In this article, Larissa shares her personal reflection on overcoming imposter syndrome among early-career researchers, and shows how a simple self-assessment transformed her self-doubt into evidence of real progress.
As early-career researchers, we often fall into the trap of comparing our internal struggles with others’ external successes, because we naturally strive to become experts in our fields. We see colleagues’ published papers and funded grants, but overlook their rejected drafts and failed experiments. This constant comparison is not only discouraging but also misleading, as it prevents us from recognizing our own competence. Moreover, building a successful and lasting career in a rapidly evolving research landscape demands more than technical expertise; it also requires a broad set of “transversal” skills that often develop organically without a deliberate plan.
Exchanges with my friends and colleagues show me that I am not alone in this feeling, struggling with self-imposed pressure and being too harsh on myself. At the same time, I strive to set high standards for myself, constantly improving—as a scientist and as a person. Navigating these “anti-parallels” can be overwhelming. Still, I am convinced that exchange (with others and with yourself) in an open, understanding way, without slipping directly into competitive thinking or antipathy, is the way to go—albeit an exhausting one.
Ironically, it was precisely a comparison tool (a “find” from my University’s Centre for Graduate and Academic Staff Development, ZGAPL) that inspired me to write this post on a random Thursday morning, as I wanted to share what I think could be a good way to place yourself in the broader context of scientists, regardless of personal comparisons, and to set a benchmark for your own development.
The European Commission developed the ResearchComp Self-Assessment Tool. It is aimed to support the goals of the new European Research Area, the Skills Agenda, and the European Year of Skills, and is aligned with the European Skills, Competences, and Occupations classification (ESCO).
Taking this test this morning revealed three main takeaways for me: (1) what I considered the bare minimum for my skills was already partly above what is considered intermediate competence in this test (yay me and nay my overly harsh self-criticism), and (2) aiming to excel in all areas is probably unrealistic for me and (3) development and not yet being where I want to be fuel me to keep improving.
This assessment was a much-needed reality check for my inner critic. The end of a year—albeit arbitrary—has an undeniable influence on how I evaluate my professional and personal growth. While this specific tool came as a surprising and fantastic way to get this reality check for myself, it is by no means the only one, the right one for everyone, or a benchmark I want to place too much importance on. It simply shows me that I am on the right track and reminds me that I don’t need to be an expert in everything to be a successful researcher.
I would be extremely interested in others’ opinions. Feel free to share them with me however you like.