Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Invited

Recently, I was looking at the CV of a colleague, and I noticed one thing that may or may not be unusual. I noticed it because the colleague listed something I don't and it made me wonder if what the colleague does is common.

Namely, on the list of the colleague's invited talks, obviously there were talks given by said colleague, but then there were invited talks given by other people  -- the colleague's students, postdocs, even collaborators (the colleague indicated the presenter by underlining the presenter's name in the author list).

When I get an invitation to give a talk and then send a postdoc or a student to give it, I don't put those talks on my CV even though I was the one who received the invitation  and the talk will involve joint work; the person who gives the talk should certainly put it on their CV. As for collaborators, I am not even aware of the invitations they get (I trust they will give credit where it is due if they present joint work), it's not like we report these invitations to one another.

Contributed conference papers are different, they are more like regular journal papers, you list everyone who contributed, and I guess everyone gets to list them on their CV. Invited talks are more of a single-person show and an honor; you give it, you list it.

These are my personal views, of course, I am not saying what I do is right, necessary, or even common practice.

So I am curious:


If you received an invitation to give a talk, but someone else (usually your student or postdoc) gives it, do you still list the talk on your CV?
No
Yes
Depends (explain in comments)




  
pollcode.com free polls 





6 comments:

Anonymous said...

I would never include the talks of others in that section - it seems very odd behavior indeed.

feMOMhist said...

I didn't answer, but as the person who for many years updated the CVs of two med school profs at a srsly major research school, we never did this. Their own invited lectures that they showed up for filled many many pages. We tended to pass off the boondoggle ones or to unpleasant locales or to people we didn't like, and the jr. peeps were more than happy to take them of course and build their own CVs. Everyone knew who was in our group, so it wasn't like the rep wasn't enhanced by these talks.

Doc said...

I voted yes, but I wanted to explain that the institution I work for values student training as much or more than my own professional development. As I want to inform my supervisors (administrators, really)of the types of opportunities I provide for my students, I do a very similar accounting mechanism on my CV.

When I was on the job search, I wanted to impress upon review committees that I had really trained many successful students, so I also underlined my student's names on papers that I was also on (bold my name, underline theirs). I did not go so far as to list any papers that I wasn't co-author on.

studyzone said...

My gut feeling is that the one who delivered the talk gets to put it on his/her CV. However, I have seen situations where the PI put the entire talk together, and "let" a student/postdoc give it for the experience (with the presenter memorizing the talk word-for-word). So, perhaps this colleague felt justified because they put the talk together? When I was in grad school, a fellow student was chosen to give a talk at a meeting but couldn't due to a last-minute emergency, so his PI gave it instead. When the student included that talk in his CV, his PI made him take it out before applying for postdocs. The student's perspective was that it was enough that he had been invited, but the PI felt it was dishonest since the student didn't actually deliver the talk. It's a bit of a fine line.

Namnezia said...

That really seems like scraping the bottom of the barrel to fill one's CV. I can see the sense in conveying in your CV your training record. Under the "Training" section one could highlight "During 2011 4 people from my lab, including 3 graduate students and 1 postdoctoral fellow were invited to present our work at major conferences". Or something of the sort.

Anonymous said...

I voted "depends" because I used to do this, back when I had few invited talks. When I was invited to an international conference but couldn't attend and sent a postdoc instead, I still could use that invitation as a way to provide evidence that I was building an international reputation (hopefully a good one ;). Now that I have been around longer, I have plenty of invited talks that I myself gave and it no longer matters if I include every singly thing like this.