Ryan Winn - CEO, Science & Technology Australia

Summary
In this conversation, Ryan Winn discusses his role in connecting the science sector with public servants and politicians, emphasizing the importance of communication and collaboration. He shares insights on the challenges of advocacy, the need for science literacy, and the significance of building trusted relationships in policymaking. The discussion highlights the value of celebrating small wins in science communication and the ongoing efforts to bridge the gap between science and society. In this conversation, Ryan discusses the complexities of political decision-making, the challenges and excitement of Senate estimates, and the importance of restoring trust in science. He emphasizes the need for effective communication in the science sector and shares insights on leadership, imposter syndrome, and the value of open conversations in fostering a collaborative environment in STEM.

Takeaways
Ryan Winn believes he has the best job in science, connecting people.
Celebrating and connecting the science sector is vital for progress.
Everyone in the science and policy realm is trying to do the right thing.
Building relationships is key to effective science communication.
Researchers need to be involved in policy-making processes.
Science communication roles require translating complex ideas.
Success in science communication is often about visibility in media.
The importance of diverse representation in science is crucial.
Advocacy can feel like shouting into the wind at times.
Small wins in science communication can lead to significant changes.
Senate estimates can be a tedious but necessary part of political engagement.
Restoring trust in science is crucial and requires nuanced communication.
The science sector has not kept pace with societal changes in communication.
Effective communication must cater to the audience's needs and preferences.
Leadership in science advocacy requires authenticity and relationship-building skills.
Celebrating hidden voices in the sector can enrich the conversation.
Understanding the complexity of the world requires diverse perspectives and knowledge.

Chapters

00:00 Connecting Science and Society
03:01 The Role of Science in Policy
05:57 Navigating Complex Relationships
09:00 Measuring Success in Science Communication
11:50 The Challenges of Advocacy
15:06 Celebrating Small Wins in Science
17:25 Awakening to Complexity in Political Decision-Making
18:18 The Drudgery and Excitement of Senate Estimates
20:35 Restoring Trust in Science
25:54 Becoming a Leader in Science Advocacy
27:54 Navigating Imposter Syndrome
29:41 The Importance of Open Conversations in Science

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:01

Brian Wynne had a glint in his eye the whole time we spoke about what he does. He's currently the Chief Executive Officer of Science Technology Australia, and he brings compassion and perspective to a role that you don't often see in those kinds of positions. He calls on his extensive experience in the public service and higher education sectors and his broad and well-honed policy chops that he earned in the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet and the Department of Education. When he was in these roles, he addressed critical issues in higher ed, research infrastructure, early childhood education, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander affairs. His role previous to STA was as Chief Executive Officer at the Australian Council of Learned Academies. Ryan sees enormous value in helping science-positive people recognize all the possibilities of a science career beyond just academic research. He told me of his joy at watching scientists have light bulb moments when they understood not only how complex the political environment actually is, but that it is possible to cut through that noise with a little information and perhaps a few friends. We chatted about how change in the dial often means having hard conversations with people with whom we don't necessarily agree, and how this means we need to establish and maintain trust within and also beyond the greater sector. Often this happens via deep and genuine acknowledgement of the value that lived experience can bring to a STEM policy debate. I was often reminded during our conversation that the greater STEM sector can help itself by recognizing that with these open conversations, we'll do much better at realizing how many aspirations we actually have in common rather than often by accident falling into some sort of non-declared competition. It's no surprise he sees how important it is that we embrace our humanity, coming as he does from his undergraduate career that began in social work. I'm Rod Lambert, a veteran science communicator with nearly 30 years of teaching, learning, and doing SICOM under his belt. My chat with Ryan coming up next on Science with Benefits. Ryan Wynn, thank you very much for joining me. I really appreciate having a chat. Look, good talking to you, Rod. I think this is the first time we've met, so this is fantastic. I know what a way to do it. Over Riverside at a vast distance, even though we're in the same town. It's crazy. Could you just start with what do you actually do? I mean, I know your title, but what do you do?

SPEAKER_01 2:28

What's the nutshell? Oh look, I have the best job in science, let's be honest. I get to spend my days um making people make friends. Look, I spend my days with public servants and politicians and scientists and science leaders, and I get to help them make be friends and get to speak to the media and people like you. Look, it's this is the best job because it's about celebrating and connecting our science sector, which is so vital.

SPEAKER_00 2:51

So tell me a bit more about making people make friends. Does that get violent? I mean that sounds hard. Hopefully not.

SPEAKER_01 2:57

Hopefully there's no never any big sticks involved.

SPEAKER_00 3:00

But look at the Trevor Burrus, How do you finesse them though? I mean, you m you must be like a science-technology engineering whisperer in some sense.

SPEAKER_01 3:07

Look, I think it's about spending enough time with public servants. You know, I was a public servant for nearly twenty years. And so understanding what the internals look like, spending time with ministers' officers, and about how they tick spending time with fellows of academies out with my time at Ecola, where you know you get to know what everyone else is thinking and what they care about. And you go, actually, you guys should like each other, but you just haven't met. It's like a relationship matching thing where everyone's just kind of Mars and Venus and they're kind of missing each other. But I feel like most of my roles in recent years have been less CEO and more chief translator and chief broker, because there's amazing people in the world who really are all on the same side. They just don't realise they are. And even public servants and advisors and politicians, everyone's trying to find a good fight.

SPEAKER_00 3:55

All on the same side, but don't realise they are. Like as as a science communication guy of far too many decades, I often describe my role, at least in the English-speaking world, as English-to-English translation. And this sounds not dissimilar. People speak the same language, but they're not talking clearly to each other.

SPEAKER_01 4:09

Aaron Ross Powell Yeah, and all trying to get to the same endpoint, but that they think someone else is going somewhere else. And you know, everyone is trying to do the right thing, and public servants are time poor, and politicians are even more time poor and everyone expects something different of them, but actually don't appreciate what they do. So between working with our superstars of STEM here and helping the big communicate to stop the media looking like white male men like me. Exactly. And then to speak to a you know program like Science Meets Parliament, where we get to help parliamentarians meet scientists and teach scientists about the complex layer, whether you want to use the parfait or the onion analogy, that you know, politics and policy making is so complex. But we just all assume the other the other's world is really simple. And why does they not get our world? But actually helping everyone peel back the layers and understand what we're all trying to achieve.

SPEAKER_00 5:06

Yeah, and look that Science Mits Parliament event has been going on for two decades or more now in some ways. Yeah, twenty-six years this year. So it's really exciting. That's a cracking event. I've been to that off and on over the years. Um, very impressive. And watching the faces, particularly of scientists, change when they start to talk about how they can interact with other people who aren't scientists, it's quite heartening, actually. It's really quite heartening.

SPEAKER_01 5:30

Absolutely. And I think it's nothing beats a scientist sitting in their house, listening to the bells ring and parliamentarians speak and meeting them and realize that they're actually genuine people and sometimes probably more intelligent than we give them credit for, but equally that their role is so different than what most people realise and how busy their days are and how time poor they are and what it takes to cut through the noise in that house is really amazing. And the number of scientists I've spoken to and heard stories about over over decades where they go, I thought I was going into the house to tell them about the world and change them. And they walk away and going, oh, I changed the most out of that experience because they had no idea how the world worked.

SPEAKER_00 6:12

Yeah, look, I I get that a lot. I've I've been in trouble for writing um opinion pieces about that saying, Did you know that politics is also a profession and a field of expertise? I get in trouble for saying that to communicators, and I get in trouble with other people saying communication is a separate profession to potentially the thing you're communicating. And science meets parliament seems to open up those eyes beautifully.

SPEAKER_01 6:34

What we need to do is get better at helping them understand the other. And then when we find those people who are really amazing, make sure they get connected to the system. Totally. Because we need researchers inside policy. We need um you know, I often refer to them as ninja scientists. We need those STEM professionals inside Treasury, inside finance, inside the departments, helping them to understand actually how to assess the evidence, how do we do these things? They are so time poor. How do we make it better? So you know, that's my day. And I guess that's you know and speaking to people like yourself. How do we get to celebrate science and scientists and researchers and wherever they sit, um, whether it's nominations for awards or speaking about issues and cutting through the range of miss, dis and unsure evidence that sits in our world these days. I think the world has changed so much, and I think the more we can help navigate that and help our sector to be a little bit less fragmented. You know, I think we're all doing great things, but we are pulling in different ways. So if we can help provide a leadership role in that and navigate that um and just accept that you know, organizations like STA are a group hug for sites, I describe it. So how do we all pull together in a better way?

SPEAKER_00 7:40

Love it. And look, Ninja Scientist, I'm going to take that one. I love that one. Um how did you end up in this role? You said you were at Ecola, the Australian Council of Learned Academies. Did I get that right? Yeah. You did, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 7:53

Um, it's not a soft drink, you know, it's not cola. Um look, I end up there and I I was there for five years, which was an amazing role, which is about helping the five lead academies, the Academy of Science, Engineering, Social Science, Humanities, Health, Medical Sciences, come together and convene the amazing power that is the academies into advice for government. And it's not trying to give recommendations or expertise, it's about how do we harness the best minds and insights and synthesize it in ways to help parliamentarians and policymakers make great decisions because I think often the public servants want to make a good decision, they just don't know what they don't know. And so Ecola helps that. But before that, as I said before, I spent nearly 20 years in the public service. And if you asked me what I would be doing twenty-five years ago, um I guarantee I wouldn't be sitting in this seat, but I'm so pleased I'm sitting here as someone who, as an undergraduate, studied social work. Um I'm not a scientist. Um a true policy walk. And maybe the social work background helps navigate the politics and educational aspects of um the world that it is in different ways, but so glad where I am.

SPEAKER_00 9:06

Oh, that is very interesting. So do you think not being a scientist has been a boon or a bane, or is it a bit of both for you in this kind of role? A bit of both.

SPEAKER_01 9:15

Look, I think I think you need to be science literate and science excited. You know, I think you need to have a passion. I think you know, from public servants to corporate boards, we we need to get a bit more science passionate and a bit more literate in the world. But roles like mine are so much about translating. In many ways, it's a science communication role. It's about relationship management, relationship brokering, communicating complex ideas and synthesizing those to the really key, what is it, why should I care, what do you do, sort of concepts. And um that's not about being a scientist. I know you need to be able to understand the science and help navigate that and build the trust in relationships with the different partners. And I think that's the key part of it. You know, you can pick up the the some of the level of the expertise, and then you can build relationships where you bring those scientists and experts to sit next to you and be involved in that conversation and help them be the person that comes out front. And I always think, particularly at a collar, um if I was ever in the media, I'd done something wrong. Because actually what government needs is a trusted partner that sits behind the curtain, who does the advice, brings people together, brings the best advice into government so it can make a better decision not for someone to lobby at it and say, this is the recommendation you need to do. And I think that's really powerful.

SPEAKER_00 10:34

Yeah, look, I I have to agree, although having said that, of course, I'm a tart on a microphone as well. But I mean, I'm not trying to prosecute the case for specific science. So but I mean I really appreciate the fact that you're behind the scenes is exactly why I wanted to talk to you here. But running with that, how how do you tell when you've done a good job? Like what are the really nourishing indicators for you that you've done something right, or you or your organization? Hmm.

SPEAKER_01 10:58

Look, you can you can pre-do that in a number of ways. Look, the starting point is I would I would say if I see a superstar or researchers in the media, then I'd go, yes, because it's not about us being in the media, it's about science being in the media and be trusted and someone that is going out there. It's about the diverse faces and about the aspirations. It's speaking to the science teachers and and say, Oh, my kids heard about this. This is really exciting. It's like, yes. Because I think what we have in this world is a lack of understanding about where science can take you in the world. Where you don't have to be on a bench to do that. You know, you could be like Forinetta Perato and you chase whales with drones catching their snot. Or you could be doing things down in gold mines, studying deep dark matter physics. Like there are so many fascinating jobs that are on the bench or off the bench. You know, I think people forget that we have amazing companies like Hankel and Dulux in Australia, and people will go, oh, Dulux is paint. They are the most amazing chemists on the face of the earth, and so many of those jobs in Australia. And so it's realizing that you can be so many things and it's not got the word scientist in that title, or wearing white lab coat. So I think that's really exciting. And on the other side, if I'm doing my job right, we are seeing a stronger conversation about RD around science and about the role that science should play in uh in productivity and our economy. And that's not about necessary research grant funding. It's about there's a valued conversation of Australia needs to value RD because it leads to this. Australian growing talent has led to new developments around AI and new products, and we have different examples, not just Wi-Fi. We have a broader range of amazing Australian ideas that are shaping the world.

SPEAKER_00 12:39

I've got to ask you, because it's this is interesting a lot. Having dabbled in and out of the policy realm, I am no policy guy, but I'm, you know, I've been in and around it for quite some time. Do you feel like it's is it screaming at the wind, or do you find yourself chipping away and moving ahead? Because I mean when you say successful RD and stuff, I thoroughly agree. I couldn't be a bigger flag waiver. But who are you talking to or at and are they listening?

SPEAKER_01 13:03

It's many people, I would say. Sometimes it does feel like we're talking into the we wind. But you know, what I would also say is success for me is that I have very regular catch-ups with a range of bureaucrats around Canberra. You know, I think the fact that I'm a coffee addict is probably an indication of the sort of nature of the conversations I have. But you know, being able to have those really robust officer-level conversations with public servants at various levels across organizations. But it's also the relationships with political advisors who they call you up and go, actually, we've got this idea. Can we just test this with you? Or something weird happened, this happened, or just to give you a heads up, the minister's going to come out and say this. It's that two-way relationship of I can call the minister's office and say, or the minister or the advisor, or text them and say, just to give you a heads up, this is a problem we have, and we can have an honest conversation. It doesn't mean we always agree on things. And actually part of that relationship is them calling us before they do big announcements, us calling them before we do big things, just to give a heads up of, you know, you're not going to like what we say. And actually a trusted relationship means we actually don't always have to agree. But we can have those trust relationships. And that's been the political side, the policy side, and across our sector. STA, we work really closely with a range of other peaks and the academies. Um I think we all work in a complex system, but again, there's trust there. And it's about where the grey is, where the black and white is. And if we can have those robust, trusted relationships where people can call up, have those conversations. And that's the dark arts of advocacy in organizations like ours. You know, if our bread and butter is those relationships.

SPEAKER_00 14:51

Trevor Burrus, Jr.: You find it hard sometimes to demonstrate that, because I absolutely take the point. It's the people who ring up and go, look, none of this is going to go public, but just want to sound you out on something. To my eye or my ear, that is absolutely a success story. But it's probably not a success story you can often tell or it would even make sense to tell. Is that is that a problem? Yeah, and I think this is always the hard thing for our sector.

SPEAKER_01 15:14

Or any any sectors. Let's not just pick on the RD sector. But I think any sector is what looks like success for people who are doing the hard yards, whether it's on the tools or in organizations or others, is really hard to appreciate what chipping away and success looks like in roles like ours. Like I think it's sometimes it just seems like busy work or noise or or like we're compromising. And I think it's those hard conversations. And I think the the trickier ones for some people to realise is our world is really complex. And the conversations we need to have need to navigate with people that are quite hard to deal with. If we're only talking to the people we agree with, then we're not going to change the dial. We need to have the hard conversations. We need to have the the conversation with the people we don't always agree with, but we need to find those middle grounds, we need to find those areas we can have conversations to try and push it along. Because if we don't do that, then where are we trying to go? But it could be slow and steady. Um no easy path that way. Yeah, I I can imagine the thanklessness can be quite high. But it does mean for some people it looks like progress is non-existent or slow. But actually it's sometimes it's hard to see the full landscape of you know an industry. And let's talk about RDs and industry. We are a complex piece that starts in universities where we're training people up all the way through to products that are rolling off production lines here or overseas that have ideas. You know, we did these things it's a a long-term investment that it takes lots of time to change those bits and there's all sorts of different components, um, whether it's PhDs or or how we teach or how we fund research. Or doing podcasts for some obscure reasons. Or doing podcasts, exactly.

SPEAKER_00 17:04

Can you tell me then what what blows your mind most about what you do? Is there anything that where you've just gone, oh I can't I can't believe that worked, or I'm so happy that happened. Is there anything, you know, real standout stuff?

SPEAKER_01 17:16

That's a that's a really hard question. Um because the wins can be slow to come, but there are times you just go, wow, that's amazing. I I look at some of the things that happened in research infrastructure and go, gosh, that's phenomenal. But the successes are really hard to show. Like it's the you know, I look at things like you.

SPEAKER_00 17:36

I mean, have you had a feeling where you you've gone home at the end of the day and you've gone, yep. That one worked, or that one like I had no idea that looked like that, and it turns out it was great or horrible. I mean it could be horrible too. Sure there's more of that.

SPEAKER_01 17:50

Look that's I think for me the the standout piece is actually seeing the light bulb moments on other people where you go, gosh, they they got it. Whether it's a scientist who goes on social media like on a TikTok or do something themselves for the first time and they have a massive response, like, oh my gosh, I didn't realize that. That was amazing. And they and it was because of something that someone on my team did. Or at Science Meets Parliament where one of our scientists came to us uh after the dinner and said, Oh my gosh, I had this conversation with a parliamentarian who I think thought I would never speak to, and it was really tough, but it was amazing. And they learnt so much and their eyes were wide open to the the mess, the complexity of what political decision-making is. And you go, you got the light bulb moment, and that's phenomenal. And they appreciated that the world changed for them at that moment, and that they have a spark to change how we talk about science. To me, that's that's an amazing success.

SPEAKER_00 18:58

Yeah. Okay. Then what about boring bits? Let me put it two different ways. One is what are the boring bits, or what do you wish someone else could do for you right now so that you don't have to. And it doesn't necessarily have to be boring. It could be too hard, too confusing, too big, too small, too expensive.

SPEAKER_01 19:15

Look, that's a there are so many things that are boring about all our lives. I'm I'm really hopeful for where AI will take us in cutting out some of those things. Look, something I would say is really boring, but both both exciting, and maybe this is a complete policy nerd coming out of me, is Senate estimates.

SPEAKER_00 19:37

Um you're not the first person to tell me that. And I've not really delved deeply, but the number of different people who said to me it's Senate estimates seasons, I can't wait. I've got my popcorn and the and the computers on, and I think you be you boo, but I I never dived in, so please tell me more. I'm very interested.

SPEAKER_01 19:54

Look, it's the boring part of watching a Senate hearing for hours. Hours. And it, you know, they will start at 18 in the morning and they'll sometimes go through to eleven o'clock at night. And you spend the day walking around with a headphone or something on, and you'll be going to coffee with someone and you're just trying to listen out to what's going on because you never know the questions will be going on different portfolios. And it's not just one day, it's multiple days of different portfolios, you're trying to see things. Look, um that's the hard grind of being connected. But at the same time, there are handsides and things coming out now that are getting better. You know, AI's ability to to digest and inform that and be more practical. Like that there is a wealth of information in those many days of sent estimates that happens and times of the year. And it's just gold for people like us. But it is it is a drudge. Um and I'm hoping that things like AI and other tools will get rid of the drudgery of that, help get us to process that information better, but equally make the questions in the room tighter, harder, more complicated. So we can get to the heart of these conversations rather than sometimes it looks like there's Vulcan's circling the public servant, the public servant's sweating there. But no one knows the right question because you can see the public servant sweating because there's a gold nugget there somewhere, they just can't find it because it's kind of wrapped up in layers of of spin and public servantness. Um both exciting and boring at the same time.

SPEAKER_00 21:25

Yeah, no, I don't that's a fair call. I I also there's something that's been rattling around in my brain. I've been seeing it in the sector for a number of years, that I have certain ranty tendencies about. So I'm not going to rant, I'm going to ask you the question. The whole trust in science thing. Now, we within this greater STEM sector hear about it all the time, right? Is that your experience? We hear about it all the time. What does it mean to you though? When you hear this, you know, I mean my one of my favorite phrases, we need to work to restore trust in science. And what we need to unpack there is restore, assuming it has been decayed, trust, whatever the hell that means, science, which bits? So much going on in there, but what's what's your perspective on that one? Because I think it's a big and nasty tangle.

SPEAKER_01 22:05

Oh my gosh, that's the Pandora's box. You threw that on the table hard, didn't you? Jeez. You can just say no, I walk away. You drop the microphone, trump style and leave. Look, I I think it's a it's a moment for the for the science and the RD sector at large to to stop and actually process what is our role in these aspects. Because I think we have not changed as quickly as society has, let's be honest. Sure. We have relied on eminence and expert-based trust. And I'm not sure if it trust was is the right word what was there before, but there was no other voice to compete against us, let's be honest. And we held a privileged place. And I think the advent of social media and and other aspects of society have allowed other voices and often lived experience, let's be honest, to have a stronger voice, which I think we need to value that lived experience is really valuable. We haven't, as a sector, matured, I think, in some parts in how we communicate. And I think we lost the opportunity to refine our trust rather than rather than trust being lost. And I think we also need to appreciate that we had a a privileged and premium position on being able to communicate. And we focused on publications and academic journals and pieces where we had an ability to do this. And then and the cycle of media and other pieces allowed us to be an expert that was spoken to and and we could compartmentalize journals and and media commentary. Now there's a soup of information and people who can add in in different ways. And so I think we haven't refined how we communicate. You know, I think journals are great and a really critical part. But a public servant or a or a everyday person or a politician doesn't want to read a journal. So where's our change in how we communicate in ways that the audience wants to? So I think we haven't kept up with the the ways to build that trust because we've just tried to communicate in a way that we have always communicated before. And so we need to own that trust and get it back. But also I think we need to mature a little bit in that changing world that we have one set of evidence, which is very robust, and I think we need to make sure we have integrity and quality and excellence in that research. But equally, we need to appreciate that there are many evidences in the world, and this is one of the things that we sort of particularly work through with Science Meets Parliament, is this lived experience of of electorates. There are polls, there's processes, there's all sorts of other evidences in the world, and we need to be more nuanced around how our evidence feeds into a broader story about trust of science and trust of evidence and how we navigate that narrative. Because I think there are times that we've kind of bashed people over the head with science and lost the trust when we need to be more nuanced in explaining the context of what it is and also how it sits in reality. I don't think this is me means that researchers need to compromise what they say, but we need to be contextualized and advised and get better at communicating in the right ways at the right times.

SPEAKER_00 25:20

Yeah, good quote. Look, I like that, and obviously as a Psycom guy, that's music to my ears. Um we do need to get better, and I spend most of my SICOM time talking to scientists, not to publics, or at least I did more often in academia. It was a lot more about holding and hugging them and saying, it's gonna be okay, I can teach you about those scary people out there. You know, exaggerating to make the point. A couple other things I just want to ask you. So if someone wanted to be you, what where should they start? What what if I wanted to be CEO of STA?

SPEAKER_01 25:51

Look, I think your starting point is be you. I don't think you need to be me, you need to be you and refine things. Like I think someone who sits in a a role like mine is someone who is um sides passionate, sides literate, um, someone who can communicate really eloquently and clearly and digest really complex ideas down to simple ways for the public, for politicians. But you also need to be a good person at building relationships, whether that's with a membership base, with researchers, with the politicians and bureaucrats, you need to have the art of relationship building because um it's not all about yelling with megaphones from balconies. And I think a lot of people feel like the role of a peak body, particularly someone like STA, should be hold the megaphone, scream for money for sites. You know, and we do that do that. But you could only do that if you have trust and someone's willing to listen to you. Um and you had the support of your members. So I think there's a there's a lot of work to be done there. And I think there's not an archetype. You look at pe previous people who have come into this role. We've had um amazing people like Kylie Walker, um Katrina Jackson, Anne Maria Arabia, you know, Misha Schubert, oh my gosh, great journalists and Scicoms people. And now you've got me as a public servant policy work background. You know, it shows that anyone can do these roles if you're excited, passionate, and driven to really change and improve our sector.

SPEAKER_00 27:21

Um Yeah, I love that. I mean, that's something I think, particularly for the young folk listening right now, your passion and your dedication and your demonstration of that can often matter a lot more than how many degrees, et cetera, et cetera, that you have. And as you say, I mean I'm going to paraphrase you, what is it? Shaking babies and kissing hands? No, the other way around. Shaking hands and kissing babies. Working with people, talking with people. Obviously critical. Um just a couple other things. Very quick question. One is, I don't know about you, but does imposter syndrome ever stop? Has it ever stopped for you? Did you ever have it in the first place?

SPEAKER_01 27:54

I think any genuine person, the answer to that is yes and always, and why am I here? Um look, I think roles like any CEO role, you need to be genuine. The reality is, you know, I look around my colleagues and go, oh my gosh, everyone is better than me. And look, and then let's be honest, there are times I spend with other people in our sector and go, oh my gosh, that person, how do they achieve so much? Um if you don't have a level of imposter syndrome, you're probably not the right person for for this sort of role. Because I think actually you need to be really genuine and engaged, and that's how you build trust.

SPEAKER_00 28:28

Um, I gotta agree, right? I just think it's important that people hear that from people who are doing things that might be aspirational, to know that you are people too, and that you have that experience, and in fact, it can be a a benefit.

SPEAKER_01 28:40

Yeah. And I think it's okay to to not be okay about the things you do and and fake it till you make it. Look, the first couple of TB interviews, I was terrified. Um the first time I sat in a new studio live, oh my gosh, that was the scariest thing I've ever done in my life. You get better at it, but you only But you won't get better unless you do it. Um let's be honest, everyone has it. You know, politicians particularly, you know, when you build trust, you realise that everyone is terrified of that job. But unless you're a little bit scared, then you're not then you're not going to try harder.

SPEAKER_00 29:14

So Absolutely. Two things I want to ask to round off. One is is there anything you wish I'd had asked you that you'd want to say, or do you want to make any sort of statement or comment for posterity? Ah, for prosperity.

SPEAKER_01 29:25

Oh gosh, yeah. Um No, like I think these conversations are really important. Like, let's be honest. We we have hidden faces in politics and sectors. We don't celebrate the voices that are, but also we don't showcase the opportunities here that are in our sector as well. Um we all benefit by knowing the system better. And I think we have a fragmented sector that is so much so much uncertainty and lack of clarity. And I think that helps to make sure that we are all pulling the same direction and understand the different roles and know who to reach out to. And honestly, everyone's trying to go the same way, where kind of where I started. You know, public servants are publishers, everyone's trying to do the same thing. It doesn't always look at it the same way. Um but at least we're heading in the right direction. Look, you know, I think recent reforms, you know, we've got taken a taken two steps forward, maybe a step backwards, but you know, I think we're all still heading the right direction. And we just need to work as a sector, keep the pressure on, and aim for aspiration.

SPEAKER_00 30:22

Yeah, I love that. And I agree, it's it's the unsung folks. It is the people behind the scenes. I mean, that's why I wanted to do this, because I want to bring in the people who aren't always on camera, who aren't always on microphone, who j but are doing work that no one would know unless they really dug into it. And hopefully that'll help enrich other people's experiences in this greater STEM sector. Final question then. We can talk about a whole bunch of work content, we can talk about policy papers. What what do you read, watch, consume, etc., when you're not working? What's your favorite TV show, book, TikTok account? Look.

SPEAKER_01 30:55

Oh, look, I watch some trashy TV. You know, things like The Pit, um, I really love. It's the rawness of the world, seeing what it's really like. Um You know, that the world is tough and interesting, but actually, you know, it's good to see what the real world looks like. Um I listen to a lot of podcasts because I don't I spend so much time reading policy papers and and it's just so hard to consume and sit down and read more.

SPEAKER_00 31:23

So I think what are some of your go-to's like what what sort of podcast would you put on every week, for example, or more regularly than not? I'm not fishing here, I'm just genuinely too.

SPEAKER_01 31:31

I won't name any of yours, because I I know that there is there is a few in the list. Um but things like I listen to BBC Science, I listen to things like 7 a.m. podcast, I listen to um Outside um the Outside magazine do a good podcast. You know, that real mix of um political, um, different perspectives on science. There's some really great um ABC podcasts around, you know, particularly some of the crime and sort of foreign politics. You know, I think we can only consume so much, and now you can get very siloed in what you see. So I think the more you understand different perspectives, different audiences, different knowledge. You know, I think there the world is so complex and we can only consume so much. So whether it's on a on a treadmill or a walking the dog or something, I I try to listen to a lot of podcasts. So nice.

SPEAKER_00 32:21

Well, obviously I fully endorse that. Ryan, thank you so very much. My pleasure. This has been Science with Benefits, and I'm Rod Lamberts. If you enjoyed the show, please like, rate, share. You all know the drill by now. Also, if there's someone you think I should talk to, it might even be you. Drop me a line either via LinkedIn or on email. Rod.lambert, Lambert Munet at anu.edu.au. Talk to you too.