When I applied for the CRUK Bridge to Academic Leadership (BAL) programme, I did so with a quiet mix of curiosity, hope, and exhaustion.

Like many early career researchers working at the translational edge of cancer science, I’d reached a point where scientific vision alone wasn’t enough – I needed the leadership skills, the strategic insight, and, frankly, the confidence to push my ideas forward.

As a senior research fellow working towards independence and building a translational programme in head and neck cancer, I was increasingly aware that leading a research vision requires more than scientific expertise – it demands clarity of direction, time management, and the ability to advocate for your work in a competitive funding landscape. The BAL programme offered a rare opportunity to step back from the day-to-day and focus on developing those broader capabilities in a focused, reflective environment.

Delivered across multiple sessions at locations throughout the UK, the programme brought together researchers at similar stages, each grappling with the same questions: How do I lead? How do I fund my future? How do I stay grounded in science while building something bigger?

The personal coaching sessions were a particular highlight. In a research environment that often prioritises outputs over reflection, having the space to examine my own working style, boundaries, and ambitions was both refreshing and transformative. I’ve already implemented several of the strategies we discussed – including carving out protected writing time and clearly shaping my research narrative across multiple funding schemes.

Of course, the most difficult part was writing an almost complete career development fellowship during the programme. In hindsight, however, it proved to be the most defining. It forced me to consolidate my thinking, articulate a long-term vision, and approach my research through the lens of funding strategy, not just scientific merit. It also pushed me to find clarity around the broader impact of my work – and how to communicate that value across disciplinary boundaries.

As a researcher focused on complex modelling of the tumour microenvironment in head and neck cancer, I’m particularly interested in how pathogenic changes to the extracellular matrix (ECM) drive disease progression. My work aims to untangle these interactions and develop tools – including bioengineered models and AI-supported digital pathology – to better understand how ECM dynamics influence therapeutic response.

The BAL programme helped me recognise how to position that complexity as a strength, and to develop a leadership identity that reflects the interdisciplinary nature of my research. I’m now refining that fellowship application, strengthening collaborative ties, and thinking more strategically about the kind of leader I want to become – one who not only drives impactful science but also creates space for others to do the same.

Kolkata – the “city of joy” – in India, meant everything to me. It is where I studied from nursery to PhD until I began my postdoctoral research at Queen’s University Belfast (QUB).

Over the past three years, with invaluable support from my mentor, Dr Mehdi Jafarnehjad, and QUB, I have undergone a significant transformation. However, I still lacked confidence in my potential as a future scientist, considering it just an ambitious dream. So, when I heard about the BAL programme from a colleague and CRUK Fellow Dr Emma Kerr last year, I was excited and felt it could be my next step.

I want to be an independent scientist, but I was unsure how to achieve my ambitions. While passion is my catalyst, I needed guidance on the steps to succeed. To my surprise, I was selected to become one of the BAL trainees. I was overjoyed and overwhelmed – this was a significant step for a boy from Agarpara, the small suburb where I lived in Kolkata.

To start, I need to carefully carve out my own research niche that is unique, innovative, and relevant to funders. Great ideas are just the beginning; I need to transform them into compelling pitches with clear vision and deliverables, avoiding being overambitious and including realistic mitigation plans. I must seek feedback from as many people as possible and absorb it effectively. Thanks to Dr Emma Kerr (CRUK Fellow, QUB) and Dr Kerrie Marie (CRUK Fellow, University of Manchester) for the lengthy discussions and constructive criticisms over the BAL grant application.

I have learnt that my pitch should be concise, simple, and jargon-free. It’s about honest communication – not how I feel, but what I convey. I have come to realise that scientific leadership is a mental state; it involves more than research or discoveries – it includes budgeting, recruitment, and administrative work. These elements are interconnected and cannot be deprioritised over the other. I need to determine what’s necessary and what can be borrowed or shared from collaborators or central facilities, considering our limited resources. Hiring new team members will shape the lab’s environment; it must align with my future vision. Delayed hiring is better than appointing unsuitable candidates.

Although I struggle with imposter syndrome, I’ve learnt to recognise that personal imperfections are acceptable; however, clear scientific communication and thinking are essential for becoming a successful scientist. The BAL programme has developed my scientific abilities in ways I did not anticipate.

Thanks to CRUK for igniting my ambition to become a successful future scientist.

Starting the programme at this stage of my career, I was keen to develop my research niche and improve my grant writing skills – I am discovering this is a completely different skillset, being too humble is not helpful! By the end I realised I gained so much more.

During online and face-to-face workshops we received training on developing our research niche, writing a concept note, pitching for funding, and building and managing a team. My experience was further enriched through mentorship from a senior professional outside academia. My mentor is great! She helped me challenge my fears and misconceptions about leading teams and offered practical advice on career planning. Despite her seniority she was relatable and happily shared personal life experiences which made me feel comfortable enough to have honest discussions.

Guidance on common pitfalls to avoid and key areas to highlight in a grant application from funding panel committee members, alongside the process of writing a grant outline, was invaluable. As was the opportunity to observe a funding panel and to review both successful and unsuccessful grant applications – an opportunity not often available to postdocs. That provided key insights that will inform how I write future proposals. I particularly noted the extra importance of study impact and inclusion of collaborators with complementary skills. Moreover, with the constant demands on your time as a postdoc, the programme offered rare, protected time for reflection, allowing me to clarify my values as a researcher and to consider how they would inform my approach to leadership. Best of all, we were given the opportunity to apply for £25k to build my research niche and support training to enhance my skills and ultimately strengthen future funding applications.

Leaving the programme, I feel equipped with a well-crafted funding proposal which will now serve as a template for my future grant submissions. Conducting a Belbin review during the programme provided feedback on how my supervisors, peers and supervisees view my role in my research team, an exercise I would not have otherwise done, but which was great to highlight my keys strengths and to inform areas of development moving forward.

The postdoc journey can be demanding, balancing the pressure to produce impactful research, build networks, and secure funding through fellowship applications, with low success rates even for well-developed proposals. I was therefore thrilled to be awarded one of the BAL £25k grants which I will use to develop my research niche and technical skills through a visit to a US research group specialising in molecular epidemiology and to attend relevant training courses and conferences over the next two years.

While the transition ahead will be a challenging, I now feel better equipped with practical tools and a supportive network of other postdocs navigating the same process.

I had reached a point in my career where I was working to a high level and had developed my own research aspirations but had hit a ceiling that limited what I could achieve.

Despite a decent track record, I had failed to generate funding as a postdoc and was therefore denied promotion. There were only a handful of small grants available to me as a postdoc, and so I thought that perhaps I should just apply for bigger ones and make a proper go of it. I knew that, if I was going to be successful, I would need every bit of guidance available to me and as much feedback as I could stomach.

So things kicked off on a blowy day in London at the CRUK offices, where I met the rest of my cohort. After some icebreakers, we were down to business: sharing and developing the outline of our ideas and meeting recent fellowship recipients to shape our expectations for what was to come. Over the following months we were exposed to everything shaping the PI experience, while being jockeyed to build a competitive fellowship proposal.

What was really indispensable, and quite frankly unmatched by anything else available to me, was the consistent process of submission, feedback and refinement. We were put into situations where we had to pitch our ideas to each other and a panel of experts, and gave critiques of successful and unsuccessful grants ourselves, all at the level we were pitching to. Most important however was the mutual support from across the cohort of participants. Hearing about each other’s trials and tribulations, particularly in the latter sessions where our facilitator kept me going through a process that is undeniably difficult.

The BAL didn’t just help me realise how to go about interacting with potential host institutes and the necessary intellectual tools to craft a fellowship proposal, but put me in a better position when applying for junior group leader positions further afield. Like fellowships in the UK, these are highly competitive entry points into independence and the BAL put me into the best position for winning one of these roles. As I write this, I am only a couple of weeks into starting my own lab in Munich, for which the BAL programme has been absolutely key, especially in helping me to negotiate a better starting package and to go about making my first hires.

The BAL not only gave me dedicated mental space to outline my future research aspirations but actively pushed me into creativity and kept me producing. As a new PI, the fun is only just beginning, and I’ll be submitting these to a range of German and EU funding initiatives.

Quite frankly, I can’t wait to get going and I absolutely wouldn’t be in this position without the BAL.