Centralized vs distributed microscopy cores (pros & cons)

[Cromey, Douglas W - (dcromey)-2]

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
*****

Pretend for a moment that we are back in 2019, blissfully unaware of the covid-19 related challenges that we face now....

Later this week we will be discussing with our cores administration the pros & cons of cores run by a single person. We have mostly a distributed collection of cores here by virtue of our sprawling land grant campus (a colleague's optical microscopy core is over 1 mile away [1.6km] and a round-trip is typically 40-45min of travel time). To help us prepare, would you be willing to give us some feedback:

* What would you say are the strengths and weaknesses of centralized vs distributed microscopy cores? Other types of core services at our institution have centralized, but not microscopy.

* Since our discussion is mainly about personnel issues related to distributed cores run by one person, what pitfalls/problems would you highlight?

* Several of us at our institution have "been around for a long time". With money always being tight, any ideas for how to plan/prepare for our eventual replacement in a manner that best serves the users?

Thanks!
Doug

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Douglas W. Cromey, M.S. - Associate Scientific Investigator
Dept. of Cellular & Molecular Medicine, University of Arizona
Life Sciences North, Room 463
1333 N. Martin Ave, Tucson, AZ  85721 USA

office:  LSN 463        email: [hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>
voice:  520-626-2824       fax:  [phone]

UA Microscopy Alliance - http://microscopy.arizona.edu/
A collaborative effort to bring information about shared microscopy
facilities to the University of Arizona and the community.

[Craig Brideau]

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
*****

Generally, a centralized facility is more efficient from a staffing,
organizational, and supply perspective. In reality though, the microscope
often has to be located near the sample source. If the users are working
with live animal, an in-vivo system located inside the animal care
facility, or adjacent to a surgical suite, can be important. Even in the
case of a tissue bank, having the imaging system located proximal to the
tissue storage and preparation areas can be highly beneficial. Much of this
depends on the layout of your facility, but most campuses tend to be fairly
sprawling. This makes such centralization difficult, so it is often
necessary to provide many individual machines.

Craig

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 9:17 AM Cromey, Douglas W - (dcromey) <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
> *****
>
> Pretend for a moment that we are back in 2019, blissfully unaware of the
> covid-19 related challenges that we face now....
>
> Later this week we will be discussing with our cores administration the
> pros & cons of cores run by a single person. We have mostly a distributed
> collection of cores here by virtue of our sprawling land grant campus (a
> colleague's optical microscopy core is over 1 mile away [1.6km] and a
> round-trip is typically 40-45min of travel time). To help us prepare, would
> you be willing to give us some feedback:
>
> * What would you say are the strengths and weaknesses of centralized vs
> distributed microscopy cores? Other types of core services at our
> institution have centralized, but not microscopy.
>
> * Since our discussion is mainly about personnel issues related to
> distributed cores run by one person, what pitfalls/problems would you
> highlight?
>
> * Several of us at our institution have "been around for a long time".
> With money always being tight, any ideas for how to plan/prepare for our
> eventual replacement in a manner that best serves the users?
>
> Thanks!
> Doug
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Douglas W. Cromey, M.S. - Associate Scientific Investigator
> Dept. of Cellular & Molecular Medicine, University of Arizona
> Life Sciences North, Room 463
> 1333 N. Martin Ave, Tucson, AZ  85721 USA
>
> office:  LSN 463        email: [hidden email]<mailto:
> [hidden email]>
> voice:  520-626-2824       fax:  [phone]
>
> UA Microscopy Alliance - http://microscopy.arizona.edu/
> A collaborative effort to bring information about shared microscopy
> facilities to the University of Arizona and the community.
>

[0000001ed7f52e4a-dmarc-request]

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
*****

Hi Doug,

We are one facility but have two sites located about 4 miles apart. So this means we usually only goes to one of the sites and maybe visit the other in the afternoon. I think having people move between sites is good for holiday and sickness cover. But an advantage of having dedicated people for one site is that they know the research groups and projects very well and the other way round, so the support can be more dedicated to the individual needs. 

This poses the question: What is a facility? A selection of instruments? A group of dedicated people who run them? A set of rules for usage, charging etc? An entity some scientists or the institute's administration creates out of thin air (or on available funding)?

best wishes

Andreas


-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Brideau <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 16:53
Subject: Re: Centralized vs distributed microscopy cores (pros & cons)

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
*****

Generally, a centralized facility is more efficient from a staffing,
organizational, and supply perspective. In reality though, the microscope
often has to be located near the sample source. If the users are working
with live animal, an in-vivo system located inside the animal care
facility, or adjacent to a surgical suite, can be important. Even in the
case of a tissue bank, having the imaging system located proximal to the
tissue storage and preparation areas can be highly beneficial. Much of this
depends on the layout of your facility, but most campuses tend to be fairly
sprawling. This makes such centralization difficult, so it is often
necessary to provide many individual machines.

Craig

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 9:17 AM Cromey, Douglas W - (dcromey) <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
> Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
> *****
>
> Pretend for a moment that we are back in 2019, blissfully unaware of the
> covid-19 related challenges that we face now....
>
> Later this week we will be discussing with our cores administration the
> pros & cons of cores run by a single person. We have mostly a distributed
> collection of cores here by virtue of our sprawling land grant campus (a
> colleague's optical microscopy core is over 1 mile away [1.6km] and a
> round-trip is typically 40-45min of travel time). To help us prepare, would
> you be willing to give us some feedback:
>
> * What would you say are the strengths and weaknesses of centralized vs
> distributed microscopy cores? Other types of core services at our
> institution have centralized, but not microscopy.
>
> * Since our discussion is mainly about personnel issues related to
> distributed cores run by one person, what pitfalls/problems would you
> highlight?
>
> * Several of us at our institution have "been around for a long time".
> With money always being tight, any ideas for how to plan/prepare for our
> eventual replacement in a manner that best serves the users?
>
> Thanks!
> Doug
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Douglas W. Cromey, M.S. - Associate Scientific Investigator
> Dept. of Cellular & Molecular Medicine, University of Arizona
> Life Sciences North, Room 463
> 1333 N. Martin Ave, Tucson, AZ  85721 USA
>
> office:  LSN 463        email: [hidden email]<mailto:
> [hidden email]>
> voice:  520-626-2824      fax:  [phone]
>
> UA Microscopy Alliance - http://microscopy.arizona.edu/
> A collaborative effort to bring information about shared microscopy
> facilities to the University of Arizona and the community.
>

[Sylvie Le Guyader]

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
*****

Hi there

Working remotely (with the facility still open to users) during the pandemics has shown that if users are well trained and the equipment is well maintained, most help can be delivered remotely.
This is because the vast majority of the help we provide concerns
- software problems
- sample prep advice
- experimental design advice
- microscopy settings advice

All this can be delivered remotely. In case of a (rare) hardware problem, we have to be there physically.

Med vänlig hälsning / Best regards

Sylvie

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Sylvie Le Guyader, PhD
Live Cell Imaging Facility Manager
Karolinska Institutet- Bionut Dpt
Blickagången 16,
Room 7362 (lab)/7840 (office)
14157 Huddinge, Sweden
mobile: [phone]
LCI website
Follow our microscopy blog!

________________________________
From: Confocal Microscopy List <[hidden email]> on behalf of Andreas Bruckbauer <[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2020 11:42:27 AM
To: [hidden email] <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: Centralized vs distributed microscopy cores (pros & cons)

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.umn.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fwa%3FA0%3Dconfocalmicroscopy&amp;data=02%7C01%7Csylvie.le.guyader%40KI.SE%7Ca458b97322e443b53f7708d8404a31aa%7Cbff7eef1cf4b4f32be3da1dda043c05d%7C0%7C0%7C637330034704662174&amp;sdata=7bpzQXqD5UldYOASpl9B7hB6esBokTeJU%2BDorR0uLss%3D&amp;reserved=0
Post images on https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.imgur.com%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Csylvie.le.guyader%40KI.SE%7Ca458b97322e443b53f7708d8404a31aa%7Cbff7eef1cf4b4f32be3da1dda043c05d%7C0%7C0%7C637330034704662174&amp;sdata=p9BwsJYPFY7TnPoLxMyn5wQT8PL5KKbtUnpyvY%2FYbLU%3D&amp;reserved=0 and include the link in your posting.
*****

Hi Doug,

We are one facility but have two sites located about 4 miles apart. So this means we usually only goes to one of the sites and maybe visit the other in the afternoon. I think having people move between sites is good for holiday and sickness cover. But an advantage of having dedicated people for one site is that they know the research groups and projects very well and the other way round, so the support can be more dedicated to the individual needs.

This poses the question: What is a facility? A selection of instruments? A group of dedicated people who run them? A set of rules for usage, charging etc? An entity some scientists or the institute's administration creates out of thin air (or on available funding)?

best wishes

Andreas


-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Brideau <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 16:53
Subject: Re: Centralized vs distributed microscopy cores (pros & cons)

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.umn.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fwa%3FA0%3Dconfocalmicroscopy&amp;data=02%7C01%7Csylvie.le.guyader%40KI.SE%7Ca458b97322e443b53f7708d8404a31aa%7Cbff7eef1cf4b4f32be3da1dda043c05d%7C0%7C0%7C637330034704662174&amp;sdata=7bpzQXqD5UldYOASpl9B7hB6esBokTeJU%2BDorR0uLss%3D&amp;reserved=0
Post images on https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.imgur.com%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Csylvie.le.guyader%40KI.SE%7Ca458b97322e443b53f7708d8404a31aa%7Cbff7eef1cf4b4f32be3da1dda043c05d%7C0%7C0%7C637330034704662174&amp;sdata=p9BwsJYPFY7TnPoLxMyn5wQT8PL5KKbtUnpyvY%2FYbLU%3D&amp;reserved=0 and include the link in your posting.
*****

Generally, a centralized facility is more efficient from a staffing,
organizational, and supply perspective. In reality though, the microscope
often has to be located near the sample source. If the users are working
with live animal, an in-vivo system located inside the animal care
facility, or adjacent to a surgical suite, can be important. Even in the
case of a tissue bank, having the imaging system located proximal to the
tissue storage and preparation areas can be highly beneficial. Much of this
depends on the layout of your facility, but most campuses tend to be fairly
sprawling. This makes such centralization difficult, so it is often
necessary to provide many individual machines.

Craig

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 9:17 AM Cromey, Douglas W - (dcromey) <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
> https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.umn.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fwa%3FA0%3Dconfocalmicroscopy&amp;data=02%7C01%7Csylvie.le.guyader%40KI.SE%7Ca458b97322e443b53f7708d8404a31aa%7Cbff7eef1cf4b4f32be3da1dda043c05d%7C0%7C0%7C637330034704662174&amp;sdata=7bpzQXqD5UldYOASpl9B7hB6esBokTeJU%2BDorR0uLss%3D&amp;reserved=0
> Post images on https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.imgur.com%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Csylvie.le.guyader%40KI.SE%7Ca458b97322e443b53f7708d8404a31aa%7Cbff7eef1cf4b4f32be3da1dda043c05d%7C0%7C0%7C637330034704662174&amp;sdata=p9BwsJYPFY7TnPoLxMyn5wQT8PL5KKbtUnpyvY%2FYbLU%3D&amp;reserved=0 and include the link in your posting.
> *****
>
> Pretend for a moment that we are back in 2019, blissfully unaware of the
> covid-19 related challenges that we face now....
>
> Later this week we will be discussing with our cores administration the
> pros & cons of cores run by a single person. We have mostly a distributed
> collection of cores here by virtue of our sprawling land grant campus (a
> colleague's optical microscopy core is over 1 mile away [1.6km] and a
> round-trip is typically 40-45min of travel time). To help us prepare, would
> you be willing to give us some feedback:
>
> * What would you say are the strengths and weaknesses of centralized vs
> distributed microscopy cores? Other types of core services at our
> institution have centralized, but not microscopy.
>
> * Since our discussion is mainly about personnel issues related to
> distributed cores run by one person, what pitfalls/problems would you
> highlight?
>
> * Several of us at our institution have "been around for a long time".
> With money always being tight, any ideas for how to plan/prepare for our
> eventual replacement in a manner that best serves the users?
>
> Thanks!
> Doug
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Douglas W. Cromey, M.S. - Associate Scientific Investigator
> Dept. of Cellular & Molecular Medicine, University of Arizona
> Life Sciences North, Room 463
> 1333 N. Martin Ave, Tucson, AZ  85721 USA
>
> office:  LSN 463        email: [hidden email]<mailto:
> [hidden email]>
> voice:  520-626-2824      fax:  [phone]
>
> UA Microscopy Alliance - https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmicroscopy.arizona.edu%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Csylvie.le.guyader%40KI.SE%7Ca458b97322e443b53f7708d8404a31aa%7Cbff7eef1cf4b4f32be3da1dda043c05d%7C0%7C0%7C637330034704662174&amp;sdata=hyAAP5VhBoWUzuDvDiGbCtX4uzzbVqvWbusE%2FfuGu88%3D&amp;reserved=0
> A collaborative effort to bring information about shared microscopy
> facilities to the University of Arizona and the community.
>

När du skickar e-post till Karolinska Institutet (KI) innebär detta att KI kommer att behandla dina personuppgifter. Här finns information om hur KI behandlar personuppgifter<https://ki.se/medarbetare/integritetsskyddspolicy>.


Sending email to Karolinska Institutet (KI) will result in KI processing your personal data. You can read more about KI's processing of personal data here<https://ki.se/en/staff/data-protection-policy>.

[Craig Brideau]

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
*****

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 6:25 AM Sylvie Le Guyader <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Working remotely (with the facility still open to users) during the
> pandemics has shown that if users are well trained and the equipment is
> well maintained, most help can be delivered remotely.
>

Sylvie brings up a great point. If you invest time up front in training
your users they can be fairly self sufficient. This opens up a few
questions and issues, however:

Do you want your core to emphasize providing service? I.e. minimal training
to the users, but staff provide ample support and their time to help users
prepare experiments. In essence the users are button-pushers, with all the
details handled by staff; the users are just taught a rote formula to
obtain images and they stick to it. This puts the onus and cost on the
core, so either you have higher core fees to compensate staff time or
additional support funding. This is not necessarily a bad model as many
researchers prefer to concentrate on their field and have no wish to learn
microscopy. It allows users to focus on the "squishy" side of experiments
while the core handles all the "crunchy" technical details. In situations
like the one we are currently in this model can be vulnerable as the
operation of the facility is more dependent on staff. Pandemics aside, if a
staff member leaves that can also cause issues for numerous projects.

Alternatively, do you invest effort up front training your users to better
understand the equipment? This lets them troubleshoot, plan experiments on
their own, and generally be self sufficient. This puts the onus on
training, and either you charge training fees or again fold the costs into
general facility fees. The advantage of this model is the system is more
robust, in that the unavailability of a staff member does not halt work and
users are often able to quickly solve minor problems on their own,
improving the speed of their workflow. The drawback is you must have users
willing to learn the "crunchy" side of things and acquire at least some
basic microscopy skills.

Craig

[Cammer, Michael-2]

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
*****

We had a long discussion about this in Oct 2009, essentially training button pushers versus creative experts.  There was no consensus.  

Different labs do things very differently.  

A majority of our training regimen is of the button pushing type.  People want answers fast, don’t have the tolerance or interest for longer training, or want to keep costs down.  (Today someone wrote to me contrasting data from a Leica confocal with data from a "compound microscope", in fact an Apotome.  At least I wasn't the person who did the training...)
Some users already are microscopists and others do become experts.  Some crave knowing more and we will teach all we know until they know more than we do.
But to repeat, most are satisfied with and/or are only tolerant of the most cursory training to get them the minimal pictures they need to satisfy their project.

But this wasn't the question.  I replied to the original question with a much longer rambling email.  I will try to summarize here.

Having a core with one staff member requires substantial management of expectations to protect the staff.  For instance, one person cannot always be available and clients must understand this.  Unless the staff likes to work all the time, uninterrupted evenings, weekends, vacations need to be managed.  If someone is on call when traveling, the institution needs to pay for the technology for this.  When staff is training one user, another cannot demand immediate help.

When I was sole proprietor of a core, it was very difficult to leave the lab for even an hour.  And now, with equipment scattered all over campus, we have issues of quality control and when people need help, even expert users, sometimes it is difficult to provide it immediately.  A centralized core with maybe a satellite instrument here or there is the way to go.


Michael Cammer, Sr Research Scientist, DART Microscopy Laboratory
NYU Langone Health, 540 First Avenue, SK2 Microscopy Suite, New York, NY  10016
Office: 646-501-0567 Cell: 914-309-3270  [hidden email]  
http://nyulmc.org/micros  http://microscopynotes.com/
 





-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Craig Brideau
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2020 12:19 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Centralized vs distributed microscopy cores (pros & cons)

[EXTERNAL]


On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 6:25 AM Sylvie Le Guyader <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Working remotely (with the facility still open to users) during the
> pandemics has shown that if users are well trained and the equipment
> is well maintained, most help can be delivered remotely.
>

Sylvie brings up a great point. If you invest time up front in training your users they can be fairly self sufficient. This opens up a few questions and issues, however:

Do you want your core to emphasize providing service? I.e. minimal training to the users, but staff provide ample support and their time to help users prepare experiments. In essence the users are button-pushers, with all the details handled by staff; the users are just taught a rote formula to obtain images and they stick to it. This puts the onus and cost on the core, so either you have higher core fees to compensate staff time or additional support funding. This is not necessarily a bad model as many researchers prefer to concentrate on their field and have no wish to learn microscopy. It allows users to focus on the "squishy" side of experiments while the core handles all the "crunchy" technical details. In situations like the one we are currently in this model can be vulnerable as the operation of the facility is more dependent on staff. Pandemics aside, if a staff member leaves that can also cause issues for numerous projects.

Alternatively, do you invest effort up front training your users to better understand the equipment? This lets them troubleshoot, plan experiments on their own, and generally be self sufficient. This puts the onus on training, and either you charge training fees or again fold the costs into general facility fees. The advantage of this model is the system is more robust, in that the unavailability of a staff member does not halt work and users are often able to quickly solve minor problems on their own, improving the speed of their workflow. The drawback is you must have users willing to learn the "crunchy" side of things and acquire at least some basic microscopy skills.

Craig

[Cammer, Michael-2]

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
*****

p.s.
1.  Sorry for the incorrect date; the discussion on best practices on this listserv was Oct 2019.
2.  The original question discussed a pre-covid or non-covid world.  Our facility is doing in person trainings.  We eased into it since June, but we are now doing it with masks, glasses or eye shields,a nd clean gloved or sanitized hands.  One modification is teaching software part of running the scope by Zoom.  This may remain SOP because it is better than over-the-shoulder.  Therefore, my call for centralized core stands even in covid-world.
-Michael C.



-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Cammer, Michael
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2020 2:44 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Centralized vs distributed microscopy cores (pros & cons)

[EXTERNAL]

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.umn.edu_cgi-2Dbin_wa-3FA0-3Dconfocalmicroscopy&d=DwIGaQ&c=j5oPpO0eBH1iio48DtsedeElZfc04rx3ExJHeIIZuCs&r=E0xNnPAQpUbDiPlC50tp7rW2nBkvV7fujQf0RknE5bU&m=HzqZfR4X40x5ezQSzHKs0EUeNhmJwNw1OekmJb2bxhY&s=CsIB1rxFrnxSVfeIhkU3ON6jdRSe8-3tpeglTfW9T94&e=
Post images on https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.imgur.com&d=DwIGaQ&c=j5oPpO0eBH1iio48DtsedeElZfc04rx3ExJHeIIZuCs&r=E0xNnPAQpUbDiPlC50tp7rW2nBkvV7fujQf0RknE5bU&m=HzqZfR4X40x5ezQSzHKs0EUeNhmJwNw1OekmJb2bxhY&s=yu7XK9JTLip-9DUiKQPK5NSKs1BjVpvkZ4AqQQz8bJM&e=  and include the link in your posting.
*****

We had a long discussion about this in Oct 2009, essentially training button pushers versus creative experts.  There was no consensus.

Different labs do things very differently.

A majority of our training regimen is of the button pushing type.  People want answers fast, don’t have the tolerance or interest for longer training, or want to keep costs down.  (Today someone wrote to me contrasting data from a Leica confocal with data from a "compound microscope", in fact an Apotome.  At least I wasn't the person who did the training...) Some users already are microscopists and others do become experts.  Some crave knowing more and we will teach all we know until they know more than we do.
But to repeat, most are satisfied with and/or are only tolerant of the most cursory training to get them the minimal pictures they need to satisfy their project.

But this wasn't the question.  I replied to the original question with a much longer rambling email.  I will try to summarize here.

Having a core with one staff member requires substantial management of expectations to protect the staff.  For instance, one person cannot always be available and clients must understand this.  Unless the staff likes to work all the time, uninterrupted evenings, weekends, vacations need to be managed.  If someone is on call when traveling, the institution needs to pay for the technology for this.  When staff is training one user, another cannot demand immediate help.

When I was sole proprietor of a core, it was very difficult to leave the lab for even an hour.  And now, with equipment scattered all over campus, we have issues of quality control and when people need help, even expert users, sometimes it is difficult to provide it immediately.  A centralized core with maybe a satellite instrument here or there is the way to go.


Michael Cammer, Sr Research Scientist, DART Microscopy Laboratory NYU Langone Health, 540 First Avenue, SK2 Microscopy Suite, New York, NY  10016
Office: 646-501-0567 Cell: 914-309-3270  [hidden email]
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__nyulmc.org_micros&d=DwIGaQ&c=j5oPpO0eBH1iio48DtsedeElZfc04rx3ExJHeIIZuCs&r=E0xNnPAQpUbDiPlC50tp7rW2nBkvV7fujQf0RknE5bU&m=HzqZfR4X40x5ezQSzHKs0EUeNhmJwNw1OekmJb2bxhY&s=7TbXs_U2mOvYaIMsfUlmX2mBQzKEaJcy-bR51wLJdT0&e=   https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__microscopynotes.com_&d=DwIGaQ&c=j5oPpO0eBH1iio48DtsedeElZfc04rx3ExJHeIIZuCs&r=E0xNnPAQpUbDiPlC50tp7rW2nBkvV7fujQf0RknE5bU&m=HzqZfR4X40x5ezQSzHKs0EUeNhmJwNw1OekmJb2bxhY&s=I-1WGln6PLLQL-fDpwt8_ybBL90nOf_6CIqQxtDOcKg&e=






-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Craig Brideau
Sent: Friday, August 14, 2020 12:19 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Centralized vs distributed microscopy cores (pros & cons)

[EXTERNAL]


On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 6:25 AM Sylvie Le Guyader <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Working remotely (with the facility still open to users) during the
> pandemics has shown that if users are well trained and the equipment
> is well maintained, most help can be delivered remotely.
>

Sylvie brings up a great point. If you invest time up front in training your users they can be fairly self sufficient. This opens up a few questions and issues, however:

Do you want your core to emphasize providing service? I.e. minimal training to the users, but staff provide ample support and their time to help users prepare experiments. In essence the users are button-pushers, with all the details handled by staff; the users are just taught a rote formula to obtain images and they stick to it. This puts the onus and cost on the core, so either you have higher core fees to compensate staff time or additional support funding. This is not necessarily a bad model as many researchers prefer to concentrate on their field and have no wish to learn microscopy. It allows users to focus on the "squishy" side of experiments while the core handles all the "crunchy" technical details. In situations like the one we are currently in this model can be vulnerable as the operation of the facility is more dependent on staff. Pandemics aside, if a staff member leaves that can also cause issues for numerous projects.

Alternatively, do you invest effort up front training your users to better understand the equipment? This lets them troubleshoot, plan experiments on their own, and generally be self sufficient. This puts the onus on training, and either you charge training fees or again fold the costs into general facility fees. The advantage of this model is the system is more robust, in that the unavailability of a staff member does not halt work and users are often able to quickly solve minor problems on their own, improving the speed of their workflow. The drawback is you must have users willing to learn the "crunchy" side of things and acquire at least some basic microscopy skills.

Craig

[Claire Brown]

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
*****

We are managing equipment for 3 core facilities and instruments for two other groups. Because of this we are managing most of the light microscopes in our part of campus (in 3 buildings, 4 departments) and can really make sure people use the best instrument for their research questions and that the instruments are used as much as possible. This can only be done with central management. When we started managing the Biology microscopes they didn't even know about the Advanced BioImaging Facility (ABIF) in the faculty of medicine. In turn, the ABIF users didn't know they had access to the equipment in Biology which has unique features.

Since we have 15 instruments now we also have enough resources for 3 full time staff. Don't estimate the importance of having multiple staff. No one staff is going to have all the expertise and each member will have unique strengths to bring to the table. One might love the technical details, another has all the tricks for sample preparation and another can write that macro for ImageJ. They can also bounce ideas off of each other, tech each other and of course the things that have already been said of covering for vacations and redundancy in knowledge.

I think the centralized vs distributed is important for the infrastructure and the needs of the researchers but having a team of imaging scientists is much better than single imaging scientist cores regardless of where the infrastructure is.

I would even argue if there is not enough funding for more staff that staff in different cores should make a team and interact even if it is just for sharing management ideas and soft skills and of course someone to vent to and keep mental health under control.

Claire

[Oliver Biehlmaier-2]

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
*****

I fully agree with Claire in the situations that she pointed out.

However, there is one thing that I noticed in the past years with fellow facilities around us in Europe and in particular when reviewing grants or individual facilities:
It is usually way harder to get things organized and payed in distributed facilities and the organizational burden on the respective facility managers is even higher than in centralized ones.
Also, in quite some cases of distributed facilities the facility mainly exists on paper to get more and better funds than individual groups would be able to apply for. In these cases the life of the facility mangers is even harder as they will have little to no right to say how the future of the facility should be shaped.

So, if possible, I recommend to spend enough time and money on planning a centralized facility with suitable rooms concerning number, size, cooling, etc as well as on the amount of staff that should be recruited.

Best,
Oliver



Oliver Biehlmaier, PhD | Head of Imaging Core Facility  | Biozentrum, University of Basel | Klingelbergstrasse 50/70 | CH-4056 Basel
Phone: [phone] | Email: [hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]> | www.biozentrum.unibas.ch/imcf<http://www.biozentrum.unibas.ch/imcf> | www.microscopynetwork.unibas.ch<http://www.microscopynetwork.unibas.ch/> | https://www.ls2.ch/sections/microscopy | @imcf_basel<https://twitter.com/imcf_basel> | Online office: https://wiki.biozentrum.unibas.ch/x/YFYfCw





On 18 Aug 2020, at 05:53, Claire Brown <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
Post images on http://www.imgur.com and include the link in your posting.
*****

We are managing equipment for 3 core facilities and instruments for two other groups. Because of this we are managing most of the light microscopes in our part of campus (in 3 buildings, 4 departments) and can really make sure people use the best instrument for their research questions and that the instruments are used as much as possible. This can only be done with central management. When we started managing the Biology microscopes they didn't even know about the Advanced BioImaging Facility (ABIF) in the faculty of medicine. In turn, the ABIF users didn't know they had access to the equipment in Biology which has unique features.

Since we have 15 instruments now we also have enough resources for 3 full time staff. Don't estimate the importance of having multiple staff. No one staff is going to have all the expertise and each member will have unique strengths to bring to the table. One might love the technical details, another has all the tricks for sample preparation and another can write that macro for ImageJ. They can also bounce ideas off of each other, tech each other and of course the things that have already been said of covering for vacations and redundancy in knowledge.

I think the centralized vs distributed is important for the infrastructure and the needs of the researchers but having a team of imaging scientists is much better than single imaging scientist cores regardless of where the infrastructure is.

I would even argue if there is not enough funding for more staff that staff in different cores should make a team and interact even if it is just for sharing management ideas and soft skills and of course someone to vent to and keep mental health under control.

Claire