Research in the governmental setting is often an overlooked avenue to job seekers. So many times we see that old (but fading) ‘industry vs. academia’ rivalry and think those are our only research career options; however, there are many bench (and non-bench) careers within government through the NIH, CDC, FDA, DoD, and others. In my previous post regarding the 2015 NIH Career Symposium, I shared that panelists from the NIH and FDA overwhelmingly agreed that the advantage of working for government agencies is research freedom. The same sentiment is reiterated here by NIH senior investigator Kent W. Hunter, Ph.D. Dr. Hunter received a B.S. degree in biochemistry 
from Pennsylvania State University and a Ph.D. in Biology from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Currently, he is a principal investigator at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Laboratory of Cancer Biology and Genetics. Read on to learn about the perks of being a government employee, why you should consider an NIH postdoc, and how the economic climate affects government research!
Dr. Hunter, tell us a little bit about your background. How did you get to where you are now?
I have always been interested in science and how things work. I have also always had an interest in health and medicine, and a desire to try to help others. I considered a career in medicine, but realized practicing clinical medicine was not my passion or my true strength. I therefore decided to pursue a research career with the goal to contribute to the basic science knowledge that would be the foundation of future clinical tools. I did my undergraduate studies in biochemistry, but realized again that that was not my main area of interest. For my graduate career I moved into cancer research, first working with retroviruses, then transitioned into genome research and genetics in my postdoctoral and my first independent research position, as the field of genomics developed. My current interests are applying genomic and genome-wide tools in combination with inherited genetic screens to better understand cancer progression.
What goal is your current research trying to accomplish?
The goal of my research is to gain a better understanding of the multiple cellular and molecular mechanisms that contribute to breast cancer metastasis. Although somatic analysis has greatly improved our analysis of the causes of primary tumors, relatively little is understood about what drives tumors to progress. My laboratory is therefore attempting to genome-wide analysis to better identify the “parts list” of the “engine” that drives metastatic breast cancer.
How was your job search experience? What was the economic climate like when you were searching?
My job search experience was stressful and trying, though probably easier than the current job market. Relatively few jobs were available for the research questions and methods that I was interested in. As a result I interviewed in a number of different institutions, but in the end received only one offer, at the Fox Chase Cancer Institute, where I spent the first four years of my independent research career before moving to the National Cancer Institute.
What do you think is the number one reason you were chosen by the NIH over others?
I believe that I was selected because my research addressed an important problem, and our approach was unique and interesting to my supervisor, who was a human geneticist. He recognized the power of our use of animal genetic models to inform human disease and believed that our combined genetics and genomics approach would make significant contributions to the metastasis research field.
What past experience helped prepare you the most for success in your current position? What do you wish you had more experience in before coming to the NIH?
The training in critical thinking and constructive criticism that I received as a graduate student and postdoc at MIT. The ability to adjust one’s hypotheses and discard your most elegant theories and ideas once proven incorrect are critical to making progress and recognizing interesting and unexpected results.
The thing that I wish I had more experience in before becoming an independent investigator would be laboratory management training and experience. We are trained to do science, but not in managing laboratories and personnel. These are critical aspects of running a successful research program, which I felt that I had to learn as “on-the-job” training.
Where do you see your career heading in the future?
Hard to say. The great joy in research is to follow the data where ever it leads. However, I currently anticipate that my laboratory will continue our past interest in metastatic breast cancer and continue to incorporate new technologies and methods as they are developed.
What advice do you have for students coming out of graduate school who want to work for a government research institution?
The NIH is a fabulous place to work as a postdoctoral fellow. The science done here is on par with any large institution in the US, including in my opinion institutions like MIT, Harvard etc. Because of the funding differences between NIH and the extramural academic world there is significantly more flexibility and freedom to pursue any line of research that can be justified. Furthermore, since NIH intramural research is not grant-based there is significantly more time to focus on science, rather than grant writing etc. I highly recommend that students consider the NIH as a viable option for post-graduate training.
Are all open postdoctoral positions at the NIH posted to the NIH website? If a graduate student is interested in a specific laboratory but there is no opening posted, is it still advisable to contact individual PIs directly?
I am not certain about this. Many certainly are. I post my open positions to the NIH website but I also receive many unsolicited applications. I would recommend that students contact investigators that they are interested in because positions may become available. Also, if investigators are particularly interested in a candidate arrangements can sometimes be made to hire that individual.
Why did you choose government over industry and academia?
I was not specifically looking for a government position when I was job hunting. The position at the NIH became available and seemed like a good opportunity that I could not pass up. I did not actively pursue a career in industry because my personal interests are in basic science, following the data to new areas of research and knowledge, rather than product development and marketing.
What do you think are the advantages or disadvantages to working for a government research institution?
A major plus working at the NIH has been the ability to focus all of the time that I spent writing grants at Fox Chase (~30% of my time) into doing what I am passionate about, which is research. I also get to devote time that would be occupied by teaching responsibilities at a university into research. So I feel that my time is devoted much more toward what I feel I am best at. In addition, the flexibility of being able to run a research program on an annual budget rather than grants has enabled me to rapidly redirect my research program as necessary to take advantage of new tools and resources or to follow a new avenue of research without having to justify changes to funding agencies. Furthermore, as mentioned above, the research portfolio at NIH is excellent. There is almost always somebody here on campus who has the expertise in any field that you might need to collaborate with.
The disadvantages of working for NIH are primarily bureaucratic. For students and postdocs that is not too much of a problem since they are shielded from much of the problem by the PI and the administrative staff. However, we are directly impacted by Congressional actions and DHHS policies, which can result in bureaucratic problems and additional paperwork, mostly for PIs and the administrative staff.
Describe your typical day at the NIH.
On a typical day I attend a seminar and/or a journal club within our department or somewhere else across campus. I spend some time interacting with the people in my laboratory, talking informally about their research or other issues that might arise. I am fortunate that I still am able to do some primary research myself, though it is almost exclusively computationally based at this point.
Are there any perks that working at the NIH provides that most people don’t know about?
Mentoring. Mentoring students, postdocs and junior faculty is one of the important criteria that investigators and department chairs are actively evaluated on during our quadrennial review. A lot of thought and effort is put into this, at least in my department. There are also programs and organizations at the NCI level to help fellows in career development.
Are collaborations inside the NIH very common? How about collaborations with laboratories outside of government?
Very common. Both types of collaborations are actively encouraged. My laboratory participates in intramural, national and international collaborations.
How has the economic climate changed throughout your time at the NIH and how has it affected your research? Do you believe things are currently improving?
Like the extramural world, the economy has had a significant impact on our research funding. Funding and personnel levels in my laboratory have been reduced by ~30% over the past years due to reductions in the Federal Budget and Sequestration. The currently projected flat budget continues to pose problems for continuing our current research trajectory, requiring careful consideration of experiments and expenditures.
I’d like to thank Dr. Hunter for taking the time to answer the questions presented here by myself and fellow iJOBS bloggers and the NIH for allowing us to publish this information. Readers, I hope this interview has given you a glimpse into research at the government level and perhaps encouraged you to consider a government position in the future.