I wrote last month about why young scientists should network and that online networking is a good way to get started and how it should supplement face-to-face networking. Continuing on that theme, I came across this article in the latest issue of The Scientist, written by Steven Wiley, the head of the Biomolecular Systems Initiative at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Washington state.

He argues that science is an oral tradition; because much biological data can’t always be standardized, biologists instead pass along valuable information through conversation. He gives an example of how he spent several weeks scouring the literature, trying to find an answer to a problem. He got his answer not through literature searches, but through a 15-minute conversation he had with two experts at a conference.

But he fears that biologists just don’t get together to talk to each other enough; here’s an excerpt:

I have found it extremely rare for anyone to take advantage of verbal information. Many scientists eschew scientific meetings as a waste of time, or are afraid of sharing their knowledge, out of concern of getting “scooped” by a competitor. I believe that open and free exchange of information is essential to drive progress in biology. Although good verbal communication skills might not be a formal criterion for career advancement, it can have a profound impact on your research. Talking with your colleagues might not be as esteemed as writing papers, but it can be just as valuable in helping everyone move their research forward.

What do you think? Do you agree that this is a problem? What can be done about it?