Diversifying your academic portfolio

Dr. Abraham (Avi) Loeb from Harvard did a nice write up titled Taking “The Road Not Taken”: On the Benefits of Diversifying Your Academic Portfolio.

Below is the abstract:

It is common practice among young astrophysicists these days to invest research
time conservatively in mainstream ideas that have already been explored extensively in
the literature. This tendency is driven by peer pressure and job market prospects, and is
occasionally encouraged by senior researchers. Although the same phenomenon existed
in past decades, it is alarmingly more prevalent today because a growing fraction of
observational and theoretical projects are pursued in large groups with rigid research
agendas. In addition, the emergence of a “standard model” in cosmology (albeit with
unknown dark components) offers secure “bonds” for a safe investment of research time.
In this short essay, which summarizes a banquet lecture at a recent conference, I give
examples for both safe and risky topics in astrophysics (which I split into categories
of “bonds,” “stocks,” and “venture capital”), and argue that young researchers should
always allocate a small fraction of their academic portfolio to innovative projects with
risky but potentially highly profitable returns. In parallel, selection and promotion
committees must find new strategies for rewarding candidates with creative thinking.

“Two roads diverged in a wood, and I –
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.”
from the poem “The Road Not Taken” by Robert Frost.

My favorite part of this paper is that it compares the investment of time in research to products found in the financial sector. Research topics belong to categories of low-risk (“bonds”), medium risk (“stocks”), or high-risk (“venture capital”) investments of research time.

Recommendations for the investment strategy of young researchers
The most common investment strategy of research time by young postdocs in astrophysics
these days is:
• 80% in bonds
• 15% in stocks
• 5% in venture capital.
My recommended strategy is:
• 50% in bonds
• 30% in stocks
• 20% in venture capital.

Looking at Dr. Loeb’s recommended strategy of dedicating “20% venture capital” personal time seems to parallel the “20% time model” used by Google. Using this research approach gives a person the ability to produce results from low risk research, and pursue medium risk research. However, when I think of high risk research in the biological sciences thoughts of higher research costs, larger investments of time, scale, and persistence come to mind. Nonetheless this is a good recipe for grants or fellowships.