. Tagging along with the Right Person can turn a so-so meeting into a career path-altering experience.
On the other hand, sometimes it's good to be on your own. Going with a colleague who does a poor job of introducing you to the people they know is infinitely frustrating and makes you think you'd be better off on your own. Moreover, when you're alone at a meeting you meet people because you have to. Because it's easier to stay in your comfort zone with labmates than it is to meet new people, labmates can inhibit networking. Being with friends can not only keep you from branching out, it can keep other people from approaching you if your group seems tight and intimidating.
The best case is when promoting your colleagues blends seamlessly with your own networking. It's poor form to ditch your labmates, but the point of conferences is to network and discuss science with the wider community. The balance depends on the personalities and experience of the players, of course, and I'm starting to think it takes some finesse to achieve.
8 comments:
I haven't been to a conference with a crowd since I was an undergrad. But I like going with 1 or 2 other people - it's a lot easier to break off and do your own thing, and you still have someone to go to dinner with at night.
I prefer conferencing alone. Most conferences I've been too over the last years I was alone, although there were usually 1 or 2 people that I knew, but didn't really know well enough to hang out with all the time.
I found that it is really easy to meet people this way, and since I am usually not very good at meeting new people this was a very good feeling for me. I never had dinner alone, but I guess even that would not have been a problem since it is quite exhausting to meet new people constantly.
When I was at a conference with a larger group of colleagues, some of them introduced me to other scientists, but they were in other fields than me so it did not make much sense in a scientific way to meet these people although it was nice to have cocktails with them...
All in all I feel more confident to talk to strangers when I am alone. Plus you have more opportunities to really talk to people, over dinner or lunch, when you don't have lunch- or dinnerdates with your colleagues, you're much more open to spontaneous plans.
I agree, it's a toss-up. Sometimes it means you meet twice as many people, sometimes it means you meet half as many. Really depends on who it is. If you're both willing to split up sometimes, it's good. Otherwise one of you tends to take charge and the other follows. This is fine if you're empowered by having a follower, but sometimes it's just dead weight if they're shy or off-putting to strangers.
I've only ever been to conferences with a big group. Yet, I've always gone off and done my own thing, as I there all only a few people I can hang out with 24/7....
I'm not sure this helps..
I agree that it can be easier to meet people alone, but it can be nice to have someone introduce you sometimes. I think sometimes when you are by a person's side a lot, they kind of forget that you might not know everyone they know. The best situation is the big meeting in my field that I go to most regularly. I know a lot of people at that one, so I'm always running into people who introduce to me to whoever they are with at the time.
I prefer going alone - a couple of people I've gone with before have ended up being quite clingy and reluctant to meet new people, while for me a mixture of seeing labmates and meeting new people works better.
I never got high enough up the academic ladder that I could walk into a huge meeting and know a large group of people from all over the world. I always thought that would be cool! But I usually went to the ASHG meeting every year, which has 2000+ delegates. It becomes more difficult to meet people who you see again during the same meeting, let alone next year's.
So I guess maybe it's better to go with a friend to a bigger meeting, and by yourself to a smaller meeting where you have a chance of actually developing new relationships???
I prefer going alone - I didn't closely know anyone at the conference I went to just days ago, and it was great. I met a lot of people, got a lot of new perspectives, and think that I will even keep up with a number of my new acquaintances.
That's great, SG!
Things have worked well for me with one of my disciplines. There is a small meeting (~200) where I met lots of people and a large meeting (~3500), where those people introduced me to lots of new people, so I feel quite comfortable in that sphere. It's when I got to meetings in the other discipline(s) that I have to work harder and it gets awkward with or without labmates, depending on the personalities involved.
Post a Comment