How to Stand Out in a Large Collaboration

Collaborations in astronomy seem to be getting larger and larger. The quantity and quality of data needed to push the boundaries of our science are becoming ever greater, and many of us find ourselves part of projects that have dozens of colleagues from all over the globe. This makes sense for the health of the project: we can combine specialists at every wavelength and experts on every science subtopic and theorists with every type of technique at their disposal and create massive onslaughts against the challenges and issues of our field. These types of collaborations can be exciting and enriching, but how do you stay involved in such projects as a young female scientist, say at the postdoc level, without becoming lost in the pack?

In some senses, large projects allow postdocs to truly shine. The postdocs are likely to be the ones closest to the data, first in the design and construction of the observations, and later reducing, troubleshooting and analyzing before sending it on for use by the greater team. Or as theorists, the postdocs are likely to be the ones testing the boundaries of the simulations or code and making sense of the initial output. As such, the opportunities for individual contact with many members of the team are great, increasing chances for collaboration. As the first to see the new results, the postdocs also have the chance at brand new discoveries or at formulating new science ideas, carving out space for their own interests piqued by the dataset. But there is also the risk that data reduction, analysis, or other team duties might result in a loss of time for conducting science and writing papers. Being acknowledged for those duties is important, but being seen as a productive member of the team in terms of science is even more important for continuing on in the field, for future jobs, and so on.

As a member of two relatively new large teams, I've been scouting about for ideas on exactly this topic: how to be a productive, cooperative member of a team, good at 'pitching in', while still maintaining a great publishing record and contributing to the science goals.

Here's the advice I've received so far, and I would be glad for anyone to add (or subtract!) from these.