Beyond academia: how to “de-risk” a mid-career move to industry
Working Scientist
Introduction
E-Harmony is a dating app that helps you be more true to yourself. Take the compatibility quiz today, and get someone who gets you. Joan Kordner's career in chemical engineering started in 1987. She was always in two minds about what she wanted to do with her life.
00:00
Transcript
Play full episode
Transcript
Episode notes
Speaker 3
So there's a decent chance it was my idea, but I can't say for sure. And I've been contacting people. So it first appeared in Charlie's episode. It was like a background joke, the baby episode. Yes.
Speaker 2
But
Speaker 3
he didn't remember writing it. The
Speaker 2
newspaper headline.
Speaker 3
Yeah, exactly. And we just wanted something, you know, because people always get that gift for a baby. So we just wanted like an inappropriate. Right.
Speaker 2
It went from spring has sprung to this grand strangler strikes again. So
Speaker 3
I asked Greg if it was his because I know that he got very involved in the rewrite of that episode. And he thought it was mine. Oh. And then I asked a bunch of other people who seemed to like it and who were around at the time, including a couple of writer assistants and Danny and BJ and Halstead. And they seemed to think it was mine.
Speaker 1
Okay. This one joke was your idea. And
Speaker 2
Warren said he thought it was yours as well.
Speaker 3
Yeah. But I can't say for sure. And I would hate to be taking credit for someone else's pitch.
Speaker 2
You're so kind, Paul. I mean, the majority of the writers think it was you. But you're still like, it might not be me. So
Speaker 3
it kind of sounds like me. Also sounds like Mindy, too.
Speaker 1
But this was intended to be originally a one-off joke gag in the delivery.
Speaker 3
Yeah, it hadn't been for more than that. Okay. But it kind of grew as things do.
Speaker 1
Yes. But I would like to note for the record, again, for the record. When conceived, this was simply a newspaper joke. Thank you. Committed to record. Angela, would you like to ask question number two? I would, and I
Speaker 2
don't think what you're commending to record proves anything, but okay. Paul.
Speaker 3
Yes, Angela. You
Speaker 2
are aware that people think Toby is the Scranton Strangler. Yes. So Aiden B from the UK says, did Paul purposely write or play the role or plan for it to be as ambiguous as it is? Like, is Toby the Scranton Strangler? Yeah,
Speaker 1
I'm curious about that too. When did you all become aware that fans were keying into Toby
Speaker 2
being the Scranton Strangler?
Speaker 1
Was it while we were still on
Speaker 3
the air? No, it was after we wrapped. So I watched that YouTube video about putting together the very first one that said it might be Toby. And that
Speaker 2
kind of blew my mind. There are many now.
Speaker 3
Yeah, there are a lot. And I watched a bunch for this podcast. And they were long.
Speaker 2
Because there's a lot of evidence to prove that he is. Yeah, and
Speaker 3
for other characters too, right?
Speaker 2
Yeah.
Speaker 3
Yeah. Yes,
Speaker 1
for other characters that could be the Scranton Strangler. There's a lot of YouTube out there. Pointing that out again.
Speaker 3
No, it had not crossed my mind that it could be, that it would be me. We may have joked that it could be Creed. We might have joked around like that.
Speaker 2
Creed definitely had a lot of different lives that he led.
Speaker 3
Yes. Yeah, which came out really strongly in season nine, I guess.
Speaker 1
Yes.
Speaker 3
But that's the kind of thing you can do in the very end, right? I guess. Yeah. And Creed, I don't know, he existed on a whole different plane. And he loves the idea. He loves the idea that he was a screenwriter. And
Speaker 2
that Toby is the one everyone would pin it on, maybe, if not for George. Well, our next question is this. Mindy said that the Scranton Strangler was one of the most pitched things in the writer's room. She said that if you compiled all the notes, you would have an epic and terrifying miniseries. Do you remember any of the pitches that you guys had? No,
Speaker 3
I think it was a lot of just this person gets strangled. You know, you're looking for, we're looking for twists in the story. So like we have this list up on the board, right? Of like, after we write things, did we include inciting incident? Oh, no. You know, it's like the simple things in stories. And so one of them was a twist. You know, is it a straight line to the end or, you know, do we go somewhere with this? So I think a twist or like second act break commonly could be somebody gets strangled when we're really stretching. All
Speaker 1
right. Next question, sir. We also received a letter from Maria H. in Atlanta, Georgia, who said, have you heard the theory that the Scranton Strangler isn't a murderer? Paul Lieberstein famously posted a video on Instagram a few years ago saying that the writers of The Office always intended to include that the Scranton Strangler would just strangle his victims till they passed out, but never actually killed any of them. Now,
Speaker 3
I loved that. I thought that was super fun. I'm not sure everybody was on board for that. But I loved it just like strangled you and left them there. Such a weird, like passive, violent
Speaker 2
crime. Like I could kill you, but I'm not going to. It's weirder. And then
Speaker 3
it becomes less of a like crazy thing. I mean, it gets crazier. But in a way, it's just like it's not a serial killer. Right. It's just a serial strangler. It's just like, oh, that was a really bad night when I got strangled and passed out.
Speaker 1
And then you live your life.
Speaker 3
You live the rest of your life.
Speaker 2
And he knows. He knows. Like, I'm
Speaker 3
going to take you to the edge. Yeah. Yeah. And
Speaker 2
it's like,
Speaker 3
sure, that's traumatic. I'm not saying there wouldn't be some therapy, but it's like, it's so much smaller. So
Speaker 1
this was just an idea in the writer's room. This never, this fact never shows
Speaker 2
up on the show. It never shows up on the show. This idea. No. Right.
Speaker 3
Which means it's not officially in the lore, yes.
Speaker 2
And then also, too, that would contradict George Howard Scubb getting the death penalty and life in prison. You're right. Because you don't strangle someone. Your string of crimes just stringing to passing out doesn't get you death penalty. Yeah.
Speaker 3
You're right. Wow, Angela. I
Speaker 2
feel like that is maybe...
Speaker 1
Unless...
Speaker 3
What? Unless he accidentally went too far one night and killed someone.
Speaker 1
Right. Okay,
Speaker 3
so maybe that happened. You don't know what that... Yeah.
Speaker 1
Well, this leads us to one of our last questions, Paul, in our evidence gathering here. If you could go back and add one additional storyline for the Scranton Strangler, knowing everything you know now about all of the fan interest, maybe it would wrap things up. Would you do it? And if so, what would that thing be? No,
Speaker 3
I probably wouldn't wrap it up for the audience. But Scub getting out of prison, like say we had gone another 10 years.
Speaker 1
Okay. With
Speaker 3
Scub maybe getting out of prison and getting people. Would
Speaker 2
Scub become Toby's friend that he'd always hoped for? Or
Speaker 3
Toby could be very, very scared. You know, or members of the jury could be very scared. Or there could be another strangling while Scub was in prison. Well, that would definitely fuel the fire. Yeah. And was it a copycat or did they get the wrong guy?
Speaker 1
Interesting questions. Yeah. We
Speaker 3
would do something like that.
Speaker 1
Yeah. It would have continued. Yeah, for sure. If we had continued. The Scranton Strangler case was not over. No,
Speaker 3
something like that isn't over ever. We're still talking about the Menendez brothers.
Speaker 2
True. True.
Speaker 3
Yeah. Yeah.
Speaker 2
No, that would be the lore of the town for as long as we documented that town and that community. Yeah,
Speaker 3
it's a big deal in the town. Yeah. Scranton size. Yeah.
Speaker 2
Angela, do you have any more questions for
Speaker 1
Paul before we get to the question? No,
Speaker 2
I don't. I think, you know, we learned a lot about Toby today. We learned about his athleticism, how he could just hop a fence with no problem. I would also say that Toby has big hands. I noted. I'm so sorry. What is this? This is not the
Speaker 1
time for you to present more evidence. You're
Speaker 2
just throwing out evidence right now. What is this? You said to me, do you have anything else?
Speaker 1
I said, do you have any more questions for
Speaker 2
Paul? Okay. Not do you want to give a speech about why Toby is the Scranton Strangler? Okay. I will just simply say this then, Paul. Yes. Is Toby the Scranton Strangler? Oh my gosh, I don't even have to win. I don't even have to win because I won. This is one person's opinion. One person's opinion. It's Toby. And by the way, what are the showrunners of The Office? So here's
Speaker 3
why he's not the scratcher.
Speaker 2
Oh, give it to us. All right. All right.
Speaker 3
Because we wouldn't do that. We're about like relatable office. This fan theory doesn't
Speaker 2
exist in the realm of what would we normally do? I'm saying
Speaker 3
this should be part of the theory. Part
Speaker 2
of the reason why he is not. Yes. Is you have to break the fourth wall and say the writers wouldn't do that. Well,
Speaker 3
okay. If you weren't breaking the fourth wall, then you would just say it's too unlikely. This is like an Occam's razor kind of thing. Like, no, the most likely thing is generally the truth, where the guy convicted is guilty of the thing. Okay.
Speaker 2
You
Speaker 3
know, there was a trial. But yeah, if you're willing to break the fourth wall, and I've been thinking about this a lot over the last 24 hours of watching all those videos, it's just, well, you know, we always for, like, the thing that people were experiencing, which sometimes is like a proximity to a big story, but not an actual part of it. So I feel like that would have been something we would have probably pitched, broken. We would have had a version of it and ultimately decided, like, no, this is not our show. Right.
Speaker 2
This is not. We
Speaker 3
shouldn't do this. This is a
Speaker 2
jump. This would be a jumping the shark moment. Yeah, for sure. If Dunder Mifflin had an employee that was a serial killer. Yes. Okay. So I guess
Speaker 1
that's my next question. Toby is not the Scranton Strangler. Does that mean that Creed, Robert California, Gabe,
Speaker 3
David
Speaker 1
Wallace, nobody is the Scranton Strangler. No one from our show. George Howard Scubb. No one in the world. Is the Scranton Strangler or was he wrongfully convicted? That maybe we don't know. Is the Strangler still out there?
Speaker 3
That's
Speaker 1
a whole other question.
Speaker 3
Yeah. Yeah. I mean, people are wrongly convicted, right? Every once in a while.
Speaker 1
Once
Speaker 3
in a while.
Speaker 1
Okay.
Speaker 3
But generally, generally not. I don't know.
Speaker 1
Okay. Well, maybe the cliffhanger here is, is George Howard Scubb the Scranton strangler
Speaker 4
or not?
Speaker 2
We may never know. We may never know. We officially mom detected of it. What? Cassie?
Speaker 4
No, definitely never. Cassie's raising her hand. Angela, I want to give you props for like your debate, even though you lost. There was something you brought up that I kept thinking about. And you said that when George is driving the getaway car, that car had been parked in the Dunder Mifflin parking lot before. Yes. Of course, that's a production thing. But in the world of Scranton, I think that would be grounds for him to have an appeal. Because what is that about?
Speaker 2
Mm-hmm. And then I also wondered of all of Scranton. Wait, that could have been
Speaker 3
his – he could have worked in the office park. But
Speaker 1
wouldn't we have known him then? Wouldn't we have known? Wouldn't we? I mean, we got so excited when the car chase went past our building, which is interesting because he clearly knows our street. Well, that's what I was going to say of all of Scranton. You
Speaker 2
know, there is some statistic and I had it, but I don't have it with me now that a lot of times crimes are committed nearest where people live. And that's why a lot of times when people commit a crime near close to where they live or work, they do a much harder job at trying to hide it because it will it's very close to their circle of where they live. So the fact that he drives down the street where his car is also parked, and while he's driving down the street of all of Scranton, that is where Dunder Mifflin is, and then Toby's phone rings as he's driving in that area, I think that did cause some suspicion about how is this person connected to the world of Dunder Mifflin.
Joan Cordiner took steps to “de-risk” her career when she moved into academia. Having spent her entire career up to that point in industry, she left her role as a technical and change manager role at chemical company Syngenta, and joined the University of Sheffield, UK, in 2020.
Cordiner, who does not have a PhD, reflected on her skills, strengths and experience and how to apply them to her new role as a professor at the university’s department of chemical and biological engineering. This included identifying knowledge gaps and areas that would really benefit her new employer.
De-risking means making any career move less of a learning curve for yourself, but also easier for new employers by ensuring that they benefit from the fresh perspectives that you bring to a role.
In the fifth episode of this six-part podcast series about porosity, the movement of people within academia and beyond, Cordiner is joined by Jorge Abreu-Vicente, who switched to industry after completing his PhD at the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy in Heidelberg, Germany.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts
Save insights instantly, chat with episodes, and build lasting knowledge - all powered by AI.
