The Magnificent Scientists
We’re back in the saddle for a Power List with a twist.
Welcome to 2017’s eagerly anticipated Power List issue! You may have already gathered that there’s been a significant change to the list this year. Rather than an overall Top 100, you nominated individuals in 10 categories, all ranked by an international panel of expert judges to produce 10 Top 10s. So, why categorize?
Firstly, we want to celebrate the full spectrum of the analytical endeavour. From the very start, The Analytical Scientist has been motivated by a central goal: to act as a community for the many disparate fields that sit under the banner of analytical science. Separation science and mass spectrometry are wonderful fields – but other areas also deserve attention. By including categories that cover specialties previously under-represented on the list, we’re delighted to welcome some new names; about 60 percent of this year’s list were not featured in our most recent Top 100 in 2015. Though our chosen few are more diverse than ever in specialty, certain groups are still under-represented – we welcome your thoughts on how we can better bridge the gaps.
Secondly, we are keen to expand our definition of “power” by recognizing that an individual’s influence can be measured in many ways (we never pretend that any of our lists are definitive for that very reason). For instance, we felt that it was important to recognize those who go above and beyond to offer the next generation a helping hand – our Mentors. We were all touched by the heartfelt comments from nominators in this category, and narrowing the wonderful selection down to just 10 was particularly tough for the judges.
Finally, we’ll admit that we also like to shake things up! From the Top 40 Under 40 to last year’s women-only list, we want to keep our celebration of analytical science fresh. Splitting the list provides some alternative insights and new angles; for example, consider how the 14 people who appear in more than one Top 10 are distributed.
No doubt this year’s list will attract all the usual excitement, comment and controversy. I’d love to hear your thoughts – the good, the bad and the ugly – at [email protected].
Before I skedaddle, I’d like to close with my sincere thanks to everyone who nominated, our anonymous judges, and the nominees themselves, who provided so many thoughtful, funny and surprising pearls of wisdom – you can read their contributions in full on our website.
Charlotte Barker
Editor
After studying biology at Imperial College London, I got my start in biomedical publishing as a commissioning editor for healthcare journals, and I’ve spent my career covering everything from early-stage research to clinical medicine.
