When Science Meets Creativity

A behind‑the‑scenes look at the day‑to‑day of technicians Eva Kaindl and Angela Burkart

Interview with Shau Chung Shin

Hello you two! Thanks for taking the time today to share a bit about your work at our institute. Could you introduce yourselves briefly?

Angela: Hi, I’m Angela Burkart, a biological‑technical assistant. I joined the institute in September 2022. I started in the Molecular Sociology department with Martin Beck, and since August 2024 I’ve been part of Melanie McDowell’s early‑career research group on the biogenesis of membrane proteins.

Eva: I’m Eva Kaindl, a medical‑technical assistant, and I’ve been here since 1990. I began in the Biophysical Chemistry group, where I carried out many electrical measurements, so my work was more physics‑focused. Since 2019 I’ve been in the Molecular Sociology department with Martin Beck, which has steered me toward biochemistry and structural biology.

What does your work involve?

Angela: In Melanie McDowell’s group I take care of the day‑to‑day lab operations—ordering supplies, preparing media and stock solutions, maintaining equipment, and the like. I also step in to support postdocs and PhD students on their projects when needed.

I grow large batches of cultures—E. coli, the fungus Chaetomium, and yeast (S. cerevisiae). I draft protocols and carry out a range of molecular‑biology techniques, including PCR, cloning, (re)transformation, plasmid prep, membrane isolation and protein purification.

Eva: These days I’m more on the biochemistry side, doing a lot of molecular biology—setting up PCRs, transforming different cell types to introduce DNA, then checking under the microscope whether the transformation succeeded. I also sometimes purify the resulting protein and run a Western blot. That was new for me when I joined Martin Beck’s group.

Keeping thorough records of experiments takes a lot of time. The documentation has to be robust, traceable, and cover all genetic‑engineering work, which can be quite demanding.

We also have to perform risk assessments and document any hazards. For instance, when we test inhibitors to see whether they block a protein we’ve produced and how that changes the reaction, we must be careful—those inhibitors could affect other proteins, even those in our own bodies.

My work essentially boils down to preparing samples for my colleagues’ structural analyses.

Are there differences between the individual research groups?

Angela: It really depends on the project. In Martin Beck’s group my duties were quite different from what I do now with Melanie McDowell, which is more cell‑culture‑oriented and involves a lot of molecular‑biology and biochemistry. I’m sure Eva would say the same.

Eva: Absolutely. Earlier I focused on reconstructing cell membranes with liposomes—essentially lipid vesicles into which we reconstituted proteins to study what they need to function. We could then probe transport proteins by measuring the electrical charge shift across the membrane. Lately, I’ve started incorporating fluorescent dyes into cellular structures so we can visualize them under the microscope.

These are very diverse activities. And it sounds like you are constantly learning something new in your work. How do you organize your work, what does a typical workday look like—if such a thing exists?

Angela: For me a typical morning starts with planning the day—if I haven’t already done it the night before. Then I either run the protocols for scheduled experiments or handle the everyday lab tasks.

Each day looks different; I can be pulled into a PhD student’s or postdoc’s project at a moment’s notice. We also have one or two meetings each week to update everyone on project progress and discuss next steps.

Eva: I completely agree—no two days are the same. Even when I repeat an experiment, the questions change or I need to tweak the protocol. I try to plan the day ahead, but unexpected things always pop up, so I have to adapt on the fly. That’s actually what I enjoy most (laughs).

I make a to‑do list, set a rough schedule, and then run my experiments. While samples are incubating I handle orders, refill autoclave supplies, discuss experimental plans with colleagues, analyse data, or prep for the next day’s work.

So there isn’t really a “typical” day. The only routine is on seminar days—morning seminars, then I organise the afternoon around that.

That sounds like a highly self‑directed role with plenty of freedom. You mentioned you love that. What about you, Angela?

Angela: I love the mix of routine duties and launching new projects, which constantly pushes me to learn something new. Working with colleagues from so many countries and cultures is inspiring. In my experience, the interaction between researchers and us technical assistants is respectful and laced with humor. The researchers’ mindset—curiosity, problem‑solving, openness, and innovation—is something I’m proud to be part of.

Eva: I feel the same way. I used to work in a clinic where everything was top‑down—“We’ve always done it this way.” After two years that really frustrated me.

So I applied and was lucky to get this role. I was thrilled because I got to learn so many new things—something you don’t hear in a “We’ve always done it this way” environment. I’d say the attitude here is more like, “We’ve always done it this way, but let’s consider a different approach.”

Collaboration here feels different, too. In medicine the hierarchy is steep, but at this institute it’s much flatter. Researchers and technical assistants work as partners on equal footing. I love that openness—and the international mix is fascinating.

It also makes you reflect on your own situation: “What’s my role?” or “What do others have to invest to achieve their dreams?” Seeing how different others’ paths can be gives me a greater appreciation for my own.

I’m really glad I ended up here and I still have no regrets, even after all these years.

Did you, before you applied, already have an idea that it would be different here compared to, for example, a clinic?

Eva: In a hospital, routines dominate. Sure, there are occasional variations, but overall it’s far more routine‑driven than here.

In a research lab, trying new things is the norm from day one. That also means you need a thick skin for frustration—you can’t be discouraged by failed experiments, and sometimes an idea simply won’t work.

And Angela, did you already expect beforehand that work here would be like this? Is it always like this at research institutes?

Angela: I’m really happy to be here. It also took a bit of luck and timing. When I applied, it was crucial for me that the employer supports work‑life balance. I saw on the website that the Max Planck Society has held the audit certificate from the Beruf‑ und Familienservice GmbH since 2006, which instantly reassured me.

Both of my supervisors so far have allowed me to adjust my hours to fit my family needs. The TVöD salary scale is also appealing, and I’m fortunate to live close to the institute, so my commute is short.

I’m also thrilled that the institute has a sustainability group, where I gladly contribute to several projects. Moreover, the Max Planck Institute for Biophysics offers a range of events—both on‑ and off‑site—like the JP Morgan run in downtown Frankfurt, the Night of Sciences at the Riedberg campus, Girls’ Day, summer and Christmas parties, a dragon‑boat race on the Main, and various outings and retreats.

I also appreciate the constructive dialogue with the creative teams in the workshop, media lab, and facility management. The purchasing team is always helpful when order issues arise. Overall, the MPG is a very attractive employer and I feel comfortable here.

What type of person will be happy here?

Eva: I’d say it’s someone spontaneous, who loves trying new things, and is creative. They also need a calm, persevering mindset because experiments can fail. In other words, you need a healthy dose of frustration tolerance and the ability to accept setbacks without self‑blame.

You should be the kind of person who troubleshoots without self‑criticism—asking “What might have caused this? How could I do it differently?” Precise work and meticulous documentation are essential; you must be able to reconstruct every step later. Safety is also key, as we handle hazardous substances, so diligence and thorough preparation are a must.

Angela: Exactly. I’d add that you need to be open, curious, and eager to collaborate with people from all over the world on equal footing—while having fun.

Thank you very much! As a final question, what would you wish for?

Angela: Personally, I’d like to see sustainability taken more seriously—ideally making the LEAF certification a mandatory standard for every lab across all MPG sites. LEAF promotes environmental best practices in research. I’d also love to see our outdoor spaces designed for biodiversity—think wild‑bee hotels, wildflower plantings—and to use grey‑water for irrigation and harness solar energy.

I’m aware that MPG President Patrick Cramer is now championing sustainability—opening doors, showing interest, and pushing various initiatives. In June 2025 he even joined a video call for the MPG sustainability network meeting, fielding questions and expressing strong support. I hope binding resolutions will follow to truly advance sustainability in research. I also think the bureaucratic steps needed to implement such changes could be streamlined.

Eva: I completely agree. I’d love to see the documentation burden reduced. While recording experiments is essential, the regulatory requirements keep piling up. The red‑tape could be eased, and the overall paperwork for labs could be trimmed.

Thank you for your time and openness. It’s nice to have you as colleagues and I wish you continued enjoyment in your work!