← All stories

Beyond the job title

What the actual tasks reveal about work in and around STEM

Learning the robot before explaining it

When Yusra Farah began a robotics communications job, she was asked to unpack a small robot, assemble it and start programming. She had never touched a robot before. A manual and colleagues helped her learn the product she would later explain through stories and messages.

What becomes clearer about work and preparation when guests describe their tasks rather than only their job titles? These six accounts show skills used across different jobs, with different levels of expertise. They also show how earlier learning can help someone change roles, while further preparation and opportunities still matter.

Yusra Farah describes her study of consumer behavior as useful preparation. For a product launch, she coordinated with product, sales and regional teams and helped prepare material for public audiences. She needed to understand both the product and the people receiving its explanation. The practical robot exercise gave her something to connect with those earlier skills: experience of what the product actually did.

When a colleague described a manipulator, Farah asked what that meant and learned that it was the robot arm. She took away a technical term and a lesson about explanations that assume too much knowledge. Learning the product helped her see what an audience might need explained.

She recalls difficulty convincing colleagues that a communications specialist could understand the technology, while distinguishing her general understanding from knowing every detail. More specific technical questions improved their responses, but the challenge returned with new colleagues. She describes the problem as being seen as a non-engineer.

Similar skills, different responsibilities

Aziza Almanakly describes building experiments as well as working at a computer. Recalling graduate study while preparing for a faculty role, she discusses building a laboratory, connecting equipment, working with fabricated chips and programming measurements. Her electrical-engineering preparation matters because the code belongs to an experimental setup. The task is to investigate how that system behaves, which requires knowledge of the equipment and what is being measured.

Writing and presenting are part of that work too. She describes designing, debugging and coding while trying to advance knowledge, without knowing whether an approach will work as expected. Explaining the result makes the contribution available to other researchers.

Leslie Pack Kaelbling recalls wanting a robot to drive without crashing when she was a graduate student. When she rewarded avoiding collisions, it stopped moving. After movement became part of the objective, it spun in place. Her account concerns a gap between the behavior she wanted and the problem she had specified. Revising the instructions meant deciding what would count as a satisfactory solution.

Farah needs to explain what a robot arm does to another person. The researcher needs to specify an objective that produces the intended behavior. Both need to make a description precise, but the researcher must also formulate and test the technical problem. Skill in explaining a product does not supply that preparation.

Changing jobs without starting from zero

Roz Katz describes moving from medicinal chemistry and academic research into commercial work. She wanted a closer connection between research and patients and remembered enjoying sales and reception work in a student job.

Her new tasks make the change clearer than the word commercial. She describes asking which patients might benefit from a treatment, what competing treatments exist, how physicians would learn about it and who would pay. Discussions involve colleagues in research, development, analysis and market access. A biological mechanism contributes to this planning, but does not settle the questions about bringing a treatment to patients. The role requires combining information from people who approach the same proposed product differently.

She recalls consulting local and regional colleagues because different authorities can ask for different information, making some launches harder than others. Understanding the science was only part of the planning work she needed to learn.

She says her science background helped her learn across disease areas, while recognizing that colleagues without that background could learn too. For her own transition, she undertook an MBA to strengthen her strategic thinking. Her earlier preparation remained useful, but she still needed to develop her approach to commercial work.

After neuroscience degrees and postdoctoral research, Sarah McKay moved into work centered on teaching, writing and speaking. She criticizes explanations that turn complex neuroscience into simple statements of cause and effect. In her account, communicating well involves judging what research can support as well as finding language an audience can follow. Research experience gives her material to work with; explaining it effectively is a skill in its own right.

She still values the specialization she left. She says that becoming very good at a narrow research problem is necessary, while explaining that it left her less room for the breadth she enjoyed. During a second postdoctoral appointment, she also felt frustrated by funding and competition. Alternatives were initially hard to see. Searching for science-writing jobs then revealed vacancies seeking people with doctoral training. The move used learning she already had, in work she had previously struggled to imagine.

Katz uses scientific knowledge to help plan how a treatment might reach patients; McKay uses it to explain research across a wider field. Each found a use for earlier training that depended on learning how to do the new work.

How a possible route becomes visible

For Victoria Dean, the alternative remained inside academia. She recalls that the common paths in her doctoral program led toward research, either as faculty or in industry. A computer-science pedagogy course and contact with teaching faculty helped her see a career centered on teaching, beyond the expectations she had placed on herself.

Leslie Pack Kaelbling arrived at university wanting to study mathematics, but encountered expectations of preparation she had not received at her rural school. She moved into philosophy, where logic and formal reasoning brought her back toward mathematical ideas. Her account does not document every step from that degree to robotics research. She also describes her career as generally enjoyable and without major setbacks, despite the earlier barrier.

These two routes depended on different openings: seeing a teaching career beyond the expected options, and finding a subject that did not presume the same prior preparation.

Help had concrete forms in these accounts. Victoria Dean credits her parents, who had both attended graduate school, with advice and reading her applications. She calls that access a privilege and describes helping create an application-feedback program. Aziza Almanakly recalls an adviser making room for her contributions in meetings, reading her work and putting her forward for opportunities. Alongside the robot, manual and colleagues in the opening, these examples show what help provided: clearer expectations, practice and attention to someone's work.

What tasks reveal

A job title is a starting point. Tasks reveal what someone needs to understand, decide and do—and how much knowledge that requires. A new role can give earlier study another use, but these accounts also show the additional learning and opportunities that made a change possible.