1. How long after your PhD did you start applying for TT positions and why? Which geographic constraints did you have?

I started applying for permanent positions in France (maître de conférence) the year after my PhD, while the first time I applied for a position (W1 even if without TT) was 4 years after my PhD. This is also due to the two maternity breaks I had in the meanwhile.

I wanted to stay in Europe and possibly in a country were I could already speak the language.

2. How did you prepare yourself for that, e.g. with scientific papers, grant approval?

During a meeting for Post-Docs on the topic of future possible paths, I remember that we have been told that, in order to get a (permanent) position one needed publications, international collaborations, mobility, grants, experience with organization of events and so on. But they added that the perfect CV does not help. One has to do his/her job but it is also a matter of luck and be "the right person at the right moment".

But I admit that I prepared myself a lot for the interview, both for the presentations and possible questions. Friends and colleagues supported me a lot during this time

3. Which are the points your qualification agreement consists of and how do you plan to achieve them?

There are several points including a teaching portfolio, the attendance of a special program for new employs, publications, grants...I started from the very beginning in doing all what I am asked in order to be done as soon as possible or be ready in case of failure or delay.

4. Which opportunities does the TT position offer you?

Stability is one of the key words, or better, the possibility of settle down which is not negligible. From a professional point of view, for me this has been the occasion to start having "a group" that I hope will grow in the next years, hoping that my proposals will get accepted (finger crossed!)

1. How long after your PhD did you start applying for TT positions and why? Which geographic constraints did you have?

In the last year of my PhD, I realized that I would love to stay in academia and possibly apply for a TT position at some point during my PostDoc. Recently, after I finished my PhD (8 months after my defense), an interesting TT position was announced at the University of Salzburg. I decided to apply, even though I did not expect to be invited, let alone accepted.

Surprisingly, things turned out quite differently, and I got the TT position! That taught me, yet again, the importance of having confidence, not overanalyzing, and just seizing opportunities.

Since my partner lives in Baden-Württemberg, the proximity to Germany was important to me.

In addition, it is also helpful (although not necessary) for my research in mathematics education to be able to speak the local language. It makes it easier to test and investigate developed teaching, learning concepts and materials in practice.

2. How did you prepare yourself for that, e.g. with scientific papers, grant approval?

After completing my doctorate, I accepted a group leader position at KIT and took on personnel responsibility as well as co-supervision of doctoral students. This allowed me to gain valuable experience, which was certainly helpful both for the successful application and for my current tasks as an assistant professor.

3. Which are the points your qualification agreement consists of and how do you plan to achieve them?

My qualification agreement is not fixed yet. However, some aspects will certainly be included: the most important point is the habilitation in mathematics education. Also teaching, supervising theses, writing grant proposals, and organizing scientific workshops will be part of it.

4. Which opportunities does the TT position offer you?

I think the TT position offers me great opportunities to gain valuable experience in all relevant areas of a professor's work - with a reduced teaching load compared to a full professorship.

Our department is relatively small - but that is a positive thing: It's easy to get in touch with colleagues from other working groups and the atmosphere is informal.

I also find it incredibly exciting to gain a deeper insight into the Austrian school system and make a contribution to the development of mathematics education in Austria.

What’s in it for me personally? The position in Salzburg allows me to live and work in a region that has so much to offer, both in terms of landscape and culture. After just a few months here, I am already thrilled that I can now pursue my favorite hobbies in a beautiful area (hiking, road biking, skiing).

1. How long after your PhD did you start applying for TT positions and why? Which geographic constraints did you have?

I applied for tenure track positions 3 years after finishing my PhD, which was a year before my Postdoc position at MIT ended. I only applied to a handful of places I really wanted to go to, all of them in Europe, as I wanted to end up close to my family in Budapest, Hungary.  I ended up getting 3 interviews and eventually a position at the CNRS in France already in that year. The CNRS has full-time research positions, that one can do virtually at any of the universities in France. I was first placed in Nantes, while my at-that time partner, now- husband moved to Santa Barbara, California. Having the research only position meant, that I could spend extended periods in Santa Barbara with my partner: I had a contact at the University of Santa Barbara, and alternated to work 3 months in Nantes, and 3 months in Santa Barbara. 

After 3 years my husband got a job (he is in industry) in Mannheim, Germany, and I moved my CNRS position to Strasbourg. We got married, and had two kids in the following 3 years. The regular commute between Mannheim and Strasbourg became too strenuous with 2 small children, so I started to apply again for jobs. This time only to cities close to Mannheim (Heidelberg, Karlsruhe and Stuttgart) and to Austria, as then again we wanted to move closer to our parents (my husband is from Linz and Bad Ischl). We didn’t try to go to Hungary, as the language would have been too big of a constraint for my husband to get a decent job. After several interviews at various Universities I got a tenure track position at the University of Vienna, that I started 3 years ago. 

2. How did you prepare yourself for that, e.g. with scientific papers, grant approval?

Apart from writing my application file really carefully I didn’t prepare specifically for any of the job-applications. I am just trying to write papers at a regular pace, by constantly working on several of them. In my field it would be virtually impossible to write a paper in such a short notice anyways; my papers take 1-3 years to write, some even longer. I also just apply for grants to facilitate my life as a researcher, it is important for me to be surrounded by colleagues with similar interest, who I can work with, and I don’t want funding to constrain my ability to go to conferences. Grants make all of these possible. 

3. Which are the points your qualification agreement consists of and how do you plan to achieve them?

I have already completed my Qualification agreement, the only part that made me uneasy when I signed it, was that I had to get a grant. And at the time of the agreement I just arrived to Austria, and didn’t know how hard was it to get grants at FWF. The rest of the agreement was standard about teaching and research, that I was confident to complete.

4. Which opportunities does the TT position offer you?

I am very happy to be in Vienna, it is a great city, and there are a lot of friendly colleagues at the Math department I can talk to. I am still exploring if I can also establish new collaborations at the University.

There are also a lot of other research institutes in Vienna that I have access to: some of my visitors worked at the ESI, and I am planning to organise a workshop there too. I have met a lot of smart students, some have started their research under my supervision. A few of them have already left Vienna, but I am keeping contact with them, and I am looking forward to see them grow. 

1. What was your research at university about?

My research involved mathematical analysis and modelling of multi-species cross-diffusion phenomena in biology, physics, and chemistry. This includes for instance multiple competitive population species in a heterogenous environment leading to segregation modelled by certain cross-diffusion terms in partial differential equations. A very interesting question was how to derive those cross-diffusion equations rigorously from the underlying particle models, using solely physical principles. The techniques used were well known in quantum mechanics, but not so much in modelling biological processes. Borrowing ideas from neighbouring fields can be very exciting and can lead to very interesting new results. In our case, we managed to provide a physical interpretation of certain coefficients appearing in these cross-diffusion equations. The coefficients now have a physical meaning related to probability theory and thermodynamics. 

2. Which criteria had to be met by your employer and how did you find possible candidates?

First and foremost, I want to be able to use my analytical mindset to solve current real-world problems. This means I want to tackle problems arising from real-world challenges of quantitative nature close to mathematics or physics. Also, my employer should offer me an environment which fosters creativity and the possibility for continuous growth. Finally, also the atmosphere in the company should be positively engaging, teamwork and communication should be more appreciated than individual success. When I heard about the company, I realized it was the perfect match for me, so I joined d-fine as a consultant in September 2021.

3. Which skills you acquired at university do you need in your job?

In general, I benefit a lot from the ability to work independently and that I can analyse complex problems rather quickly, which I acquired at university. I use my analytical mind to thoroughly understand and solve the problems I encounter, my programming skills to develop software or to tackle projects related to data science. My experience as a post-doc I use in project management to coordinate and manage project teams and all the relevant stakeholders.  

4. Which new skills did you learn in your job? Did your employer support you and if yes, how?

In the past 2 years, I learned many new skills, including new programming languages, but also a new way of thinking related to how processes in companies in the industry work. d-fine supported me during this transitional process from academia to industry by providing me internal and external trainings whenever I needed it, or the opportunity to study for new certificates.

I really appreciate the engaging atmosphere to learn new skills and techniques at d-fine. The variety of different projects and teams specialized to different industrial and financial areas is just amazing!

1. What was your research at university about?

University research was in the field of socio-hydrology, which examines the interplay between human decisions and water systems. Using an interdisciplinary approach, the research embedded hydrological and resource management models into economic frameworks to analyze optimal decisions for households, companies, and societies in two specific applications: flood management and phosphorus management. The research introduces mathematically rigorous models (optimization methods, Impulse control models and Endogenous economic growth models) that endogenously describe human decisions and their feedback with water systems, providing insights into optimal investment strategies and the impact of socio-economic conditions on decision-making.

From <https://www.waterresources.at/index.php?id=132>

2. Which criteria had to be met by your employer and how did you find possible candidates?

I was looking for a meaningful job with tangible output and wanted to work with a successful mid-size company. Moreover, having colleagues and supervisors with extensive knowledge and passion was crucial for me. I was lucky to end up in a company where I could work with inspiring owners and be part of an impressive  growth story.

I finally found the company via a recommendation of friend who was back in the time a consultant of the company. Further, I had other employer candidates which I identified by screening all world market leaders in my region.

3. Which skills you acquired at university do you need in your job?

Technical skills are forming and understanding economic models, handling equations (comparably simple though), time series and statistics.

More important is the ability to work interdisciplinary in an international environment, at different institutes in different countries, take leadership and ask the right questions. Further, I got decent support in science communication and formulating complex problems in a way that many can understand.

Last, but not least, I learned how to read and write scientific papers and to structure huge amount of literature.

4. Which new skills did you learn in your job? Did your employer support you and if yes, how?

In over five years I got great insights in the company, its business model, its products and markets. I increased knowledge on project and program management, contracting, negotiating, as well as pricing, health economics and outcome research. The company supported with internal and external trainings, conference participation, great leadership, cooperative colleagues and trust. Most importantly, people are in the center. Starting from patients (which we aim to provide therapies for), researchers, business partners, policy makers and of course colleagues.

1. What was your research at university about?

I did my PhD in the area of ​​algebraic geometry. More specifically, the main objective of my research was to study the occurring phenomena in (embedded) resolution of singularities over algebraically closed fields of positive characteristic. In simple terms: How can you smoothen cusps, edges and the like of zerosets of polynomial equations in order to gain insight on the nature of those singularities.

2. Which criteria had to be met by your employer and how did you find possible candidates?

I have always had an interest in the financial sector. Therefore, it was straightforward for me to apply for a position at a company in this sector.

But when I was looking for a job in 2009, the financial service industry still suffered from the financial crisis of 2007/8; jobs were scarce (in contrast to the "employee market" today). It was therefore a bit of a coincidence that my path led me to the insurance supervision of the FMA.

Even though I no longer work there, in retrospect it was the perfect start to the job world as I was immediately confronted with a wide range of different topics and gained a very good overview of the entire insurance industry. It was also a very good time to get into the insurance industry as the new supervisory regime “Solvency II” was being prepared at the time, which was new for everyone and as a newcomer there was no significant professional disadvantage.

After starting my professional life at the FMA, I worked in group risk management at UNIQA Versicherung AG, which was a very instructive time.

I have now been working as an actuary in the area of ​​auditing and advising insurance companies at KPMG for more than 10 years. Here I particularly appreciate the variety of different topics and therefore my varied everyday work.

3. Which skills you acquired at university do you need in your job?

Even though my doctoral program was very abstract and had nothing to do with my later professional development, I still benefited later from the fact that from university I was used to working independently and quickly familiarizing myself with complex topics.

In addition, a PhD in mathematics teaches you a certain tolerance for frustration, which always benefits me in the professional world.

4. Which new skills did you learn in your job? Did your employer support you and if yes, how?

I quickly realized that solving practical problems is not always as technically complex as the mathematical models at university, but that solving the problems is still usually very challenging because the difficulties often lie elsewhere (e.g. poor data basis, too long computing times of certain models, weak points in the processes).

Furthermore, at university you work a lot alone, which is usually completely different in business. Therefore, teamwork and communication skills play a much larger role there.

I am therefore very happy that all my previous employers – and also my current employer –place great value on further training (both professionally and in the areas of project management and soft skills) in addition to daily on-the-job training and buddy systems. This has supported me greatly in my professional and personal development.

In particular, I am proud to be meanwhile a recognized actuary at AVÖ, the Austrian Actuary Association.

1.  Could you describe the leadership position(s) you are currently in and how you got there?

My current main leadership positions are as Editor in Chief of the Journal of the European Mathematical Society and as a president of the Inverse Problems International Association, where the first one comes with a considerable amount of workload, which I luckily share with the second Editor in Chief, Anton Alexeev.

Former positions in which I learned a lot were, e.g., as president of the Austrian Mathematical Society, as the chair of the scientific advisory board of the Weierstraß Institute WIAS in Berlin, and as the speaker of the Karl Popper Kolleg at my university. Roles in which I also had substantial financial responsibility since I contributed to decision making about grant proposals were in the board of the Austrian Science Fund FWF and later at its Canadian counterpart NSERC; also these two positions came with a substantial amount of work.

Usually one is nominated for such a position and then some (s)election by an executive committee or similar takes place.

2. What is your philosophy regarding leadership?

I think a very rational way to approach such a role is to take it as what it is: Another more or less big chunk of work that needs to be done properly. 

An essential piece to it in addition to the time and effort to be spent is the responsibility, that one must be aware of when taking part in decisions that affect other people's careers.

As a committee or society chair, I always see my role as the person who keeps the overview, reconciles opinions and leads the discussion to a constructive solution in finite time, while giving people enough opportunity to express their opinions.

3. Which experiences helped you taking on this leading role? Which advice can you give on how to prepare for such a position?

In each of the above mentioned cases I learned from my predecessors and then it was to some extent training by doing.

The most important point is probably to be always very well prepared for meetings, having thought about possible solutions for all tasks on the agenda while remaining open to other suggestions.

4. What do you aim to achieve within you (leading) role(s)?

My two main motivations are to give back to the scientific community and to serve as a role model (since women are still often under-represented in such positions). Otherwise I do not have a particular mission in mind. While I of course feel honored when being awarded such a position, it is after all - as already mentioned above - work to be done in a responsible and proper way. 

1.  Could you describe the leadership position(s) you are currently in and how you got there?

Currently, I see myself in two leadership positions: I am the head of my research group and I am vice dean for research at the Fakultät für Mathematik at the University of Vienna.

To be the head of a research group is part of my job and it is a longer story how I ended up there.

I became vice dean because the dean asked me to join his team. There is much pressure from outside to have women in such positions and I felt that the dean thought it would be a good idea to finally have the first woman in the faculty management. 

2. What is your philosophy regarding leadership?

Concerning my research group I try to be as supportive as I can. Being on temporary positions and having to prove at the same time that you are good enough for a permanent position is mentally challenging. In such a situation it is important to have someone who believes in you. At the same time, one has to convey how much dedication it requires to be successful in the end.  There are certainly more talented people who are attracted by this job than there are positions.

Concerning my position as vice dean I try to see the bigger picture and not just protect mathematics against other interests. I think it is quite healthy to explain the, say, taxpayer, what are our various contributions for the society. I do not feel comfortable when mathematicians feel elite and, in the long run, it is not very helpful for our field either. 

After being vice dean for one year now, it turns out that I tend to be more outspoken compared to other colleagues. I struggle with the culture of "informal agreements'' and bending rules. I have seen other women in similar positions who feel the same way. 

On days when I am frustrated, I wonder whether this is because some men have the tendency to be part of a better network they feel obliged to and thus have more to lose if they address their criticism. There are also statistics that imply that bending rules could be more disadvantageous for women: for instance, women tend to apply for positions only if they (over)fulfill every single requirement, while men tend to apply if they just fulfill some of them.

Having said all that I need to point out that I have clearly received support over the past year by men, especially from the next generation, but there are also several senior men with tremendous gender awareness. 

3. Which experiences helped you taking on this leading role? Which advice can you give on how to prepare for such a position?

My father was also professor and actually dean, who earned admiration for his work. It was definitely the role of his life. This also shaped me. It was him who urged me to see the points of view of all stakeholders.

Otherwise I think it is important to get to know your faculty well before you join the faculty management. My advice would be to attend many meetings, talk to people, get interested. University administration is not something you can learn from a brochure, you need to get involved.

I had a few difficult situations in leadership positions and learned that it is important to choose your battles. If you do not manage to have any Allies for your mission, it is usually better to wait until you have support. Just do maths instead.

4. What do you aim to achieve within you (leading) role(s)?

Concerning my research group, I'd like to achieve that they receive the chance they all deserve. Also in a research group the perfect situation is when "leading'' is not necessary and everyone is taking initiatives from time to time.

Concerning the faculty, it was not so clear from the beginning. However, soon after the beginning of my term we had a department evaluation, where external peers came with the (to some) surprising suggestion that we should create the position of a vice dean for gender and equality/diversity. What a start for the first woman in the faculty management! 

You may or may not imagine that this led to many "interesting'' discussions, sometimes with me in an isolated role.  After this year, I feel more than ever that our system supports only some types of characters and we are losing something if we continue to ignore other characters.

What would be the influence on the process of developing mathematics and subsequently the outcome if we had a more divers faculty? I'd love to explore that further.

1.  Could you describe the leadership position(s) you are currently in and how you got there?

I am professor at Sorbonne University in Paris and currently leading a research group within my ERC Starting Grant LAHACODE. I completed my PhD in 2012 in Innsbruck, Austria, then went for a post-doc to France and later for a junior professorship to Germany. 

2. What is your philosophy regarding leadership?

I am really happy to have a team of independent young researchers who burst with their own ideas. For me I would rather call my role ‘guidence-ship’ instead of leadership.

3. Which experiences helped you taking on this leading role? Which advice can you give on how to prepare for such a position?

I can strongly recommend to all young researchers to apply for research grants; in my opinion one gains a lot of experience in doing so. And, luckily, I always had outstanding mentors whom I can mirror now.

4. What do you aim to achieve within you (leading) role(s)?

I hope to inspire and support young researchers to discover their potential and fully develop it.

1.  What kind of contract did you have when you had children and which career steps did you take since then?

In fact the time when my son was born was just perfect: while my wife was pregnant I started as an Assistant Professor at the University of Salzburg that was tenured for Associate Professor. So I got my first job with a longtime perspective at precisely the right time. Since then I finished my habilitation in Salzburg and became Associate Professor after the usual evaluation process here in Austria.

2. How did/do you split the care taking responsibilities? Was there anything you would like to change in hindsight and why?

We always try to split the responsibilities even and fair - but of course there are always constraints we cannot really influence. So in the first couple of months she was taking over nearly all the care taking responsibilities. What helped us to get out of this was definitely the fact that my wife wanted to get back to the job quickly to finish her training as a medical doctor. 

So in the second year after the birth of our child I took parental leave for more than half a year while she was working full time as a resident, including nightshifts and weekends. This time way very important for the three of us: I got to know my son much better than before, learned how demanding childcare can be. And my wife learned to trust her two boys, saw that we could get through the day even without her help. 

Since then, we split it as equally as possible. I think that I spent even more time with our son since I simply have more flexible working hours. These days, I take him to school on my way to university, pick him up from childcare in the afternoon half of the week and then play with him, go swimming, climbing or skiing. My wife, on the other afternoons, picks him up for appointments at the dentist, piano lessons or simply to go have some icecream now that spring has finally returned.

3. What worked out as planned and what didn’t career-wise?

A tough question and usually not the type of question I ask myself. What worked out is definitely the plan of doing research in mathematics as a living for the rest of my working life.  And we all know that talent is necessary but not sufficient to achieve this goal. One also needs a huge amount of patience and luck.  I am very happy indeed that this dream of mine came true.

4. Which advantages and disadvantages come along with university when it comes to the combination of family and work?

What really helps a lot are the flexible working hours: No one cares when I do what I have to do as long as the work gets done. So I could always pick up my son in the afternoon and get back to work when he was sleeping. 

Another thing I do appreciate is something that might also be very special to mathematics: You can even do research while looking after your child. Of course I cannot write down my ideas while taking care of him and I cannot search for literature. However, I can think about problems I have on my mind and come up with new ideas while pushing the strollers or sitting at the scater park now that he is more grown up. Also, your right to go on parental leave as a man is maybe more excepted than in other fields of work. 

1.  What kind of contract did you have when you had children and which career steps did you take since then? 

We had our child during my first postdoc position at IST Austria, where I was employed as an ISTplus Postdoctoral fellow. This was initially a 2-year-contract, which was then extended for the duration of my parental leave (altogether eight months). Afterwards, my advisor added another four months to my contract to be back in the academic calendar. In October 2022, we moved to Munich to my current position as an MCQST Distinguished Postdoc.

2. How did/do you split the care taking responsibilities? Was there anything you would like to change in hindsight and why?

When our child was born, my partner took the four weeks of unpaid vacation which are offered in Austria (“Papamonat”), and I was on parental leave for the first six months. Then we switched and I resumed working full-time. When our child was one and a half years old, we started with daycare, which our child attends now every day until early afternoon. Recently, my partner started working in a part-time position during the daycare hours, and he takes care of our kid in the afternoon.

In hindsight, I think it was really good to make use of the “Papamonat” to take the first four weeks of leave together. We were very glad about our decision that one of us would stay home until after our kid would be well settled in the daycare – which, due to holidays and the ever-present children’s sicknesses, took altogether more than three months.

What did not work out so well was our switch of parental leave after six months. Changing the family life so drastically all of a sudden was very stressfull for all of us; it would have been much better to plan an overlap of some weeks to adjust slowly to the new circumstances.

3. What worked out as planned and what didn’t career-wise?

I have been really lucky with my PhD and postdoc positions, where I have been profiting from great advisors each time. Moreover, as both of my postdoc positions were fellowships which I won after competitive selection processes, I am so far happy with my career, and I am looking forward to taking my next steps.

4. Which advantages and disadvantages come along with university when it comes to the combination of family and work?

We benefit a lot from the fact that as a mathematician, I can essentially work everywhere and anytime. Optimizing my working hours under the constraint of our child’s sleeping hours allows us to spend much more time together as a family. On the other hand, the usual short-term contracts in academia and the uncertainty and pressure that come with this are not easy to handle, and this can sometimes be very demanding for the whole family.

I would like to add another thought, which doesn’t really fit any question but it is important to me to put it nevertheless. I think children are a family responsibility, not the women’s job. However, I have never experienced a man being interviewed on how to combine kids and career. While I think it is important to talk about these issues and to showcase the diversity of solutions, I really wish that not only the women were asked these questions. Fathers are just as responsible for their children as mothers.

1.  What kind of contract did you have when you had children and which career steps did you take since then? 

In July 2021, I was working as a postdoctoral scholar at ISTA on a 4-year contractual position when I had my child. Because of the maternity break, I extended my contract for an additional 8 months, allowing me to continue my work at the same position. Since then, I have been balancing my professional and personal responsibilities while continuing to develop my skills and expertise as a postdoctoral scholar.

2. How did/do you split the care taking responsibilities? Was there anything you would like to change in hindsight and why?

When my child was 6 months old, I returned to my full-time position, which my husband and I balance while working from home. We take turns caring for our child, allowing the other parent to work in the basement office or attend meetings.

While we have found a system that works for us, some days it can be challenging to manage all of my responsibilities, and in hindsight, it may have been better for me to take a longer break before returning to work. However, I was involved in some time-bound projects with my team members, and I wanted to return to those projects as soon as possible. Despite my best efforts, juggling all of my responsibilities has made it difficult to be as productive and contribute to the projects as I could have been before.

3. What worked out as planned and what didn’t career-wise?

When I started my postdoc, I had planned to begin applying for my next position after three years. However, due to my leave of absence, that timeline was delayed by a year. I have just recently begun applying for positions this year. While some of the projects I was working on were able to mature or be put on hold and later resumed, some of the new collaborations had to be dropped due to my unavailability. Although this has been challenging, I have learned from the experience and am now better prepared to balance my professional and personal responsibilities moving forward.

4. Which advantages and disadvantages come along with university when it comes to the combination of family and work?

Being in an academic position and having an extremely flexible advisor has been immensely helpful for me in balancing my family and work responsibilities. I have the ability to work flexible hours, schedule meetings at my convenience, and work primarily from home. However, as I am approaching the end of my contract, I also need to look for new opportunities while maintaining my research profile. This can sometimes feel like a lot, especially as a new parent who is already exhausted. Despite this challenge, I am grateful for the advantages that come with working in a university setting, as they have enabled me to better balance my personal and professional obligations. 

1.  What kind of contract did you have when you had children and which career steps did you take since then? 

I had a third-party funded contract (FWF) with about one year left when I found out that I was pregnant with my first child. As my contract ended during my parental leave I had no protection against dismissal after. During my maternity protection period my institute was granted a second funding period for another 4 years. When my old contract ended, I decided to go back full-time and I could sign the new contract. My partner and I have agreed beforehand that we wanted to split parental leave into three parts. After four months full-time, I was back in parental leave. During my parental leave time I was always part-time employed. Our parental leave ended when our child was 14 months old. I am currently working 24 hours per week and intend to raise my hours when my child is 2 years old. 

2. How did/do you split the care taking responsibilities? Was there anything you would like to change in hindsight and why?

Before our child was born, my partner and I agreed on sharing parental leave. I would start and end and he would have 4 months in between. When our child was 5 months old, I went back to full-time work and he was in parental leave. After our parental leave my partner reduced his hours and I raised mine. He works slightly more hours per week than I do, but this was my choice and I see it as my privilege. Apart from that, we equally share the care taking responsibilities.

In hindsight, I would not change anything. At the time, we had some challenges when I went back to full-time work when our child was just 5 months old. However, we successfully faced all of them. The big advantage I had was that I was never away from work for a long period. For me it was always relatively easy to get back into my research. I never lost contact with my (international) colleagues or supervisor, and I even gave a few talks at conferences during my parental leave.

3. What worked out as planned and what didn’t career-wise?

For me, it worked out to sign a new 4-years-contract in between parental leave. So far, I have always had the perfect work-being-a-mum balance. For my career and without a permanent position, I think the biggest challenges are ahead of me though.

4. Which advantages and disadvantages come along with university when it comes to the combination of family and work?

A disadvantage is that contracts can end during parental leave or parental part-time if you are third-party funded. There is not much of a work security in that case.

A big advantage is work flexibility. As a mathematician, I can mostly work from anywhere. A combination of office work and home office allows to fit in a lot more working hours per week than I could without home office. Additionally, I do not have fixed working hours but can often work when it best fits into my and my child’s schedule.

All of this is, however, only possible due to the continuous support of my supervisor.

1. For which grant(s) did you apply and why? Which grant(s) did you get?

The first grant that I applied for was the WWTF grant "Mathematics and... 2014". These "Mathematics and..." calls were meant to promote scientific projects in the field of mathematics together with other disciplines. Having chosen as topic "Risk management in energy markets", I wrote a joint application together with the Institute of Energy Systems and Electric Drives at TU Vienna. Even though our proposal was accepted in the first round and was also very well received by the reviewers in the second round, the call was quite competitive and the project finally did not get funded. The main reason for rejection was that my leadership experience for this rather big project, which involved also supervision of PhD students, was rather limited at that time, since I applied only three years after having obtained my PhD. My next trial was again a joint application with several researchers for an FWF funded so-called DACH project. These are international projects involving researchers from Germany, Austria and Switzerland. As several people from different universities were taking part, it was quite difficult to write a homogeneous proposal. Therefore we had to modify and resubmit it three times until it eventually got approved and funded in 2018. In the meanwhile, I applied together with my Post Doc advisor Walter Schachermayer for the next edition of the WWTF grant "Mathematics and... 2016", this time successfully. In 2018, I decided to apply for the FWF START grant with a project combing several new ideas that fascinated me with research directions that I had already pursued for a while. After an interview, which is part of the START application, my project got approved in June 2019. 

2. For how many different grants should I apply at the same time?  

In order to be able to develop and to focus on novel original research ideas, I would say only one, at least at the beginning of the career. I think it is somehow natural to apply consecutively for grants, in particular if they are rather big ones. Indeed, if the grant is approved, then the project phase allows one to elaborate in detail on the ideas or conjectures of the proposal, while simultaneously new research questions and directions naturally arise. These can then build the basis for a new grant application. 

3. How did you prepare for the application (e.g. with scientific papers) and how long did it take you to write the proposal?

One's own past and current research is somehow the most essential preparation. To frame the different ideas and questions in a convincing way and to point out the relevance of the research topics are the main challenges, when actually writing the proposal. The actual time for writing the proposal depends on the specific grant. For the START grant it took me about 4 weeks, but of course I already had the essential mathematical ideas from my previous research. Most grant applications require also a detailed budget statement, a work and time plan, a description to the research environment, etc., which one should be aware of when starting to write the proposal. 

4. How did you make sure your grant application was suited for the audience that evaluated it? Are there any common mistakes that one can avoid?

If the proposal is in a field in which one has already worked for a while, the scientific referees usually come from the respective research community. Therefore, it is not so difficult to convey one's ideas to researchers who have a similar background and expertise. However, if one would like to explore new or interdisciplinary areas where one's own research is less established and where people potentially speak a different scientific language, this become much more challenging. In this case, I think one should carefully choose the keywords, cite the relevant references and express the research questions and milestones of the project in a particular comprehensive way, also suited for a broader audience. 

1. For which grant(s) did you apply and why? Which grant(s) did you get?

I applied for a Marie Skłodowska-Curie individual fellowship (MSCA-IF) for the first time in 2019. I had completed my PhD at the University of Padua (Italy) about a year and a half earlier, and I was about to finish my first postdoc at the same university. To give my career a boost, I was eager to gain work experience abroad, in a research group that was related to my interests, but at the same time would allow me to expand them. In the spring of that year, I learned that the University of Graz was going to organize a workshop on preparing an application for Marie Curie fellowships, and (lucky coincidence!) it was in Graz that the Algebra and Number Theory group was working on topics of great interest to me. I knew that the Marie Curie fellowship is a very competitive grant and that the chances of winning it were slim, however, I was convinced of the worthiness of the project I had in mind and thought that in any case it would be instructive to write a proposal for a European call. I decided to contact Prof. Geroldinger (my current supervisor) to inform him about my intentions, and his immediate support motivated me to pursue my plan and apply for the workshop and then for the grant. Despite commitment and enthusiasm, the proposal I submitted in 2019 was not funded. Nevertheless, it was evaluated very positively and obtained the "Seal of Excellence" from the European Commission. I won the grant only in 2021, after resubmitting an updated and improved version of the original project.

2. For how many different grants should I apply at the same time?  

Depending on the grant for which you decide to apply, preparing the application can be very challenging and require a great deal of time and concentration. For this reason, I would recommend focusing on one grant at a time. Of course, after the initial effort of writing a solid and convincing research project, it is always possible with a few modifications to reuse it (or a part of it) for other applications. Especially when applying for very competitive positions, it makes sense to consider the possibility of failure and look for alternatives. For example, with a reduced and suitably modified version of my 2019 project, I applied successfully for a different scholarship.

3. How did you prepare for the application (e.g. with scientific papers) and how long did it take you to write the proposal?

Applications for a Marie Curie grant must follow a very precise structure, both in form (limited number of pages, minimum font size, etc.) and content (specific topics to be covered). The actual research project is only one part of the application, although it is the most important for evaluation purposes. The rest is devoted to planning the integration of the researcher into the new team, the exchange of knowledge between host-institution and researcher, training activities to carry on beside research work, and the evaluation of the impact of the grant on one's career.

As for the purely mathematical part, I had a preliminary discussion with my supervisor to outline the main goals and the (of course approximate) timeline to achieve them. From this rough structure I then built my project in detail, based on an extensive literature search and continuous exchanges of emails and ideas with my future collaborators. As mathematicians we are much more used to writing about mathematics than about more organizational and administrative questions. Thus, it was more difficult for me to redact the non-mathematical part of my proposal. For this, I found great help in reading old successful applications, in the suggestions gathered during the 2019 workshop, and in the constant support provided by the International Office of the University of Graz and by the Austrian Research Promotion agency.

Overall, writing my proposal for the first time took me about four months. For the resubmission I was faster, but I still worked on the project for more than a month. The one for the MSCA fellowship was my first grant application ever. It was a really challenging process, especially because I wrote the project while working full time. However, I learned a lot from this experience, and I am sure it will be useful for me in the future.

4. How did you make sure your grant application was suited for the audience that evaluated it? Are there any common mistakes that one can avoid?

To get your proposal evaluated by people who are as close as possible to your field of research, the first (crucial!) step is to choose your keywords efficiently. In any case, for grants as large in scope as the Marie Curie actions, it is still plausible that the evaluator pool for your application will consist of mathematicians who are not experts in your area. For this reason, you must be careful not to write a too technical project and not to be sloppy in motivating the research questions. A schematic, concise style is also preferable to a more conversational style to keep the reader’s attention. Moreover, typographical tools such as boldface and bulleted lists, together with graphs and tables, can be efficiently used to highlight salient concepts. I think it is especially helpful to get as many people as possible, both inside and outside your research group, to read your proposal. To this end, I would also recommend the mentorship service offered by EWM to be put in touch with former winners of the grants you want to apply for, and who could give you some feedback.

The last piece of advice I would like to give to those of you who are thinking about whether to apply for a grant, is not to be discouraged by statistics and success rates, but to give it a try. Either way, it will be worth it.

1. For which grant(s) did you apply and why? Which grant(s) did you get?

The first grant I applied for was a an Elise Richter grant of the FWF, in 2018. I decided to apply for it because I was feeling I had a too-senior profile to try other grants meant for freshly graduated postdocs (I was 6 years after my Phd) and I was a bit scared to try directly a stand-alone. In the same year, I also applied for an international project, jointly funded by the FWF and the GACR (Czech funding agency) together with Martin Kruzik from Prague. We were already collaborating together and decided it was a way to deepen our cooperation. At the same time we also applied for a WTZ travel grant. All those proposals were approved for funding. In 2019, I decided to try and apply for a START grant: I wanted to try for it while I was still in time and I had an idea for a nice research topic. This was also approved in June 2020. At the same time, I was involved by some colleagues at the University of Vienna and at TU Wien in the second stage of an SFB. This was also approved in Spring 2021. In addition to the above mentioned grants, I tried twice to send a Research Group Proposal with two colleagues but this was not approved for funding. 

2. For how many different grants should I apply at the same time? 

There is no unique answer. I would say that it depends a lot on your research profile, your academic age, and the time that it takes you to write a good proposal. In principle, I think it is a good idea to try for more than one possibility but one needs to have enough material for a scientific proposal and needs to find the time to focus on it. 

3. How did you prepare for the application (e.g. with scientific papers) and how long did it take you to write the proposal?

By reading the works other colleagues published, thinking to open problems related to my works, and talking to my colleagues. For me, the thinking phase is the longer one and it usually takes no more than two weeks to write but once again I think it is a quite individual process. 

4. How did you make sure your grant application was suited for the audience that evaluated it? Are there any common mistakes that one can avoid?

It is impossible to know that in advance. What you can do is focus on writing an interesting, scientifically meaningful proposal with clear aims. Some common mistakes to avoid: 1) avoid writing vague sentences, everything should be explained and justified; 2) check your English and work on it; 3) avoid making things too technical, whoever reads might not be exactly working on your specific topic but should nevertheless still be in a position to get your research goals.  

1. What are you currently working on?

I am interested in structure in signals or functions, respectively. In particular, I try to understand, how the representation, that we use to analyse these signals or functions, influences the results of further processing steps. In this context, I have also started to ask the question, whether and how certain properties of a given class of signals can be used in order to choose more concise representations, in particular for specific tasks in applications. So, in short,  I am working on how to represent functions in order to better understand them.

2. Which applications do the tools from your mathematical field have in your current project(s)? 

There are applications in medicine, signal analysis, sound processing, …, and many more. For example, algorithms we developed can help to analyse and modify sound in a desired manner. In medicine, the representations we suggest can lead to faster or more reliable medical insight. Another important application is a reasonable dimension reduction for complex data sets. This means that the information contained hundreds of millions of numbers can be recovered from far less different numbers, if the latter are obtained in a smart manner. 

3. To what degree do you typically use existing mathematical tools? How do you attack the problem if it can't be solved by the available tools? 

Of course, I rely on existing tools to some extent or I develop those further. On the other hand, if a problem stems directly from applications, one also has to come up with a certain "out-of-the-box" approach at times and invent new techniques. Most typically, that is successful if developed in teams, where different abilities complement each other. Of course, if I can’t find the appropriate tool, I often ask my colleagues or we work together on new ideas. 

4.  Which challenges have you faced when communicating with someone who has a different background? When did a different point of view help you? 

For me personally speaking to people with different background has never been particularly difficult, since I have always worked in an interdisciplinary manner. Obviously, given the dialectic nature of scientific work, different points of view are essential to scientific progress. Homogeny in opinion is maybe for politics, and also there it is not beneficial, but if applied in science, it is a dead end. 

1. What are you currently working on?

Many of my current projects are related to financial risks stemming from climate change. This is a hot topic in central banking and in the financial sector generally. Tools to meet climate-related financial risks are not yet standardized and therefore must be developed and investigated. Together with my colleagues, I am responsible to capture such financial risks for the German central bank with help of quantitative methods. This includes to develop risk models further or run impact analyses.

2. Which applications do the tools from your mathematical field have in your current project(s)? 

In my case, starting to work for the German central bank one year ago meant to completely change the mathematical field, from geometric knot theory to financial mathematics. So far, I have not directly applied the topic of my PhD research, but I would not rule out possible uses in the future. Yet I strongly benefit from methods of research, mathematical and analytical approaches to the problems, and other soft skills that I gained throughout my graduate studies. Not to mention my training in statistics and probability theory over the bachelor and master studies. 

3. To what degree do you typically use existing mathematical tools? How do you attack the problem if it can't be solved by the available tools? 

Quantitative risk models and analyses are full of mathematical tools, like copulas, Monte Carlo methods, or mathematical optimization. Such theoretical foundations accompany me in my everyday work, but their correct and fine technical implementation as well as their actual application to questions from risk management are equally important. If I discover a problem in these areas that cannot be solved by available tools, I sometimes feel like being back to university solving a research question. The only difference might be that I am not the sole responsible person for the problem, it is addressed in a coordinated team of experts.

4.  Which challenges have you faced when communicating with someone who has a different background? When did a different point of view help you? 

Bringing together people with different backgrounds is indispensable for tackling challenges like human-made climate change. I really enjoy working in interdisciplinary teams on a regular basis. A typical challenge for me would be to explain technical details like the composition of risk analyses in simple terms. Conversely, it is sometimes challenging for me to turn non-technical descriptions into technical concepts. At any point of time, I am happy if colleagues share a different point of view with me. This usually leads to better solutions and broadens my horizon concurrently 

5.  What were the reasons for choosing your job in industry? 

It was not an easy decision how to continue after my PhD studies. I carefully compared my personal pros and contras on whether or not to stay in academia. Afterwards I identified my personal fields and employers of interest within the non-academic scope of career opportunities. Taking time in the decision-making process has paid off, I am now very happy about my choices and especially about my current job. It gives me a good work life balance and a sense of stability while being intellectually challenging and having a noticeable real-life impact.

(Disclaimer: This interview represents Nicole Vorderobermeier’s personal opinions and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Deutsche Bundesbank or the Eurosystem.)

1. What are you currently working on?

I work at the intersection of computer algebra and combinatorics. I am interested to see how the tools of one field can benefit and support the other. 

2. Which applications do the tools from your mathematical field have in your current project(s)? 

Computer algebra tools are quite powerful these days and can handle pretty complicated symbolic expressions and special functions, as well as functions for which we may not have an explicit closed form but that are known to satisfy certain differential or algebraic equations (or systems of equations). For example, such objects show up regularly in combinatorics and physics applications in the contexts of identity proving, system solving, summation, integration, and elimination of variables and quantifiers. The tools can play an important role in the manipulation and simplification of these objects to facilitate a deeper study so that we may be able to answer questions about them in a decisive way. 

3. To what degree do you typically use existing mathematical tools? How do you attack the problem if it can't be solved by the available tools? 

I pull out the computer algebra toolbox regularly, and since Linz is a symbolic computation "hotspot" so to speak, I have plenty of experts (and access to their network all around the world) to consult with here. If the existing tools are not sufficient, I try to reduce the problem at hand to a simpler case to see if it is more manageable, and then work it from the bottom up. At some point, one has to decide if more than one tool is needed, or if the problem requires some ad hoc tweaking so that the tools can be used in a reasonable way. There are also opportunities to re-imagine the toolbox itself and start to develop new ones if one feels motivated to do this. 

4.  Which challenges have you faced when communicating with someone who has a different background? When did a different point of view help you? 

One challenge is usually dealing with the initial mismatched expectations of familiarity with the definitions and nuances in the problem. So in this way, communication can become muddled and confusing. To counteract this, I ask all of the naive/fundamental questions at the very beginning so that the definitions of all objects are precise and clear, and I always ask for simple examples so that I can get some basic intuition. Just by clarifying these things, we may already be halfway to solving the problem. Another challenge is finding the right balance of talking and listening when communicating. If one person consistently dominates the conversation, then it can be difficult to collaborate effectively.

I always try to welcome different points of view, because I find that they always add some level of understanding even if it is not immediately clear how they will end up being helpful. I once experienced getting stuck on a problem and then putting it aside to work on something else from another (not too distant) mathematical area. The experience and point of view that I gained from that side gave me confidence to go back and solve the original problem.

5.  What were the reasons for choosing your job in industry? 

I will start my new research position at a government lab in the U.S. soon. I saw this as an exciting opportunity to expose myself to new applications and ideas and I hope that I will be able to bring what I have learned at JKU and RICAM to help with solving problems that could potentially have a deep impact. 

1. How many times did you move and why?

I have moved twice during my career; I had a master's degree in mathematics in Tunisia, and I was major of promotion at the time, so I got a scholarship to go to Sweden and do a second master's there at Linnaeus University. I spent a year there and was impressed with their study program, where students had the flexibility to choose which courses they wanted to take each semester based on their vision for their career. It was the first breakthrough for me, I felt I had the option! Back in Tunisia, we didn't have that, you can choose the field of your studies but the courses and the program are already fixed by the government. So, I kept thinking that if I want to pursue the academic career, I have to do it somewhere where I can first choose my field and my research topic, and also where the doctoral student is seen as a worker and no longer a student and get paid for the work he does. It was then that I started to apply for a doctoral position in different countries and found myself in Linz.

2. What did it mean for your career and was it worthwhile the effort?

From my point of view, I think that being a doctoral student in an EU country has several advantages; I want to point out that by just not doing my doctorate in my country I saved around 2-3 years, in fact in Tunisia the average number of years spent in doctorate is around 5-6 years sometimes 7 , so being able to finish it in 3-4 years on average was already a good motive for me. Another important point was the salary, it was important for me to be financially independent from my family. Among many other reasons, I can say that since I was planning a career in academia, I am grateful that in addition to being a researcher here at JKU and working on my project, my PhD position helped me grow my work network with all the conferences and research trips and stays in which I have participated, it also gave me the opportunity to have my first teaching experience and to learn how to prepare courses, worksheets, prepare exams, and deal with students. I think this is something essential and useful to learn at the start of your career. So to sum up, even though I made a huge sacrifice being away from my family, trying to adapt in a country where I don't speak the language... It was totally worth it !

3. What challenges did you face and what where your most rewarding experiences?

The first hurdle was having a good Arab community, I made a lot of international friends when I first arrived here (2018), and I'm grateful for their friendship, but I always missed out on being with people who understand my mother tongue, it was something important for me to have; in fact, it feels good to have people with whom we share almost the same traditions, a very close mentality and a very similar cuisine. German was also a big problem for me, when I first arrived I had a hard time understanding my rental contract, internet contract and paperwork with the magistrate (which didn't make sense for me because the magistrate in particular was a place for me where the internationals had to come without German knowledge).

I stayed at Raab Heim for almost 7 months then they refused to renew my contract so I had to look for an apartment, it was the most frustrating 2 months I lived in Linz, I applied for many apartments and sometimes I have been rejected because either I don't speak German, or just because I am Arabic. Money was also a problem sometimes e.g. the last landlord asked me to pay 1000 euros extra Kaution fee compared to the previous tenant and this was not included in my original budget as these fees were added when I was about to sign the contract and not in the initial announcement. Nonetheless, I've learned a lot from staying abroad, and the most important thing I've learned is how to keep an open mind and be okay with leaving my comfort zone. Being alone in a foreign country made me realize how important it is to be independent and autonomous, I learned to organize my budget and take care of myself in the most ideal way; how to deal with my stress, how to do my best before asking for help, how to work hard on every aspect of my life to prove (first to myself then to everyone I left at home) that I made the right choice to be here! I started going to the gym (1st time in my life), going for long hikes, traveling around, being open and welcoming to every new culture in my social circle and every new idea or detour during my work process ...

When I look back I found that I couldn't really name my “most” rewarding experiences, I had a lot and learned a lot, and it changed my personality and the way I looked at people and my whole perspective in life, so, I can sum it up in one thing: "I have learned to push my limits and not to be afraid from any change".

4.  Do you have any specific plans regarding your next steps? 

I plan to apply for a postdoc when I finish my PhD, maybe in Austria or in another EU country.

1. How many times did you move and why?

I left my home country, Spain, when I was 22 years old. At that time I was doing a bachelor in Mathematics at the Technical University of Catalonia (it was a 5 year program at the time) and in my last year I went for an Erasmus to Grenoble, in France. At that time, I was the kind of person that preferred staying at home and I was very shy (so shy that I would get nervous from asking a loaf of bread at the person at the counter in the bakery). So nobody expected me to move abroad (including myself). But I did. I did so because I was unhappy: studying mathematics was a great personal effort on my side and I could not see any future beyond my university days at that point. I could not see myself pursuing a career in academia and all the job offers seemed to be about becoming a programming monkey. I felt trapped. And because I was unhappy I decided to try something new (after all, what is there to lose?): maybe studying a bit of computer science could open my horizons and prepare myself better for the future. So I went to France to study at ENSIMAG (Engineering School of Computer Science and Applied Mathematics of  Grenoble). I had only studied an intensive course of French during the summer and I was “ready” to spend two years there. It was a tough experience to begin with, but, curiously, the unhappiness I felt before moving away dissolved immediately. That is how I knew at the time that I had made the right choice by going to France. In the end the Erasmus experience was so great that I did not want to go back home. I wanted to do a PhD, and I wanted to try a different country this time. But I did not want to learn a new language. So in 2010 I went to the UK, to Cambridge, to do a PhD. Later (2015) I worked at the Imperial College London as a post-doc, and in 2018 I moved near Brighton to start working as a lecturer at the University of Sussex. In the same year I moved to Austria, to work at the University of Vienna.

2. What did it mean for your career and was it worthwhile the effort?

I recommend to everyone to have an experience abroad at least once in life, for at least a year. The Erasmus program is a great way to do so. I find it hard to convey with words why living abroad at least once in your life is so important: it helps you to know yourself better, you experience new things in life. You will grow and that will make you happier (even though to begin with it may be tough). Wherever you are, in your little comfort zone, everyone thinks the same, everyone experiences the same. It may not look like it, but only when I went abroad I realized how little my world was; how many other ways exist of doing things (the very little things, not only the big ones); how suddenly I was confronted with making new choices, to allow myself to be influenced; feeling vulnerable, not knowing the rules, not knowing the language well, but still coming through; bonding deeply with people because they are in the same situation as me.

Scientifically, going abroad was also crucial because it exposed me to different ways of carrying out research, of running a department, of different leadership and mentor styles. This is important because when we become group leaders we tend to imitate (we reproduce what was done to us or we do something in reaction to what was done to us). After all, no one is going to train you to become a group leader and the only experience you have comes from the observation of what others do. So, for example, during my PhD in Cambridge I felt that the environment was very competitive: the stress was high. This was also the same at Imperial College London, but my post-doc mentor, Pierre Degond, was always very relaxed and caring and I learned a great deal on how to run a group by just observing him (he was, fortunately, a great role model).

3. How does it feel to change places a lot? 

Something that has always helped me to change places is that I do not tend to get attached: I am not attached to my hometown, nor to my current place (Vienna) or was attached to a particular temporary job. I enjoy the place but it does not belong to me. I always understood that temporary means temporary. I enjoy it while it lasts, and I know there is a moment to move on. It is hard to leave friends behind. But I already accepted that that is going to happen all the time in this career. Do not try to grasp and keep: enjoy and let go.

It is always a challenge to move abroad, but it is also very inconvenient to stay all your life in the same place: you become too comfortable. Comfort is nice, but it narrows the spectrum, it makes the mind dull. I always try to distinguish between comfort and well-being, so that I can choose the second one. It was painful to leave my comfort zone at the beginning, but the payback was so immense that it was truly worth it to overcome the initial barrier.

4. What do you hope for the future? 

It would be great if every person in the world could spend at least one year abroad, and for a scientific career it is fundamental (in my opinion). Of course it becomes harder the older you get, among other things, because we tend to become less adaptable and we tend to have more responsibilities (at work and in our personal life). Moving around became difficult the moment I got a partner. Fortunately, my partner is also a researcher and understands the need to move (other people with “normal jobs” are not so understanding). Unfortunately, European universities still do not take into account couple hirings as it is done in other places, like in the USA.

I could say many more things on the subject, but I would like to finish stressing that moving abroad for work is not only about the work: there is the place, the people, the culture, the food.

Moving abroad is about experiencing life from a different angle, not so much about work. These experiences have transformed me and I feel very grateful for that.

1. How many times did you move and why?

I moved a total of four times: initially, from Athens, Greece to Zurich, Switzerland to pursue a Master's in Computer Science (ETH Zurich) after my Diploma in Electrical Engineering. I ended up staying for a PhD and then moved to California for a postdoc at Stanford (also Computer Science). After trying out the industry in the Bay Area for a little bit I made up my mind to switch domains and finally pursue Mathematics (something I'd been thinking about since childhood) so I left California for Berlin and a second postdoc in Geometry (TU Berlin). After a year and a half I moved to Austria for my current position in Austria (Assistant Professor in Applied Geometry, TU Graz).

2. What did it mean for your career and was it worth the effort?

I think all of my moves were worth the effort, career-wise but also in terms of growing as a person. In terms of career, moving from my familiar Greek environment to a bigger, international European university felt like a huge step for me, not only in terms of knowledge acquisition during my studies, but also seeing what world-class research looks like, developing standards for high quality research, gaining cross-cultural experiences and building confidence that I can survive in a competitive international environment and meeting tons of people who would propel me forward, on whose way of living I could at least partially model my own. My move to the US reinforced all that, and in addition gave me more confidence in my own independence not only as an academic researcher, but also as an individual away from home. It also offered me a comparative view of the US landscape, which, while not so different academically (I found top ranking universities function similarly enough across countries), was vastly different culturally. Because of this exposure to a very different underlying culture (misunderstood by me up to that point — I never had any particular aspiration to live in the US and moved there with some hesitation), I would say that, of all my moves, this was the most conducive to my own personal growth, and I would recommend it to anyone who has the opportunity. Coming back to Europe to pursue a different academic domain (mathematics instead of applied science / engineering) was naturally uniquely valuable for me since I wanted to switch focus. This switch also exposed me to an entirely different structure, pace, standard, and routine of work — theoretical research follows quite different principles than engineering, and one really notices this in the ways research and teaching are done. Berlin, with its vast historical tradition in Mathematics and in particular geometry was (it seems to me) the best place to do it — meeting and collaborating with insanely intelligent and mathematically creative people was an eye-opener and a dream come true, and a great personal challenge that I am still a part of. Finally, my current situation in Austria is a culmination of my career efforts of sorts, where I am finally taking a step towards trying to make it on my own — this feels like an inevitable experiment that I must undertake (and am lucky enough to have found a great place to do it), so I find it extremely worthwhile. 

3. What challenges did you face and what were your most rewarding experiences?

It is always challenging to move (especially for more withdrawn people like myself who are not drawn to highly active lifestyles). Not so much in terms of work/career — I would say the challenges and expectations in my work life have been fairly predictable and mostly manageable after my first exposure to international academics. In some ways my work life has been the more constant factor throughout, the challenges were mostly personal. Uprooting one's life, giving up old habits and structures that one can rely on to add meaning to one's life (family, friends, socially accepted norms and ideas one grew up with, prevailing notions of what constitutes a good life, habits, pastimes, patterns of behaviour) can be disorienting and challenging to the sense of one's identity. One needs to constantly adapt to new environments and norms, and essentially re-invent oneself a little bit, which can be tiring — no sooner does one manage to build a nicely flowing life than one has to reset one's expectations of what a 'nicely flowing life' looks like and figure something else out at the new place. Leaving friends behind is always unpleasant, and creating anew a network of people at the new place becomes harder and harder as one gets older (especially for an introvert like myself, even more so if there is a language barrier or the social culture is generally introverted). This can cause the occasional loneliness and loss of one's bearings. It took me a good 6-8 months to get accustomed to and start enjoying the permeating US culture after leaving Europe for the first time, and similarly upon returning to Europe after having grown fond of the US. Maintaining romantic relationships can be a challenge (although the ones that do last grow infinitely more strong) and building a family even more so (I will admit that this has not been at the top of my priorities in the past, so perhaps I'm not the right person to ask in that respect). The knowledge that one is staying at a place only impermanently makes it difficult to establish lasting routines and commit to picking up hobbies and pursue new activities that one might be interested in but would need time, stability, and peace of mind, to develop the necessary skills (I wanted to play music but only now that I feel more permanent did I start learning an instrument) . Once you accept all these facts, however, this all becomes bearable and even beautiful in itself, as one starts appreciating the flip side of all this: that one needs not identify with any of the aforementioned things, and can instead find value in one's own experience whatever that might be. After moving a bit, the potential of re-inventing oneself even becomes something of a thrill on its own, and one enjoys the sense of freedom as one's inner nomad kicks in :) One becomes faster at adapting, more resilient, more courageous, less attached to things that are anyway impermanent, and less worried about things that essentially don't matter so much — and also, ends up empathizing more with fellow humans of varying backgrounds and builds up a less judgmental openness to others' experiences. Friendships (the select ones that pass the test of distance and time) become stronger and one gets to be selective about the people that are closest to them and gets to know oneself better in the process. And there's something beautiful about knowing that one has close friends all across the world, even though one does not see them that often. 

4. Do you have any specific plans regarding your next steps?

I plan to stay put for a while, if given the opportunity. Moving offers a great many advantages but a bit more permanence is also necessary to build the sense of security that is required for pursuing more long-term activities and goals. One needs to be able to actively pursue change but one also needs to be able to take a breather and commit to a good thing for a while, and I feel like I have a good thing now. So as of now I don't have an immediate plan to move again, however I am decidedly not ruling it out for the future. In fact I harbor this half dream of eventually retiring home and living the simple life at some Greek island. But we shall see :) 

5. Did you feel you needed to move for your career to proceed or did it feel more like an optional voluntary decision?

I guess that depends on what "needed" means. I wouldn't say I needed to from e.g. a financial security perspective — I could have likely found a job right after my first degree and might have been ever more well off by now that I am presently. Nor did I really ever have a real childhood dream or set goal of pursuing an academic or research career. I was driven mostly by a general curiosity for life experiences, an interest for intellectual challenges and a will to not settle prematurely — from that point of view, I mostly chose from the available options the one that I felt best suited me at any given moment. For the most part, I moved when it was the right time for a change and I felt my available options at the old place (e.g. the types of jobs I would be able to find and the lifestyle I expected to be able to build around them) were not particularly exciting, or the opportunity at the new place was simply too good to resist (as was the case with this Austrian job). So I would say that me moving was more of an optional decision, but it felt almost as if I had no choice :) 

6. What advice about moving would you give to other (female) mathematicians/scientists?

Move (if your circumstances permit). Even, or especially, if you're scared of it. It is good for a well-rounded career, but don’t just do it for that. Do it because it keeps you young :) — you keep growing as a person, you gain perspectives that you don’t expect, and it has repercussions that you cannot imagine. And once you move (for the n-th time), and once you (once again) hit that inevitable wall of 'what am I doing over here/what am I going to do with myself'— don't panic, be patient and give it some time. The fun starts right after. But also — once you move, don't constantly look for the next thing. Give yourself some time to get acclimated, to get a good view of what the place and/or work environment has to offer and what it can turn you into, and make the best of the opportunity you chose. Then, if you feel stagnated, move again :)