Starting your own research group is a big transition in an academic career. Suddenly, scientific excellence alone is no longer enough. You also need to recruit a team, make strategic decisions, secure funding, and create an environment in which others can thrive. In this interview, Kevin Jahnke, Emmy Noether Group Leader at the Max Planck Institute for Medical Research, shares what he learned during the transition from postdoc to independence, the challenges that surprised him most, and what he wishes he had known earlier.

What were the key steps that led you to become a Research Group Leader?

I originally trained as a physicist at Heidelberg University, where I became increasingly fascinated by biological systems and experimental biophysics. During my studies, I worked on localization microscopy and later on DNA nanotechnology, which sparked my interest in understanding biological processes from a quantitative, physics-based perspective. I also had the opportunity to spend time as a visiting researcher at the University of Cambridge, which further broadened my scientific outlook.

For my PhD at the Max Planck Institute for Medical Research, I worked on building synthetic cells from the bottom up. That was an exciting experience because it combined physics, chemistry, biology and engineering to recreate fundamental cellular functions using minimal synthetic components.

I then moved to Harvard University for a postdoctoral fellowship in Dave Weitz’s lab, where my research shifted more toward soft matter physics and the interface between synthetic systems and living cells. There, I focused on engineering lipid-based biomaterials with applications in areas such as drug delivery and cell engineering.

Since March, I’ve been very happy to be back in Germany as an Emmy Noether Research Group Leader at the Max Planck Institute for Medical Research. It’s an exciting opportunity to establish my own research program and bring together ideas from physics, synthetic biology and biomaterials to tackle fundamental questions while developing technologies with biomedical potential.

What motivated your return to Germany, and were there any particular challenges in transitioning back into the German academic system?

Germany has an outstanding research landscape and the Max Planck Society provides an exceptional environment for starting an independent research group. From the very beginning, I received tremendous support from the directors and fellow group leaders at the institute. Whether it was access to equipment, laboratory space or scientific advice, I could always count on their help. Returning to Germany felt like the natural next step in my career because it gave me the opportunity to build my own research team while benefiting from excellent infrastructure, outstanding colleagues and highly motivated students and early-career researchers.

Of course, every transition comes with challenges. One of the biggest is recruiting the right people, but that is something every new group leader faces, regardless of the country. There is also a significant amount of administrative work before you can fully focus on the science. Fortunately, the Max Planck Institute has provided excellent support, which made that process much smoother.

Another aspect was building strong connections with the university while being based at a Max Planck Institute. That took a little time initially, but those collaborations have developed very well. Looking back, most of the adjustments were really related to the transition from being a postdoctoral researcher to leading an independent research group, rather than to differences between the U.S. and German academic systems.

What advice would you give to researchers abroad who are considering a return to Germany?

Returning to Germany is certainly not a must, but it offers an outstanding scientific infrastructure and many excellent opportunities to build an independent research career. My advice would be to start planning early, as many fellowships and faculty positions have long application timelines.

While abroad, I would also encourage researchers to actively build and maintain a network both within Germany and internationally. Attending conferences in Germany, as well as events such as the GAIN conference or GSO’s Leadership Academy, is a great way to establish connections and learn about opportunities.

Finally, if you do decide to return, make sure to enjoy your time abroad to the fullest. The international experience, scientific perspective and personal network you build will remain invaluable throughout your career, regardless of where you ultimately establish your lab.

How did your role and responsibilities change when moving from postdoctoral researcher to research group leader?

I had already supervised students and junior researchers during my postdoc, so mentoring itself was not entirely new. However, becoming fully responsible for a research group is a very different experience. As a group leader, every decision ultimately rests with you, from defining the scientific direction and recruiting team members to managing budgets and handling administrative responsibilities.

What surprised me most was how important the seemingly small decisions are, especially in the beginning. Questions like when to hold group meetings, how to structure the onboarding process or how often to have one-on-one meetings may appear minor, but they play a major role in shaping the culture, communication and long-term success of the group.

At the same time, I’ve found the transition to be incredibly rewarding. Beyond pursuing exciting scientific questions, I now have the opportunity to build an environment where people can develop, collaborate and do their best work. That’s a responsibility I really enjoy.

What were the biggest challenges you encountered as a new group leader?

Hiring the right people was by far the biggest challenge. Scientific excellence is important, but so is finding people who contribute positively to the group culture. During the first few weeks, I realized that every hiring decision would influence not only the science, but also the culture of the group for years to come. That was both exciting and humbling. From the very beginning, my goal was to build an environment where people genuinely enjoy what they do while maintaining high scientific standards. Finding that balance takes time and constant attention, but I’m happy that we’ve been able to establish exactly that kind of atmosphere in the group. Of course, none of that would be possible without the incredible people who decided to embark on this journey with me. I’m deeply grateful for the enthusiasm, trust and hard work my team has invested in building the group from the very beginning.

Which leadership-related skills have proven most important in your role, and which ones were you least prepared for?

One of the most important leadership skills is making many small decisions every day, both scientific and administrative. Time is limited, so learning to make thoughtful decisions efficiently is essential. Another critical skill is hiring. Building a great team has an enormous impact on the success of a research group and I underestimated how much time and thought go into recruiting the right people. I also learned that hiring inevitably means saying no to many excellent applicants, which can be one of the more difficult aspects of the job.

What I was least prepared for was managing the broader network of stakeholders. As a group leader, you’re not only leading scientists, but also interacting with institute leadership, funding agencies, collaborators, HR, university administration and colleagues. Many of these relationships rely on influence rather than formal authority, so communication, diplomacy and aligning different interests become essential. Balancing all of these relationships while moving your research forward is an important part of the role and something that receives far less attention during scientific training.

You participated in the GSO Leadership Academy. In what ways did the program help you navigate the transition to leading your own research group?

Is there anything you wish you had learned or practiced earlier in your career that would have made the transition to a leadership position easier?

I wish I had realized earlier that great science is the entry ticket, but people ultimately hire colleagues, not just CVs. Scientific excellence remains essential, but communication, collaboration and building professional relationships are just as important for a successful academic career. Earlier in my career, I was very focused on producing the next paper. However, once you’ve established your scientific abilities, investing time in meaningful collaborations and expanding your professional network can often have a greater impact than adding another publication.

I also learned that resilience is incredibly important. Rejections are a normal part of academia, whether it’s papers, grants or job applications. Learning to keep going despite setbacks is one of the most valuable skills you can develop.

Finally, for postdocs who are considering applying for an Emmy Noether Research Group or a similar independent leadership position, what advice would you give them as they prepare for this next career step?

Invest the necessary time in your proposal. For me, writing the Emmy Noether proposal took several months and that preparation made a real difference. At the same time, don’t put everything on a single opportunity. Apply broadly, set yourself realistic milestones and timelines for your job search and keep your options open.

Most importantly, don’t forget to enjoy your postdoc years. It is a unique period of scientific freedom with relatively few administrative responsibilities. Once you become independent, your role changes dramatically. So while preparing for the next step, make the most of the opportunity to explore bold ideas, because your next experiment as a postdoc might be your last.