On hiring

Are you lucky to get these kind of emails to apply for a research position you recently advertised? John Carmack on Twitter: People like the idea of hard and fast rules, but putting +/-infinity as a factor in a policy decision is almost never the best plan. Hiring is an obvious example, with "requirements" that … Continue reading On hiring

The stasis of “healthcare innovation”: Get new ideas!

light bulb

https://twitter.com/chrissyfarr/status/1438914101330124806?s=20 Something to spark off ideas AI in healthcare is a classic case of putting the cart before the horse. Yes, this one: Transformation can begin only if there is a felt need. If there's none, you can roll off hype straight from the consultants marketing pitch (or sales deck). What is that isn't working? … Continue reading The stasis of “healthcare innovation”: Get new ideas!

The flywheel effect

Blogging should follow the "flywheel effect". I have reiterated several times- blogging helps in writing. The free flow of ideas makes it easier to understand and spot patterns. Here's an example of the flywheel effect These assume importance for those in content marketing and "trying" to funnel in customers, but I have mentioned it here … Continue reading The flywheel effect

LinkedIn: Why have it in the first place?

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com LinkedIn is a glorified resume centre. Long time back, in my earlier avatar on Twitter, I couldn't differentiate between users pushing out affiliate links and trying to create "conversations" around content. I had stayed away from it because of privacy concerns and I am glad I stayed away from the … Continue reading LinkedIn: Why have it in the first place?

Is peer review “dead”?

My standard reaction (actually to most issues!) It is odd that the "institution" of peer review should come up time and again, but sample this- it is unpaid labour, few people "profit" from this and holds no water unless you wish to crow in front of a committee that you have volunteered your "precious time". … Continue reading Is peer review “dead”?