Another question asked about the differences between presenting to academics and practitioners. Vanesa noted that practitioners are more results-driven, whereas Grazia stressed that academics focus on novelty. Francisco highlighted the importance of understanding the audience’s perspective before presenting findings, and the panellists agreed that communicating OR should be taught as part of formal training.
The discussion also touched on presentation style. Francisco shared advice from his sister, an interior designer, who recommended using more colour in slides and holding a pen while presenting to reduce nerves. Grazia encouraged having a strong opening and closing line, ideally memorised if you are introverted, and reassured attendees not to feel guilty about lacking flamboyance on stage. Vanesa stressed the importance of honesty when presenting assumptions, even if this risks lowering confidence in the results. Francisco reminded the audience that even the best physical laws only work under experimental conditions, so assumptions are often unavoidable.
The final discussion focused on how ECRs can pursue applied research without compromising academic progression. Grazia reflected that applied work is often highly customised and therefore more difficult to publish. Vanesa observed that supervisors usually guide research choices, limiting ECRs’ independence. Anand, playing devil’s advocate, suggested that while applied problems may be hard to publish, shorter theoretical papers remain an option. He also reminded attendees that academics are encouraged to engage with real-world initiatives such as Study Groups and Modelling Camps.
In closing, the panellists left attendees with some golden rules: follow your passions, recognise that success takes time, and embrace failure as part of growth.