Interview with Laura Elias
Interview with Arnold Kriegstein
Interview with Laura Elias, UCSF Neuroscience Graduate '08, Head of Commercial, Neurology/Pediatric/Rare Disease at Invitae
What is your current position?
Currently I work at Invitae, a genetic testing company. I lead the commercial organization for neurology, pediatric, metabolic, and rare disease genetic testing. What really struck me about Invitae is the mission of the company - getting high quality genetic testing to more people, more affordably.
This job is an opportunity for me to experience what it takes to drive a commercial organization. My job before this was at the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) where I worked in the healthcare practice. Consulting was a fantastic experience and I learned a tremendous amount, but I thought it was time to take direct responsibility for growing a business rather than supporting others to do so. In my job today, I get to combine my science background and business knowledge to think creatively about how make our company successful.
What kind of responsibilities do you have in your current position?
I talk to a lot of different people. I talk to our clinical team, our sales team, our commercial operations team, and our marketing team to ultimately bring things together to develop strategies that will increase testing volume. The things I think about are: what’s valuable to our customers, what products do we need, who can we partner with, how do we train and enable our sales force, and what kind of marketing we should create. One of the challenges for the area I am leading is that there are a tremendous number of tests and genes, so selecting where we focus is critical.
What makes you excited about your job?
This past year at Invitae, we worked on the opportunity to build some new partnerships and push the business model in uncharted directions. We had to think about our business differently – not our business model today, but rather our business model next year, and the year after that. It’s an incredible feeling when you see how what we are doing today might change the landscape of the industry in the future and in doing so improve healthcare.
How is Invitae, the company you are currently working for, structured?
Invitae has grown to a little over 300 people now. It's a very team-oriented company and one quirky fact is that we actually don't have formal titles. Everyone at the company is expected to fully contribute and be action oriented.
The company brings together a lot of very diverse expertise – from the clinical teams, to web development, software development, sales, commercial etc. By contrast, BCG is full of smart, truly fantastic people from different backgrounds, but they tend to excel in similar dimensions. One of the things that struck me when starting at Invitae was the unique expertise each person brings to the mission of what the company is trying to do.
Part of the reason I have chosen the places where I have worked is because of a great sense of community, collaboration, and willingness to listen. It is something that both BCG and Invitae actively look for. You can be super smart, but if you are not collaborative and thoughtful in the way that you interact with people, it is just not a fit.
What kind of skill sets did you obtain from your PhD program and postdoc that transferred over to what you do now?
The biggest transferable skillset is problem solving and that has served me well in all my career transitions. In this job, I’m pulling from academic training in neuroscience and my training in business from BCG. When you can put different expertise areas together I think it makes you more successful.
How did you choose the lab for your postdoc?
A lot of it came down to the dynamics in the lab during the interview process. The type of work and the quality of the work of course plays a role, but there are so many fantastic labs. I wanted to study something interesting in an environment I could learn in with people who I felt could inspire me. I ended up in Gerald Crabtree’s Lab at Stanford which was a fantastic choice.
This also extends out to why I went to BCG. It was about the people. During the interview process the people I met got me excited and inspired. Why did I choose to go to Invitae? Same thing. I was impressed by what the people were trying to do and their commitment. It inspired me, and so I wanted to be a part of it.
What were the main things you learned during your career in consulting?
The nature of consulting is that there is an incredible pace of learning. I learned a whole business skillset as well as skills around leadership management. You very quickly find yourself moving from being a sole contributor, to managing a small team, to managing a pretty large team, to being responsible for helping sell work and make pretty important decisions with business leaders. It challenges you to develop in a different way than I did in academia, where I was focused mainly on the content of my work. Certainly, content was critical to my work at BCG, but it also pushed me to think about communication, leadership, and inspiring my team. BCG is a big proponent of feedback which helps accelerate learning and development.
You have had multiple steps in your career. Could you share with us your thought process and what influenced you to move in the directions you did?
In each stage of my career I was very passionate and committed to what I was doing. I wasn’t doing it to prepare for the next stage, I was doing it because I loved it. When I stopped loving what I was doing or if I felt I had stopped learning at as fast a pace, I started to think about a change.
When I was in science, I loved being in Arnold’s lab, being part of the community at UCSF, discovering new things, and sharing it with the science world. But there was a point at which I got very interested in the other parts of the business: how these findings are translated to clinical trials, into drugs, and how they touched patients. That drove me to consulting at BCG. I also didn’t expect to leave BCG, I loved working there, but this other opportunity came along. Invitae is an exciting and pretty young company, and I thought I could make a difference.
What was your decision making process when you were thinking about changing your career path?
For me the big decisions have been about staying on my course or exploring this one other thing that I get really excited about. Once I have found the “alternative”, I usually look at a bunch of other things as a pressure test. I ask myself: “Why am I so excited about that? Should I consider this instead?” And as long as the pressure test holds, I’ve always decided to try the new thing.
Every time you think of making a big change in your life, it is scary, but I also feel like you just have to do it. It's so worth it! My career transitions have been a lot of fun.
How have you explored career paths outside of academia?
While doing my postdoc at Stanford, I took advantage of classes in business that were offered to postdocs. I also worked with the career services there, which was really helpful. After talking to many people I decided I wanted to go into consulting.
Could you recommend anything to people who are in the process of career exploration?
I think it is important to be honest with yourself. Some of my colleagues were extremely passionate about their lab work and about becoming a PI and they are successful now. It’s about listening to yourself, learning from others' experiences, and being willing to take some chances.
How big of a role did networking play when you were moving from one career path to another?
Networking is really important. More important than that, however, is doing high quality work and focusing on making a difference for your team. Through that comes a good network. When considering the job at Invitae I certainly used my network to do diligence on the opportunity. I met with my mentors, venture capitalists, past clients, etc. They were all the sounding board for my decision.
In my current job, I actually use my network more than during my career transitions. BCG has alumni at almost every pharma and biotech company and I often find myself getting in touch with them. I underestimated how valuable that is until recently.
What is the importance of personal relationships during the job search?
It’s extremely important. When I was hiring people at BCG it’s what made people stand out. It's a client services business, so it makes a difference when people take the extra time to build relationships. It provides more data about candidates, so we could understand who they were and whether they would be a good fit.
How did you find approaching your PI about going in a direction outside of academia?
It can be hard. Both my PhD advisor and postdoc advisor have been extremely supportive. But both were very excited about what I could do in science and I think it is hard to have a trainee go in another direction. When it came down to the final decision, I knew there was a chance that I would want to come back to academia, and thankfully my advisors said that I was welcome to come back. Having that kind of support made it easier to take that jump. Interestingly, BCG said the same thing when I discussed my interest in going to Invitae. It is fantastic to have relationships that allow you to try new things, and if it doesn’t work out, you know that they are still there to help.
Have you had any eureka moments while you were working in academia? Do you experience them in your current work?
I certainly remember surprises while looking in the confocal microscope at the neural migration patterns of our cortical slices. We knocked down connexins and were really surprised by what we saw. Discovering something that nobody else has seen – there's just a pure joy in that.
At BCG and Invitae, I have also had eureka moments: when you finally figure out how to think about a problem and what the right answer is. For example, your question is whether we should acquire a company – you talk to a physician or an expert that makes you think about it in a totally different way that nobody else has thought about, or you learn something that people have missed that would change the value of the drug they are developing tremendously. It really makes a difference, and it's super exciting.
What do you think is the difference between collaboration in academia and in industry?
My work in my PhD and postdoc labs was certainly collaborative, but not as collaborative as what I've done since. In academia there is always a first author and a second author. In other areas, while there are people leading projects and people supporting, there is the mentality of “We all have to get this project done”. Nobody gets their name on anything and success is measured by whether the project is a success. There is also a different set of incentives - in a place like BCG you are graded on your ability to collaborate and on your support of other people just as much as you are graded on your intellectual capability and contribution. This is not yet the case in academia.
I think it’s important that we think hard about how to encourage collaboration in academia. Most people are very willing to collaborate, but there are a lot of incentives that don't foster collaboration. At BCG, I was working on projects for a number of foundations that fund research. We were thinking about how you truly drive collaboration from an IP perspective, training perspective, and career opportunity perspective. I think it is a big challenge, but I hope we can solve it. The power of collaboration is so great that it's worth it – we'll discover more things and move faster if we can collaborate more.
How have you developed your management style?
I mirror the management style of the people that I have worked with and then adapt it to something I feel comfortable with. Both my PhD advisor Arnold Kriegstein and my postdoc advisor Gerald Crabtree were great leaders. I remember watching Arnold build the Regenerative Medicine program and get funding for the new building. I think that was one of the first indications that the business end of things, beyond the science, interested me.
At BCG you work very closely with Partners, and in the beginning I would try to mirror them. That was sometimes very successful and sometimes not. There were some partners that commanded the room in an incredibly engaging way but I was just never going to be that person. I think over time I’ve taken different pieces from different people and then mashed it into something that is authentic for me. I’ve realized that different styles can all be equally successful.
What are some of the fields in which you plan to deepen your knowledge in the near future?
In the next five years I'd love to learn more about what it takes to create and grow a company. There are just so many pieces that go into building a successful company, and understanding more of those pieces is certainly an area of interest.
What is your motivation in publishing articles now that you work in non-academic environment?
I’ve always been an academic at heart and enjoyed the process of writing so it's something that I have tried to stay involved with, especially at BCG, where there were opportunities to do so. You do so much thinking, and you invest so much into a project that taking that next step to publish some of the findings can capture that value. It just feels good to share information, to put it out there in the world.
You have been involved with UCSF through the Alumni Association, could you tell us a bit about that?
I had a great experience at UCSF, so I always enjoy coming back. I was part of the alumni board for a number of years helping lead a student alumni engagement program. I had a strong interest, when I left academia, to connect alumni and students to open doors for them.
What is your approach to finding the work/life balance?
I am my own enemy in that regard – I find things that are challenging and that I love to do, and I like to commit a lot to them. It also makes it a little challenging to have a work/life balance. But having a kid, and wanting to be there for her changes your perspective and your priorities so you make balance happen. I think different balances are OK at different times and working really hard can be the right thing sometimes – you just have to keep check on whether you are spending your time the way you want to.
Interview with Arnold Kriegstein, Professor at the Department of Neurology at UCSF and former advisor of Laura Elias
What was it like when Laura was a graduate student in your lab?
Laura was a truly exceptional student from the very beginning. She came fully equipped with all the skills that were necessary to actually succeed as a student and further on in her career. She was very smart, she could design her experiments properly, she could troubleshoot problems, and she had the sort of hands that allowed results to really come forward very quickly, so she had no trouble when working at the bench. And when it came to writing and data analysis, and so on, she was terrific at that. So, it made it much easier to me as a mentor, because there was very little that I could actually teach her. She also came with a very independent project of her own, she had an interest that was already pre-formed and it complemented what we were doing the lab at the time. She looked very carefully at the role of GAP junction proteins and connexins and a whole family of different adhesion molecules at early stages of cortical development. She got terrific results, things moved very quickly, and I was delighted. I wish that all my students were like her.
How have you mentored Laura during her career transitions?
After finishing her work in my lab, Laura decided to do a postdoc in a somewhat different area. She went to Stanford and she joined Gerald Crabtree’s lab and learned a whole new set of molecular biology skills. At that point, having lots of bench experience in a variety of different areas under her belt, she had the option of going into any academic position, I think, that was available at that time. She scheduled a dinner in the city to discuss her career plans with me, and she explained to me that she had been offered a job at the Boston Consulting Group, a very prestigious, very competitive position. She felt eager to take it, but she had not fully decided if that was really the direction she wanted to go. And I reassured her that, with her track record she would have the ability to try that career for a year or two, and if she was not satisfied, she could still pivot to a more academic position. And I like to think that it gave her some reassurance to give it a try, and in the end she accepted the offer from BCG, did extremely well, and really enjoyed the work.
When Laura was thinking of changing her career trajectory after working in consulting for several years, I told her once again that she could succeed in any of a variety of different careers that she chose. I was not in a position to really advise her which to pursue, except to reassure her that I thought that she would succeed regardless. She made the decision to join a young and rapidly growing company called Invitae, and I think it was a perfect opportunity for her to bring to the company the skills that they really needed, and at the same time provide a new career direction for her: instead of seeing companies from outside, she was now going to be involved inside from the ground up.
I have been watching Laura’s career as a spectator over the last decade or so. Ten years ago I would not have predicted where she would be now. In fact, I cannot predict now where she will be ten years from now. But I think the thread that ties all these steps in her career path together is the fact that she has enjoyed everything she has done and has succeeded. I am sure that will continue through the rest of her career.
Laura’s career is more exciting in a way, and a little bit less predictable, than an academic career. In academia, one progresses through measured steps: Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Full Professor, and so on. What’s exciting in an academic career is what your research directions are. But the overall career path is pretty well determined. It takes courage to do what Laura is doing, and actually step into a career where there is no clear path. In a way it is more exciting, but it is also more risky. So, I am very interested to see how it all unfolds for Laura as the years go on.
What do you think makes Laura so successful in a variety of positions?
Laura is a very fast learner, and she is very independent, so she can learn and progress on her own. She picks things up very quickly from other people, so she could build on a broad range of expertise to make rapid advances. And she is very creative and very good at solving problems. I think the way she was approaching and solving problems in the lab is similar to what she must have been doing in her years as a consultant. Laura’s ability to see very quickly to the core issues and address those right away is what allowed her to progress so quickly through the lab, and I am sure it was a very valuable asset for her consulting work. And I am sure that she is bringing all those skills to bear for the company she is working for now. In general, I think that Laura is ideally suited for any problem-solving environment. Knowing how to deal with a large set of data, synthesize it, and come up with a solution and plan of action is important for any career. Laura’s ability to write well, speak clearly, and articulate so nicely is also an asset that has clearly been a big benefit.
What is the range of careers students and postdocs in your lab choose to pursue?
Graduate students all come to my lab with an interest in doing basic research oriented toward developmental biology. It’s very interesting that, despite that commonality, they often have very different motivations and in the end wind up in careers that would have been difficult to predict. I’ve had people in the lab who have gone into industry, either into biotech companies or into large established pharma companies. Certainly some followed a more traditional academic track and have proceeded to postdoctoral fellowships, and then faculty positions at institutions around the country. I have had some students and postdocs that have become writers. I have a fair number of MD/PhD students who come to the lab. Some of them go on into academic careers, some of them go into clinical careers, and one of them went into government policy. I am proud of all of them, especially the ones who really succeed in these different careers. I am always fascinated to see where students wind up. We are lucky at UCSF because the students and postdocs are of such high quality. Regardless of what career path they choose, they usually do extremely well. For those of us who mentor them, it’s a real education to see the different directions they take and how successful they are.
How do you mentor people with different career goals?
Clearly, I am better able to mentor students and postdocs if they are thinking of doing something that is similar to what I have done myself. So, I feel I have the most to offer when someone is asking me for advice on going, say, from a graduate program into a postdoc, or clinical residency, or going from a postdoc into their first professional position, or getting promoted, or getting tenure. If they are going into a career in industry, or into writing, or consulting, or something else that I have not experienced first-hand, I may not be the best mentor. But what I feel I can provide, is my perspective on whether they are suited for the job. And I am happy to say, most of them are. By the time they finish their training, they acquire the kind of skills that will allow them to succeed in any of these other jobs. So, it is really a question of what do they want to do themselves.
I had a postdoc who came to my lab, and on day one he explained that he really wanted to found a company, and I said: “That is great!” This is not something that I have ever done, so I was not equipped to guide him. But he was enough of a self-starter that he took courses and acquired the skills that he needed. So, by the time he has finished here, he did exactly what he wanted: he founded a start-up, and he is doing quite well. People come with all kinds of ideas about what they want to do. I am happy to help them along the way if I can, but luckily most of them are smart enough that they do not really need my help, and they make their decisions on their own. So, I sometimes think my role as a mentor is very minimal, but I try.
What was your own career path?
I am an MD/PhD, and I always had a split career, doing clinical work and working in a basic research science lab: two independent careers, essentially, with very little overlap. But there was a time when I actually decided to give up academia and go into clinical practice full time. I opened up a solo practitioner office as an adult neurologist. But after a year and a half, I decided that it was not what I really wanted to do. I was very lucky that I was able to come back to an academic position. Having made that detour taught me that in fact I was not as successful in my academic work as I could have been prior to that moment, not because I did not have enough time, which was partly true, but because I was not completely committed to being in the lab, because I was split between two different careers. Having spent a year and a half doing purely clinical practice was enough to teach me how much I missed being in a lab. I got rid of the notion that I was going to be a clinician, and I have become much more focused on the work I am doing in the lab. That is part of the reason why I encourage people to do what will make them most happy. If they follow an unconventional route, and if after a couple of years they decide that what they really want to do lies in a different direction, they should have the confidence to change direction and make it work.
What do you think is the career development culture at UCSF?
Before UCSF, I worked at Harvard, at Yale, at Stanford, and at Columbia. They all have their own very distinct and different cultures. But the most welcoming, the most nurturing, and I think the most exciting environment has been at UCSF. There are more opportunities for students and postdocs to experience different careers here than what I have observed at the other institutions. Students and postdocs don’t necessarily have to leave their positions and take an alternative job in order to experience what it would be like, they can get a sense of that beforehand.
The entrepreneurial spirit of the Bay Area also influences the way people conduct their research. It encourages people to take risks, it teaches them to treat failure as a learning experience. And I think that is a lesson that people acquire just by having been here as students and postdocs. They see people around taking risks, some of them fail, but somehow most of them succeed in the long run. At other places I have been, there have not been a diversity of career paths, there were not so many role models as there are here. The diversity of people with non-academic or unconventional backgrounds who come to UCSF opens your eyes to opportunities that you otherwise may not have considered.
What do you think is the importance of the PI in the career development of his or her students?
A PhD mentor is almost like a parent in a way, and I always feel that sense of responsibility. I remember that, when I was a student, my mentor and I had a close relationship, which I thought was wonderful, so I try to become that kind of role model for all of my students, but it is hard. My advisor was Eric Kandel, a Nobel laureate, and he set a very high standard. I remember what he thought was the most important thing he could teach the people in his lab. He agreed that although one could be successful and satisfied with various careers, he thought that none were as wonderful as being a scientist. I remember that very well, and it left a distinct impression. So, when I have a student who I think has the ability to become a real star in an academic career, I always encourage them in that direction. And if they decide not to, I sometimes fault myself. As though I did not convey to them that this is really the best and most satisfying of careers. But it is not the best choice for everyone, of course, and there are many problems with academia. But still, irrational as it may be, I think this attitude was imprinted upon me at that particular early moment in my career. So, as a mentor, one has to be careful about the things one says, because even casual remarks and the attitudes they reflect can have a big impact on your mentees.