“Science is not finished until it’s communicated.”
— Sir Mark Walport
Stories Of a Maker - Vol 1
This quote came up as I started my first and only class of the semester. A science communication course focused on explaining complex ideas to people outside the sciences. It immediately resonated with where I am right now: building a company in tech, pushing deeper into research, and speaking more often about both.
I spend most of my time working with engineers, founders, and researchers. All people doing deeply technical and thoughtful work. Across research, hardware, startups, and fundraising, I keep running into the same challenge: not whether the work is good, but whether it’s being understood.
In research, it shows up as misalignment around goals or future directions. In hardware, it’s confusion about what the core technology is actually supposed to do. In startups, it’s the challenge of clearly explaining what companies like QTex AI are and why it matters. In fundraising, it’s translating what students or teams are building into something others can see as worth investing in.
I felt this firsthand recently. A paper I submitted received strong, thoughtful feedback, but a recurring theme was miscommunication around goals and future work. The ideas were there, but the way they were framed left room for misunderstanding. That feedback stuck with me more than anything else.
I’ve always been surrounded by communication. I was raised by two marketers, and growing up, clarity wasn’t optional. If you said something, it had to make sense. That influence shaped how I think about communication now: not as hype or spin, but as the honest transfer of information. Precise, accessible, and grounded but yet still containing ones character.
There’s a common belief in technical spaces that “engineers shouldn’t have to explain.” I don’t think that holds up. Everyone explains to teammates, users, reviewers, customers, funders, or the public. Communication isn’t separate from the work; it’s how the work becomes real to others.
This is also where personal brand comes in. Not as self-promotion, but as reputation and trust built over time. Your personal brand is both an extension of your work and a byproduct of showing up consistently and thoughtfully. Especially now, when so much content is automated, unreviewed, or disconnected from real people, there’s real value in sharing work with intention and care.
For me, this class feels less like an academic requirement and more like training. Media training, illustration work, speaking practice, and a chance to sharpen a skill I need as I speak more for QTex, submit to conferences, and continue bridging research and industry.
So I’ll leave this with a question and a challenge:
How important do you think communication is to the impact of your work?
And if you’re comfortable, share your thoughts publicly, post your work, and tag me when you do. I’d genuinely love to see how others are thinking about this.
Because science (and engineering, building, creating, etc.) isn’t finished until it’s communicated.