I think for the purpose of research, academia seems to be the best option for me as well. I think academia will not only encourage learning but also like he said we can “be on the threshold of human knowledge”. I want to be in a lab and conduct research and then present my findings. However, I do not have experience grant writing, and I think that’s very important in the field of academia. Overall, I think the information provided will allow anyone in academia or in research to be successful, even outside of medical devices. What do you feel the cons of research in academia are?

When we first started discussing academia versus industry, initially leaned more towards industry. I thought industry research was better because certain jobs provided job security. The thought that a specific job title will always keep me a job I felt was something that was necessary; however, when going over current lectures, academia seems more enjoyable, less demanding, and more rewarding. I am still torn between the two. I feel like I would actually have to gain experience in both areas to see which best fits me. Is there an occupation that share the benefits of both?

Academia research would absolutely more enjoyable for the sake of research. Being on the threshold of human knowledge and being able to take and sit on as many projects as you like is very appealing. Being able to discover and take credit for new things and attend conferences to talk about your research sounds really fulfilling.

However, in my case specifically, I feel as though I would be left somewhat unsatisfied with research in academia. While conducting research related to medical devices, there is an extremely long process between discovering a new phenomena and incorporating that into the medical device market. It could take decades and may not even happen during one's lifetime. When you discover something in academia and publish a paper on it, that concept floats in a nebulous until enough people have taken notice of it and express curiosity about it. On the other hand, industry research seems to provide a lot of short-term satisfaction in the sense that the work you will be doing will directly translate what will be going on the market. Although the research in industry is not as fulfilling and freeform as it is in academia, I prefer to see the impact of any work that I do. I feel this would be easier to see in industry research rather than academia research.

I've researched a fair bit under academia and have to say the flexibility to ultimately switch to 4-5 projects at any point provides such a breath of relief to the monotonous day to day cycle a job might have. I've had the opportunity to create my own projects based on results off existing projects and therefore I consider it an amazing exercise tool to see how diverse you can be in a open environment. Contrast that to my little industry experience, its more methodical and constrained to having a short group of tasks without any leeway to drop any of them. The benefit is that knowledge can be easily introduced in a structured manner, whilst in research its very open ended to exactly how you want to use what you learned. 

In terms of satisfaction, I can say Industry is more rewarding because it feels like a difficult/time consuming task at all times, while in academia it is more apparent after months-to-years of work coming together at the end. It makes me feel I was more productive in Industry, because the shear number of tasks that can start to accumulate and since more often times you get to see how your work makes an impact in the production line. 

I hope one day I can do a bit of both, thought the structure of each's requirements, make it difficult to do so. But if I had to lean specifically into one of them I'd chose industry because of the somewhat consistent satisfaction of your work and ultimately your pay as well.  

The research path for making medical devices depends on the career goals an individual is trying to achieve. In terms of academia, the research for medical devices would be more focused on the academic side, where the goal would be to advance the science and technology behind the medical device at hand. On the other hand, from the industry aspect, the main goal would be to apply practical knowledge and design a medical device that meets the needs of the market. All in all, the academia field could be used to advance the knowledge behind a medical device and then the industry field could be used to apply that knowledge and design the said medical device. 

From my experiences, I would prefer research in industry over academia, as having stricter timelines, although potentially stressful, ensures that projects are being completed. Additionally, in industry, companies are usually willing to spend more than in academia on new devices and means to ensure that research is happening at a high level. Going into research in academia is a greater commitment than going into research in industry as it typically requires getting a Ph.D., whereas in industry you can work with a bachelor's or master's degree. Additionally, if an individual is working in industry and wants to pivot from research, there are plenty of different opportunities within medical device companies that deal with research without actually conducting the research such as project management, quality, and regulatory. In academia, there are not other departments within the lab that they could transition into, which is why people that go into research in academia typically have to love doing research. Research in industry and academia are also very different, in that industry an individual will be focused on following timelines, whereas in academia, an individual would be focused on obtaining grants and writing proposals. 

@vkeithley From what I can tell, there are cons to research in both Academia and Industry. In terms of Academia, the cons include lower pay, more schooling, success sometimes based more on name than quality of work (need to be more recognized/reputable to have success), and the politics involved. In order to find success in Academia, you need to get either a Master's or PhD, which involves more schooling. Even with this extra schooling, the starting salary of someone in Academic Research is usually lower than the starting salary of an individual who goes straight from undergrad to Industry. Moreover, success is often because of "who you know" rather than simply "what you do." You may have high-quality research, but that research won't be recognized and appreciated in the way it should unless you have top-tier connections.

When it comes to the valuing of research in making medical devices in academia, they do it for the love of it, "Neat-o!", they believe they are helping people and they are also curious, they really do boldly go where no one has gone before and that is why academia does research.  In Academia, research is the reason for reason, "They do it for itself".  In Academia, research is done by "fly by the seat of your pants", where chance gatherings spark curiosity, which sparks ideas, which sparks projects.  In Academia, professors could be working on multiple projects, 50 possible projects, whatever gets finished, gets finished and it is for the sake of research, it is for the sake of science.  While in Industry, research is done for reason#1: money, reason#2: money, reason#3: money, but for reason#4: it is to help people - there is some degree of wanting to help.  In fact, if you talk to anyone in Industry - any scientist, any engineer, etc. - they are not going to tell you only I want to make money, they do want to help people, everyone is concerned about their bonuses and salaries, too, the management is absolutely concerned about the wealth of the company and what kind of money the company is earning, but they do want to help people.  In Industry, research is a means to an end, it to obtain some competitive edge over a competitor or to gain tax write-offs because you do not have to pay taxes on the money you spend on research.  In Industry, research is done with two main goals: 1. am I going to be able to beat me competitors and 2. am I going to be able to save money (through tax write-offs) and that is why a lot of companies do research.  In Industry, you have a higher archical decision making process.  Management is going to decide there is a business need for something, and if there is, they are going to tell you to make it, research is going to research it, and it is either going to become a project or not become a project.  At this time I would prefer to do research in an industry setting, where I could use my engineering knowledge and skills directly for the design of a medical device that will be going into the market to help the current need of the people as the effect of my research would be seen easier and earlier in a commercial setting rather than in academia.  

If I were to decide to conduct research in academia or industry , without a doubt I would decide to conduct research in academia for different reasons. One of the main reasons is that in academia you have a lot of space for setting the research topic, compared to if you work as a researcher in industry where the research topic is determined by the boss. Also, the life you do when you work as a researcher in academia is better for me because there are no  tight deadlines. Also, if you don't like the project  or it  doesn't turn out to be efficient, you can cancel the research  without a problem. Also, another point that I like is that in academia people who work as researchers attend many conferences that take place in different countries of the world and in this case they can visit many different countries in the world.

When weighing out the pros and cons of conducting academia research versus industry research, I would be lying if I said that academia research does not seem like it would be more enjoyable than industry research. Having the ability to rely on fundamental knowledge while being able to have the freedom to explore unconventional ideas or topics out of pure curiosity sounds extremely appealing. However, in my case, I feel as though I would lean more towards conducting industry research due to the structure it provides. Whether it be a direct result of playing sports my whole life or not, I am someone who has always needed structure and organization to stay motivated. In industry, the pressures are typically more deadline-driven, as teams work to integrate science and business-focused problem solving on tight project timelines in accordance with larger product and business goals. This a key aspect of industry research that I have been doing my whole life. Another reason I tend to lean more towards industry research is because the scope of work is typically focused on applied research that will have direct clinical value, meaning that completing the research may feel more rewarding or satisfying. While their is still a rewarding factor to academia research, I feel as though I would prefer to see a more immediate impact of my work.

If I were to have the option to conduct research in academia or industry, I would choose academia. When researching in academia, you are given almost a free range of possibilities to peruse what interests you most. You are able to work towards a goal that you personally chose and that you are actually passionate about. There are limited strict deadlines, and the work and meaning behind the research is often powerful and can potentially impact the health and wellbeing of others (especially in biomedical engineering). 

In industry, research feels much more like just a requirement that management controls. Industry research can be much less meaningful at times, as industry is entirely money-driven. As an industry researcher, there's minimal opportunity to explore what really interests you personally, and you are more so given the task of researching management-delegated items. In industry, you can spend months of your time researching a solution to a task that you have been given, just for management to move on from the item due to a lack of budget or interest. 

However, this is just what I have experienced as someone who has been involved in research in both industry and academia. The obvious benefit of industry research is the compensation, but research in academia is ultimately more fulfilling. 

Going back to Week 1, we have gone over the difference between academia and industry in terms of job opportunities, benefits, pros and cons, as well as what path each one of us wants to take. From when I started my undergraduate study in biomedical engineering until now, I still want to pursue a career in the industry all the way through. I can still see myself taking the industry path when it comes to valuing the research in making medical devices. In the lecture and slideshows, it compared academia and industry in the research aspect. Although the industry is highly motivated by money and business, there is still that aspect of helping people, which I want to do. I am not interested in the academia side. I do not particularly have the passion for research, but I do have the passion for making real products to help real people. Throughout the lecture, I saw that research is more beneficial in the academia field since you are more in charge of your project with more flexibility rather than the management of your company. That did not discourage me from still wanting to go down the industry ladder. I am more of a hands-on person when it comes to making products or completing projects. As one user said, research seems like a requirement for industry to make medical devices, but that is the point since management is technically in charge of this. 
On this side, the management decides a business need leading to the project being born while researchers look into it. The pitfalls with research in industry is a little intimidating since not all projects are completed correctly or on time. I have mentioned in a post in Week 1 that I enjoy the challenges of that. “If there are too many projects, then work harder.” Again, I had a little practice during my third and fourth year of undergrad with researching and writing protocols for a medical device prototype to present it and get approval each week by management, or faculty mentor, in my case. Writing your own research protocol and doing the study was challenging due to limited resources, budget, and timing from the university. I think it is beneficial to do research in the industry on what you are planning to build or develop based on management and business needs. This gives you insight and you would know more about the project since you are doing the research, writing the protocol, doing the study, collecting data, and presenting the results to management. Getting the general idea from the management to research and being able to defend that research is important in industry. This is establishing the need for this potential device and this would greatly help the company with their goals and business plan, as well as yourself within the company to move up the ladder. In my eyes, it feels like you are able to do more with the research in industry. All of that research is being applied for clinical use to help people. There would be an immediate and greater impact on patient lives. Maybe it is due to the fact that I got practice in this field that has influenced my career path choice. Once again, I can see myself going down the industry path for research.

I unfortunately don’t have enough experience in academic research to provide a personal perspective, but I can share my experience in industry.

During my time as a co-op at GAF, I saw a strong dedication to market research that helped identify what competitors’ products were lacking. This carried into R&D (my department), where program managers regularly presented updates on product trials, material and production costs, outstanding issues, and upcoming goals. Upper management would review these reports, approve next steps, and make adjustments to meet deadlines or material constraints. The challenge, as mentioned in lecture, came when management asked engineers to complete unnecessary tasks to “prove” product viability, which ultimately cost the company more than originally budgeted. This is one downside of a corporate setting: management often underestimates the true resources needed to ensure market success.

In contrast, academia appears more flexible and, in some ways, more rewarding. From what I’ve gathered in this course, researchers have greater freedom in choosing their focus, applying for grants, and even setting aside projects that stall to pursue new ones. As Dr. Simon noted, this cycle can lead to projects “piling up,” but it also allows graduate and postgraduate students to contribute directly to research without the same corporate pressures. Instead, they collaborate closely with professors and can be more rigorous with their work, since they are not constrained by strict deadlines or immediate financial concerns.

Overall, I’ve had favorable experiences in industry, but I’m open to exploring academia as a way to refine my skills and pursue unanswered questions, rather than just meeting deadlines and pleasing the corporate apparatus.

I personally would enjoy doing research in industry. From my experience, I had the opportunity to work with novel and cutting edge technology for the first time and that's primarily due to the company having a large budget allocated towards the research. Although there isn't as much creative freedom like how there is with academic research however, it's very fulfilling to see the medical device commercializing and something that you had direct input with designing is helping improve patient lives and overall wellbeing. Although I was primarily on process-development, it was insightful to translate the designs from research and development into efficient processes and helping influence the product as well through various testing and characterizations. It's also nice to work cross-functionally with other engineers/researchers and get their unique perspective on the matter and their way of approaching the problem statement and the deliverable.