u/FluidBasil7437

Has anyone here gone through the process as an international postdoc or postdoctoral fellow in Türkiye?
I recently completed my PhD in Türkiye and currently hold a one-year short-term residence permit for job seeking. I’ve been offered a TÜBİTAK 2247-funded postdoctoral fellowship at koç university.
I’m trying to understand the administrative process before I start. Specifically:
Will the university apply for my work permit, or is my current residence permit sufficient?
What documents did the university ask you to provide?
Did you need to notify the Directorate of Migration Management (Göç İdaresi), or was everything handled by the university?
I’d really appreciate hearing from anyone who has been in a similar situation. Thanks!

A PI recently advertised on LinkedIn that she was recruiting three postdocs. My research area overlaps closely with hers, so I emailed her with my CV and cover letter. In my cover letter, I also mentioned that I currently live in City X, while the position is in City Y, so I would need to relocate if offered the position.

Two days later, she replied. The email was very brief and mainly pointed out the salary, almost as if she wanted to make sure I was aware of it before going any further. She also included her phone number.
To be honest, although the salary is lower than I’d ideally like, I genuinely like the research topic, so I decided it wasn’t a dealbreaker.
Since she had shared her number, I called. She answered, said she was in a meeting, and told me she would call me back later that day. She never did🥲
The next day, instead of calling again, I sent a polite email saying that I’d tried to reach her, understood she was busy, and that I am still very interested in the position. I said I’d be happy to discuss it further whenever she have time.
She replied saying, “Sorry, I forgot to call you. Let’s meet online on Friday at 10:30.”
I replied immediately confirming that the date and time worked for me.
Friday came… and I never received a meeting link or any further message from her.

At this point, I’m not sure what to do. Should I send one more follow-up email, or should I take this as a sign that she’s no longer interested and move on? Has anyone experienced something similar?

Hi everyone,
I would really appreciate hearing from people who have received an MSCA PF or have experience with the application process.

How novel does a project need to be for an MSCA proposal, considering that it has to be completed within two years? Sometimes you may have a very exciting and ambitious hypothesis, but realistically it cannot be fully addressed within such a short timeframe. Given how competitive MSCA is, how do you balance being innovative with being feasible?

I am also a bit confused about the budget side of things, especially for expensive techniques. For example, if you plan to include RNA-seq, single-cell analyses, or other omics approaches, how are these costs usually covered? As far as I understand, MSCA provides a monthly Research, Training and Networking Contribution (around €1,000/month) and a Management and Indirect Costs Contribution.

What I do not fully understand is whether this research budget is transferred directly to the host institution and whether the host lab is expected to cover consumables and costly experiments from that budget. Does it therefore matter if the host lab already has active grants? For instance, if a project requires several rounds of RNA-seq, would the MSCA budget typically be sufficient, or is it generally expected that the host laboratory has additional funding available?

I would be very grateful for any insights, especially from people who were successful in obtaining an MSCA fellowship.Gracias🙏

Hey everyone,
I’m looking for some real-world experiences with applying to MSCA. Has anyone here applied before and had their proposal rejected?
I’m especially curious about what actually makes a proposal competitive. The official guidelines are one thing, but the reality seems a bit more unpredictable.

How much does the overall “success probability” depend on things like project design vs. PI reputation or host institution? And in practice, what tends to be valued more: strong in vivo work, clinical relevance, or is it more about conceptual novelty and interdisciplinary angle?

Also wondering about expectations during the project itself. Do reviewers lean more toward ambitious translational/clinical setups, or are solid mechanistic preclinical studies still considered equally strong if the rationale is good.

Another thing I’m unsure about is how much the host lab’s background really matters. For example, would it be seen as a disadvantage to apply with a newly established lab, even if the PI is strong scientifically? Or is it generally more strategic to go with a PI who already has a track record of successful grants (even if they haven’t specifically had MSCA funding before)? How much does the lab’s funding history actually influence the decision?

Would really appreciate insights from PIs or postdocs who’ve been through the process or seen it from the evaluation side. The whole thing feels a bit like trying to optimize a very expensive lottery ticket with very specific rules that nobody fully agrees on.

I just got rejected from a postdoc position at Karolinska Institute, and honestly I feel pretty desperate right now.😞
I had an interview for a project I was genuinely excited about, and I can’t stop thinking that I ruined one of my best chances. I keep replaying the interview in my head and wondering what I should have said differently.
What frustrates me the most is that it feels like nobody wants to give fresh PhD graduates a chance. So many postdoc positions seem to expect applicants to already have years of experience with exactly the techniques they use. But how are we supposed to gain that experience if no one is willing to train us?

Hi guys, I had a postdoc interview last Friday, and the PI mentioned that they would likely make a decision in the beginning of this week about whether they want to continue with my application or not.

It’s now Wednesday and I haven’t heard anything yet. I’m not sure what the usual expectation is in this situation.I’m also aware that I might be a bit impatient here, but since they specifically said “beginning of the week” and I haven’t heard back, it’s starting to cause a bit of anxiety and uncertainty.

Would it be appropriate to send a follow-up email at this point to express continued interest and gently check on the status? Or is it better to wait a bit longer?
If any PIs or experienced postdocs are here, I would really appreciate your perspective

I’ve been applying for about six months and the experience has been pretty discouraging. I tailor my CV for each position, write a specific cover letter, read the PI’s publications, and make sure my background closely matches the advertised role before applying. Despite that, I’ve submitted around 30 applications and only received 2-3 interviews, none of which led to an offer.

What frustrates me the most is the amount of ghosting. Many positions never send any response at all, even after interviews.

I’m also not based in Europe, so I’m wondering whether location is playing a role as well.

Is anyone else experiencing the same thing? Has the postdoc market become significantly more competitive in the last couple of years, or am I just having particularly bad luck?

A friend of mine is in a difficult situation, and I’m curious what others would do in their place.

She completed a one-year postdoc contract and left the position at the end of the appointment. One of the main reasons for leaving was that she felt shewas being treated differently after their supervisor and lab manager appeared to figure out her sexual orientation. Both individuals were very religious and held strongly conservative views, and according to my friend, the atmosphere became increasingly hostile and toxic over time.

My friend never filed a formal complaint and simply decided to leave when the contract ended. She is now applying for new postdoctoral positions and have not listed that supervisor as a reference.

The concern is what happens if a future PI wants to contact the former supervisor during a background check. Should my friend explain the situation honestly if asked why that supervisor is not being used as a reference? Or is it better to keep the explanation brief and simply say they prefer to use other professional references?

Has anyone been in a similar situation, either as a candidate or as a PI? How was it handled?

Has anyone here interviewed for a postdoc position at Karolinska Institutet?
I’ve been invited to a first interview with the PI and I’m curious about the process. How does it usually work, how challenging is it, and are there typically additional interview rounds after the PI interview?

I’d also love to hear about the research environment and overall experience at KI.
Thanks!

I had a postdoc interview, and honestly, I feel like I blew it. The technical part went well, and I was able to answer the scientific questions, but I keep overthinking the behavioral part. English isn’t my first language, and there were a few moments where I paused, struggled to find the right words, or felt like I didn’t express myself clearly. Not sure if anyone else does this after interviews.

I recently had a postdoc interview for a biomedical research position . The technical part went well overall. I was able to explain my PhD work and my previous postdoc experience,experimental design, and answer questions about validation and mechanisms in the new project.

However, I’m really worried about the behavioral/communication part.and I’m now overthinking it.

During the interview:
I sometimes froze or paused too long before answering questions
My answers were probably shorter than they expected in behavioral questions
I struggled a bit to structure my responses under pressure
I had a few awkward moments where I couldn’t find the right word (English is not my first language).

Beyond technical questions they asked:
1. What is a good supervisor?
I explained that good supervision is a balance between independence and support. I mentioned that I experienced different styles during my PhD and postdoc one supervisor was very supportive but expected high independence, while another was very controlling. I said the balance between the two is important.
2. Did you supervise anyone before?
I said yes — I supervised a master’s student in my PI’s lab. The project was originally my idea, and I guided her through it.
3. What was challenging about supervising?
I said that I tend to be very detail-oriented, and that this might sometimes be challenging in mentoring. I tried to explain that I’m aware of this as a potential weak side and that it could sometimes affect how trainees experience feedback.
However, I now feel like I may have phrased things awkwardly, especially when talking about being “too detail-oriented,” and I’m worried it might have come across negatively.
At the end of the interview, the PI said she will interview other candidates and decide next week about moving forward to a second round. She also said I can email her if I need anything.
Now I’m overthinking everything and feeling like I might have hurt my chances because of communication issues, even though I think the technical part was solid.