Havva, thank you for sharing this — it’s a joy to read a profile that feels both grounded and forward-looking. My sincere congrats!

Wearing both hats — as Vice-President of the Turkish Biochemical Society and Chair of the FEBS Education & Training Committee — I also want to say how proud we are to see you not only doing excellent research, but also helping to build community through the FEBS Junior Section, and strengthening the national Junior Section in Türkiye. That “step up and make it happen” attitude is exactly what keeps our scientific ecosystem healthy.

To the FEBS Junior Section: please keep using your voice — ask bold questions, create supportive spaces for peers, and don’t wait for permission to start good things. We’re cheering you on, and we’re here to back your ideas.

As Chair of the FEBS Education & Training Committee, I loved how this piece moves the spotlight from “star science” to the conditions that make good science possible: psychological safety to ask tough questions, cross-level conversation, and the unglamorous operational reality (reimbursements, purchasing, IT) that either protects or quietly eats research time.

The strongest thread is that “culture” isn’t a vibe — it’s a set of repeated, observable behaviours (who can challenge whom; what happens after a tough question; who gets access; how quickly obstacles get removed). 

The “magic” in institutes is often attributed to brilliant science and funding, but the day-to-day governance you describe is what quietly decides whether people can actually do their best work.

The governance paragraph is important because it names the gap: many boards oversee outputs and budgets, but not “operational fairness”. The MIT example is a powerful reminder that inequity can be structural and invisible until someone measures it. What worries me (and you hint at it) is how often poor practice isn’t “caught” simply because nobody is formally tasked to look for it, and because the people affected don’t feel safe to raise it.

One “new ingredient” I’d add from an education lens: intentional development of group leaders (not just scientific excellence). Institutes rarely train PIs in feedback, conflict handling, assessment/appraisal conversations — yet these shape the learning climate every day.

Many thanks for creating this discussion platform with your triggering questions!

Great opportunity for the future scientists!
I hope initiative like this will increase in this challenging times of science and research!
Many thanks for sharing and organizing :-)

Dear Joydeep;

Congratulations on a wonderful presentation and for sharing your experience so eloquently with the community.

As Chair of the FEBS Education and Training Committee, I'm thrilled to see how our workshops continue to spark exactly this kind of transformative thinking.

Onwards and upwards (preferably in microsecond resolution)!

Best,

Ferhan Sağın

Great reflections, Zuzana!
Congrats for writing this inspiring and warm post AND for getting the Poster Award!

Ferhan 

Thank you so much, Manuel, for this beautiful reflection!
It was (and always is) great working with you!
I am sure we will find new ways to co-create💓
Cheers!
Ferhan

You did an amazing job as the Workshop Coordinator Ali Burak!

Keep up this awesome work!

Congrats!

Dear Brooke;

Thank you for sharing this valuable guide on asking questions in seminars.

Effective questioning is such an important skill in scientific discourse, yet it's rarely taught formally.

I appreciate how this 'catechism' approach provides a structured framework that can help both early-career researchers gain confidence and established scientists refine their communication. 

Thank you for articulating so clearly what many of us have learned only through years of experience!

Ferhan Sağın