The Emotive List?

“The Power List is great fun – and I like to think that it doesn’t really matter that much! But I also know that I will probably be mildly disappointed when I eventually – and inevitably – fall off it when I am displaced by much abler analytical scientists. With apologies to Oscar Wilde: “There is only one thing worse than being on The Power List, and that is not being on it.” – IW

“It is an interesting exercise, but I think for every person on this list who’s happy and appreciative, there’s an unhappy one who feels he or she ought to be listed!” – HKL

“Anything that draws attention to the profound influence analytical science has on our lives is a very good thing. By sheer accident, this corner of science, which frankly underpins most of modern life, has found itself in something of a corner, vital but somehow too reliable, essential yet bizarrely undervalued. If The Power List helps raise the profile of work in the field, then its a good thing, whether that be with users, industry, agencies that fund research or early career researcher thinking of entering the field. If smart people don't enter the field then we are globally in big trouble.” – AL

“The thing I like most about The Power List is that it raises awareness of not only analytical science but also some of the tremendous science done in that field.” – JG

“I could paraphrase Groucho Marx – do I want to trust a list that includes me among its members? It’s certainly a difficult job to come up with such a list and quantify the influences of analytical chemists, especially with all the subfields around the world. You have to include a balance between research topics, geography, gender and so on. Such lists always ignite controversy – and when a group is under represented on the list – it promotes conversation, which is a good thing. But – as with any list – it will include some important individuals while others are left out. It’s important to make it clear that no one should take it too seriously!” – JS

“The Power List is fun and flattering – but shouldn’t be taken too seriously.” – CF

“I think it is a great effort – and being on it means huge peer recognition. The fact that the ranking is based on expert opinions lends credibility and transparency.” – RA

“I like that The Power List has got people talking about the analytical sciences in general and that it highlights the importance the development of the technology that underpins measurements made in other more high profile fields.” – EH

“Obviously I love it, if I keep moving up! Actually, I think it is a little uncomfortable to be ranked in such a dramatic fashion; however, my latest thoughts are that it shouldn't be taken too seriously and instead should be considered a bit of fun and a conversation piece for those of us in the field.” – BK

“It is always very nice to have a high ranking in The Power List and this obviously caresses your ego. For those involved in drawing up the list, it must be a big challenge to maintain credibility and remain unbiased.” – PS

“It is an interesting exercise and a bit of fun (and it’s nice to be included). However, the list is very subjective.” – PH

“The Power List is a measure of scientific impact convoluted with personal popularity and visibility. That said, it might be important to recognize impact on the scientific community other then strictly via ‘H-index’.”  – JP

“It is a bold move to publish such a list, as there is any number of ways to find fault in the method used to generate it. It is a challenging – maybe impossible – task to accurately generate this list. It is easy to think of people that you think are missing or should be in the Top 20 – but at the end of the day, it’s just one list. It generates discussion and it’s probably good for people to think about who has contributed to our field.” – MR

“No doubt The Power List helps promoting the analytical sciences and adds great prestige to the field. On the other hand, scientists are already continuously compared and ranked by their citations, number of PhD students, h-index, and so on... Yet another type of ranking maybe not what this field needs – especially if it relates to such an ill-measurable quality as “power”. Conclusion: great advertisement for the field, but the individual ranking of somebody – or the mere fact that she or he is in the list or not – should be taken with the largest possible grain of salt.” – GD

“I’m honored to be included with such a talented group of individuals, but emphasize that this has only happened because of the great team that I work with.” - DS

“It is rather nice to be recognized by your peers. Even if there might be some bias in the list. It is quite an exclusive group of scientists to belong to after all...” – AF

“To be honest, I personally do not take lists very seriously. However, my colleagues actually recognized me on The Power List 2013 and informed me, so there are a lot of people who do take lists very seriously! Since then, I feel very honored of course to be on the list. I really appreciate that this list is alternated with a young scientist list, such as the Top 40 Under 40. After all, they are the boys and girls who will take over and continue to boost analytical science and technology in the future!” – MN

“A good idea. It gets noticed by my colleagues, who have been known to part with money to buy me a beer...” – CP

Nominations are now closed for the 2017 Power List.