Aggression and collaborators

I'm working pretty intensively with a colleague currently on a project, an Skype has decided to not allow us to have a video connection the last few times we've met. So we have to depend on tone of voice only to convey information.

At some point, I realized that I was getting very excited about a point where I knew I was right, and since he couldn't see the smile on my face while I was talking, it was possible that I just came across as overly aggressive. So after I was done explaining, I preemptively apologized in case he felt bullied into understanding my point.

He hadn't. We moved on.

But I have felt bullied into accepting other people's points of views, and I have felt threatened when discussing science with others. I have also felt tension rising in me when talking to very emphatic excitable people (mostly, and stereotypically, Italians) until I've realized that that is "just how they talk" an recalibrated.

In fact, after a recent visit with a colleague, where we just had a bad dynamic (every scientific disagreement seemed to escalate into an argument), I've tried to be very cognizant of my tone an possible aggression level.

Which now makes me wonder at what set of indicators pushes one over the line between excitable and emphatic to aggressive, especially in the context of defending one's position over that of someone else.

Certainly, having a history of being willing to back down gracefully when proven wrong helps. Being consistent about what one said in the past helps. As does being clear about one's assumptions under which and domains in which one's argument is valid. All of this required developing a history with the person one is arguing with, and to a certain extent, I'm willing to only care about the large n interaction limit of my relationships. But is that all?

What think you?

Confidence

It took me a long time to really feel comfortable in my new skin of being an academic and a parent. At my last post doc, I would feel apologetic about interrupting a skype session to put Epsilon back to sleep, or about only being available to meet in the evenings after his bed time.

I've always known that I shouldn't be apologetic. I've heard all the rhetoric about not explaining that I can't attend for family reasons, and just being point blank about having other appointments. Knowing doesn't imply feeling. I tried to follow all the "don't apologize for procreating" rules and watched what I said to colleagues, but that didn't change the fact that I felt apologetic.

I'm realizing that this is changing. I don't know if this is because I am changing, or I am interacting with a different set of colleagues, or something else completely. I feel no guilt saying I am available from 8:30-4 pm and 7-10 pm, knowing full well that chunks of this period are unthinkably early, or dinner time for my colleagues.

Last night, Epsilon came out of his bedroom and curled up asleep in my lap while I was mid meeting. It was nice being able to excuse myself, turn of the bedroom light and continue the conversation in hushed tones. It was even nicer when my colleague apologized for eating while skyping, I was able to give a rejoinder about snoring three year olds. Much of the credit goes to how comfortable I feel with this colleague, but I think I could now do this for people I keep a more arms length relationship with.

I think for me, confidence is not marked by when I can confidently excuse myself from an obligation without giving a reasons, but when I CAN be honest about what my life looks like, even in a mildly hostile environment.

I'm not all the way there, but it's good to see that I'm making progress.



*Epsilon is 3, and I'm just writing this post. 

A frustrated attempt at a funny Friday

Dinner with Epsilon is starting to become unpleasant. Motivating him to sit in his chair and eat before his food becomes ice cold and he is bored with the task of eating his risotto one grain of rice at a time is harder than I would have ever imagined. It usually ends in deadlines and warnings about watching his playtime disappear, and eventually threats about having to go to bed hungry. Not a pleasant sight. And then I read this about the sequester.

US transportation secretary Ray LaHood said sequestration “would force the FAA to undergo an immediate retrenchment of core functions.” He added that it “will be impossible to avoid significant employee furloughs” at the agency.

“The furlough of a large number of air traffic controllers and technicians will require a reduction in air traffic to a level that can be safely managed by the remaining staff,” LaHood wrote.

Aaah, lets add to the list of threats and warnings longer lines at airport security and fewer flights. It makes me wonder if Obama feels like he dealing with his daughters in their worst toddler years.

***

Emoticons. ... Sigh.  I'm old school. I remember getting to college and keeping in touch with high school friends via talk. Anyone else? I learned about emoticons pretty early, and like them in their text version. I really appreciate people who come up with clever ones. My thesis adviser, a bald man with a mustache and a beard often signs e-mails (:-{)} Brilliant! A friend's evil grin is >=]. A nice variation on the theme.

The animated emoticons strike me as .... unimaginative and restrictive.

And then I send the following bits of harmless mathematical expressions over skype to a colleague I keep a fairly formal relationship with.

(h)^2 = result




Nope... not hitting on you... just being stupid with the space bar.

Or how about

x=(\int (f) dy)




Right... I've completely lost it. Lets call it a day, shall we?

Kerfuffle Unfuffled

Yesterday I learned an important lesson. Always make sure that your coauthors are actually your coauthors.

Regular readers of this blog may remember my coauthor kerfuffle several months ago, at which time I was frustrated with the lack of work a more senior colleague and coauthor was putting into a paper we were working on together. He was slow to turn around drafts, and would complain about parts without making much in the way of constructive suggestions. His emails were sounding increasingly frustrated, and I was getting frustrated with his lack of input.

In person he was much easier to work with, and much progress had been made on the times we got to work together in the same place. Unfortunately we are on different continents so flying to meet was not something either of us could do very regularly.

It recently dawned on me that we had never actually formally discussed the authorship, and the drafts I was sending had no names on them. After a few emails it turns out that he had never seen himself as a coauthor on the paper. I now go from frustrated to in awe of how much time he gave me and how much thought he put into a paper that is not his.

In the future, even the most rough drafts I share will have the authors listed, even if we don't have a title yet.

Coauthor Kerfuffle

I seem to be developing a trend in my coauthor experiences. (3/5) Small N, but early in my career, so I should do something about it now rather than let it get worse.

My coauthors are lousy communicators!

Two out of three of these are significantly senior to me, and the nearest lives 2.5 K miles away. I feel like I am pulling teeth to get through feed back on drafts, Skype meetings to talk through sticking points, advice on areas where I have gotten stuck on a project. Progress seems to only happen when I manage to fly over to the other person's city, or after I've badgered for a very long time.

Full disclosure, I am partially at fault here: I'm bad at badgering. After badgering for a while, I tend to give up and say things like "We can talk about this the next break you have from classes," which is stupid, I know.

So my question is, am I unlucky in my draw of coauthors? I tend to look for a project that is interesting/I have something to say about and go for it, rather than looking at who it is I will be working with. Should I be paying more attention to who I'll be working with? Is this experience with distant co-authors normal?

And most importantly, is there a well hidden secret to dealing with people like this that both gets the work done in a timely manner, and doesn't offend the senior collaborator?

I haven't gotten satisfactory answers from my colleagues, but that could be because everyone knows the people involved, and therefore don't want to say anything. So I'm asking the blogosphere. Help?