Thinking on Finding your Path, Making a Startup & Walking Away from Academia with Aditi Dimri

Aditi Dhinri switched from economics to becoming a startup founder

Divya: Welcome to this episode of thinking on thinking. Today we talk to Aditi Dhinri from Cranberry about her switch from being in economics and policy to becoming a startup founder, how she got into healthcare, what kept her into it, and we discuss a lot about how our identity affects the way we make decisions. Hi. So, maybe, Aditi, do you want to tell us a little bit about, like, you know, what you do currently and maybe tiny bit about how you got to be where you are today?

Aditi: I'm going to tell you a very long story. So, currently I'm, building Cranberry, which is a women's health company, where we really have the vision of, you know, empowering women with informed choice about their health so they can lead a healthy life today and also have, you know, better health outcomes throughout their lives. So we're building Berry, which is an, AI companion. We are super excited about building it and already live with some women and hoping to grow more. So, I mean, my journey here has been, like, fairly meandering, but a lot of fun. I don't come from a health background, but I've been working more in public health and on, like, women's health topics, and almost six, seven years now, I think when I was in undergrad and that time I did an internship, and basically based on that, I was like, oh, I want to do something where I make impact at a large scale. So I think that was my aha moment at, like, 20. And, I. That time I thought the way to do it is through governance and policy. And so, basically, I went and studied, economics. And, like, I've been throughout working with governments and, you know, like the World bank, doing policy research, data, behavior change, all really fun things. a lot of very, like, I find challenging and interesting problems like maternal anemia to, you know, how to measure impact of COVID in Mozambique. And. But I think, like, I realized because I had worked in a startup, one, that I wanted to do things more in an interdisciplinary and, iterative way. I thought a lot of the problems I was working on, they could not be solved by economists like me alone, for sure.

Divya: That's interesting. Like, wait, what kind of problems do you feel like can be solved by economists alone?

Aditi: I would say things about the fiscal policy, what should be the interest rate, pension policies. So a part of my PhD was also on measuring inequality and poverty. And those things, I would think is, like, really economist domain, and they have the tools and they're trained to do that. but what happens with policy, at least what I took away was that it was again, quite dominated by economists like me, which is a good privileged position to have. But like, say I was working in health policy, and there I felt it needed much more interdisciplinary things in the sense that we actually needed the best people of health, the best people of tech, the best people of behavior, change of design to come together and solve these really hard problems. So one, I think, insight was that, and the other insight was often things were done in a very long time frame, that you decide something, you do it for a year, whereas I had seen in the startup world that things were done much more iteratively, which is, again, the kind of problem solving method I think is needed for the kind of problems we're trying to solve there. So based on those things, then I think around four years ago, I was like, oh, I want to transition out of academics and do something urgently about women's health now. So then I started building something called high g, one, which was more in preventive health broadly. And then I met Saraswati and we started building cranberry.

Almost 50% of economics is about individual behavior, right?

Divya: Okay, so I have, like, so many different questions from so many different things. As you were speaking, I was thinking about this one thing. Behavioral economics is like, so I'm assuming you're not a behavioral economist.

Aditi: No, I'm not a behavioral economist.

Divya: Okay. Like I was, wondering, like, how does somebody who has studied more, let's say traditional, like, economics, how do you see sort of, because, like, principles of behavioral economics, a lot of them, like, seem very resonant with like, principles of design or especially game design, because a lot of it is about like, you know, behavior and motivation manipulation, for the lack of a better term. Like, how do you see it? Because I think that economics is on a very large scale level, right? Like you're thinking of hundreds of people, and behavior is much more like individual in nature. Like, how do you sort of think about those things?

Aditi: Aha. Uh-huh. Interesting. So, okay, so I think so in economics also, there are macroeconomics, and micro macroeconomics is, as you're saying, like studying systems at the aggregate. So totally, like, I would say, like fiscal policy, monetary policy, everything, right? So I am a micro economist there. You study individual behavior. Individual behavior may be like firm behavior, like at that level, but what, let's say, neoclassical or mainstream economics would do right now is this what's called the representative agent, which is much spoken about and hated maybe in some way that, let's say I am the representative agent. I, and I have certain preferences and beliefs and certain constraints and neoclassical economics views that I have like, complete information and things like that. And then basically I make decision. Right? So that is, the individual decision making in neoclassical economics. And then behavioral economics came in, of course, inspired from psychology and, neuroscience, saying that, hey, people don't have complete information. They just don't act in this rational way, quote, unquote, rational being this economic way of neoclassical economics, way of defining it. So, like the kind of economics I was, let's say, researching in, we were also already looking at deviations from this classical economics, rational behavior. But I would say almost 50% of economics is about individual behavior.

Divya: Oh, okay. So then how is microeconomics different from, behavioral economics?

Aditi: Yeah, so, exactly. So neoclassical microeconomics assumes that, I, as an individual, I know everything, and then basically on that I optimize and I make choice. Right.

Divya: So it assumes informed consent on all decisions.

Aditi: Yeah, it assumes a lot of things in the sense, if I am deciding right now to buy, let's say, pizza over rice, microeconomics will assume that my beliefs are totally updated. I know all the prices of everything. I know all the choice. I know my, so to say, restrictions of my budget and everything. And then I'm making this choice, whereas behavioral economics will come in and say things like, oh, you know, actually there are other concepts of, let's say cognitive load, where adity, because she's so stressed for some other reason, or because actually I have less money, I am not able to make those trade offs. I cannot evaluate complete information. So basically, behavioral economics then introduces these, I would not say now not a controversy, but initially, economists were made fun of, like, for being like, oh, everything is rational, you know, and these things were called like, irrationality, but not anymore, I think they are not treated as that. Even in mainstream economics. They are acknowledged. The models are trying to come up to pace.

Divya: But, yeah, this, like, reminds me of how, like in the 17 hundreds when physics was sort of being, I would say, structured as a science, it was like, okay, let's ignore drag, let's ignore friction. Like these real world things that really affect everything that we, we like, you know, encounter, you know, when we are thinking about any sort of object behavior, we will assume vacuum, no other forces acting on it, only two bodies interacting with each other. Like if you add a third body, oh, suddenly it's a very complex situation. We can't solve it anymore. And I feel like this is a little bit like that. That, like, you know, initially, konomics was.

Aditi: That's a perfect balance. Is it? Yeah, it is. It is perfect. Yeah.

Divya: Because, so, like, I had heard this talk by the AI professor from IIT Madras.

Aditi: Oh, yeah, right.

Divya: Doctor Pratyushd. Doctor Pratish, yeah. Actually, their company, servam, recently raised, like, this week they raised 40 million. Really cool.

Aditi: I know.

Divya: Anyways, and when he said that what you consider as a design variable when you are at a particular part of the system, can be changed and you can question it, and it almost seems like economists, like, okay, let's consider human as a stable and not a design variable, and then behavioral economists. So I like, ah, okay. No, they are also design variables.

Aditi: Yeah, exactly. And people's preferences, their constraints, how they make choices, it's all like, design variables. Yeah. yeah, I think economics became, like, really mathematical at a point of time, and then a bit like physics in the sense you want to keep it as much as you can solve it.

How did applied micro economist get into healthcare? Like, what interested you about it initially

So to say, I'm an applied micro economist.

Divya: How does a applied micro economist get into healthcare? Like, what interested you about it initially, and then also, like, what kept your interest? Because it's very different to, like, get into something, and then it's very different to, like, you know, keep doing it for years and or, like, starting a company in it where, you know, you're probably gonna be there for, like, five to ten years, like, you're spending that amount of time.

Aditi: Yeah, I think by now I've become so passionate about health that I'm like, oh, I'm gonna spend my life doing okay. Yeah. So I started with this question of individual behavior. So I think I was always super interested in the choices people make. I think my encounter with it started with when I worked in a colony in Delhi where there was a lot of littering. And there basically, then I was like, working with final mile, which was a behavior consultancy before my PhD, where I was trying to understand that there was a, sulab socalle there, and people would not use it. Right. So for me, like, a person who used to not live there, I came there and I was like, oh, this seems, like, totally irrational or illogical to me that there is a toilet available, but people are practicing open defecation. So, I mean, as I said in economics, like, we study really people's, like, choices. So that's how I kind of really got into wanting to, you know, like, study how people make choices. And then, slowly, I, as I was working on gender and gender discrimination. I started looking at household decisions in general and on health in specific. And basically, that led me to, like, working with the government on Uttarakhand on maternal anemia. So these are often, like, questions, like, so there the government had the question that women are really anemic in India. So, like, around, I think, 60, percent of women are anemic, but especially when you are pregnant and anemic, it's a high risk pregnancy. So they will provide free, iron tablet to women. Right. But the. The anemia levels still don't go down. And, of course, the hypothesis was that, why aren't the women taking the tablet? You know, is it some kind of. Because we've removed the price constraint of it. But what are the other constraints? What's there? So, yeah, that's how I started actually really doing work on health through that. I lived in rural Uttarakhand for, like, almost nine months. It helps that it's really beautiful. So, I think I really, like, saw the huge gaps there in, generally in healthcare. But because I was working in women's health, there were just, like, so many types of constraints and barriers, starting from, of course, things with, income and money, which are easier to imagine, but cultural, but informational, but access and. Yeah, so that's how I got into it. And I think that I was already very motivated. And, like, I. I overall got very interested in preventive health. So I find it fascinating that when we kind of know that something is good for us, but we are not able to act on it, it is such a. I mean, I think I'm attracted to hard problems. So I'm just like, that is a good hard problem. Like, we know we have to exercise. Why are we not able to do that? And I think that's, like, when I became obsessed with, preventive health, or, you know, like, you. I mean, not just in India, but, like, in Germany here as well, people know they should go for their pap smear, but they won't, right? So. And my economics models, I were taught, like, is not able to explain that. So I think then I became obsessed with it, of course. I'm like, why?

Divya: So, what is a model that explains that? Like, I have been needing to go to the eye doctor for a checkup for a year. I know that, like, my distant vision is kind of going, and I haven't gone for a year. I know I need specs like, I can't read when it is far away. I know I have cylindrical power. How much is the question and I'm not going. And it's just like, I have known for a year that I have, like, you know, cylindrical power because I had polarized glasses on, and then, like, that made things better, and I was like, okay, then this is definitely cylindrical, and I'm not going. Like, I'm talking about it, and I'm still not going.

Your case is, uh, interesting. Humans discount far away rewards much lower

Aditi: Your case is, interesting. So, one of the prevalent ways where. Which people try to explain, say things where the reward is really, in the future is through a concept called hyperbolic, discounting, that basically anything which will give reward, really, in the future, humans are not able to, like, absorb that or, you know, kind of rationalize it into their brain. So, in the sense, like, you know, apple will have, you know, long run benefits versus, right now, a chocolate bar will give you instant joy. So it's been consistently seen that, you know, humans discount far away rewards much lower. Right. So I think this explains a lot of health behaviors which are preventive, but you're. I'm not too sure. Like, maybe you're not convinced of the benefits you'll get in the short run. Yeah.

Divya: I also don't know. And it's. It's very interesting. Like, every time I tell somebody, they're like, just go to the doctor. It's not gonna take too long. It's like a two minute thing, and I'm just like, ah. But I am not able to do it because I am not free on the weekend, which is such a ridiculous lie that I'm telling myself, but I guess I am telling myself that.

Aditi: Yeah, I think that there are more layers to it than, That. Yeah.

Divya: but, like, this happens quite a bit, right? Like, even if it isn't far away, sometimes, like, changing behavior is really difficult. I mean, like, how did you, as somebody who had worked for years in, like, a more slow paced, long planning kind of system, like, how did you change your thought process into an iterative one? Because iterations are painful.

Aditi: True. Yeah. Great question. Yeah. How did I do that? So, research was very, like, during my PhD, for example, I took four years, and I wrote three papers, which was also super hard. But, like, I think for, like, now, a startup world definition. That seems, like, insane, right?

Divya: That is a little slow.

Aditi: Yeah, it is a little slow. Also, the iteration cycles are much longer, let's say. I mean, there is, of course, improvements and iterations, but it's. So. I think it's a good question. So, initially. So, first time, I actually started building a product on my own. Like a crazy person. No. No background and I have to say I wasn't super iterative. I think the bigger barrier than that was actually listening to people I was building for and taking that input. Because you're right. Maybe that leads to iteration. That's why. So it is so hard. It is so easy to say, listen to people, you're building for all those things, but it is so hard. And I think I was not able to do that for a year. I was actively avoiding it almost. And you're right, I think it was a lot because, because it would, I knew it would lead to iteration. It would lead to my hypothesis being proved wrong in every month. and that is just super hard. I think at some point of time after doing that for one year, I realized there's no good way to build a product. That's the only way. I think it just became like, hey, I don't have to come up with the perfect idea and then get sad when the hypothesis is broken by people I'm billing for. Rather. I think I've just become more like, hey, actually it's people's ideas we're just testing. So I think maybe that helps.

Divya: You're like, I will disown the idea. I am just making it happen.

Aditi: Oh, that's a good way to. I think it has become like I've reduced the ego from it because as a researcher, you have so much like copyright or the idea, right? Like, yeah, that's a good way.

Divya: One of my friends was talking about how like, when you are presenting your thesis, you are expected to be the expert at the thing. He's like, no matter how senior the researchers who are taking your interview or who you are defending your thesis against are, you need to be the person who is answering all the questions and you need to know the most about it. And I found that really interesting because like, that's not how I would have thought of anything to function. That like, you should be the person who knows the most about this thing in a room full of experts in this particular domain, right? And like, even when you were describing it, it is that, right? I think the biggest hurdle is just like accepting I could be wrong. Like, that feels like such a stab to the heart. And like when you just said, ah, it's people's ideas, then you're like, haha, people can be wrong. Who cares? Of course they can be wrong. They are wrong all the time.

Aditi: Yeah. I don't know. I mean, I just found a loophole and not addressed them.

Divya: I don't even know if the code thing is addressable, right? Like, it's a little bit like, I don't know, millions of years of evolution, you can't really fight against it. At some point you have to accept, you know, humans can't fly, you just can't do it.

Aditi: Yeah, no, I totally agree. I think that's, I mean a great question. I also think more about it, but I think that's how I've done it for now, because we are iterating like really fast now and I don't have trouble and I frankly don't see another way actually. So I think it's also there.

Divya: That way.

Like healthcare is also an industry that doesn't really appreciate the principle of move fast

Like healthcare is also an industry that doesn't really appreciate the principle of move fast and break things. So how are you guys like, you know, working against those norms? Because I would imagine both for your potential customer and for your potential collaborators, for them also it would be an adjustment that it's like, oh, we are okay with making some mistakes. And like in healthcare, the principle is make zero mistakes, even if you have to go dead slow.

Aditi: yeah, so one, we, I think we do go slower than most startups. I would say that, and I think it is a lot because of, we are in health and so we are a lifestyle company, but for a lifestyle company we are the most medically, I would say evolved and safe, because, and it's very interesting, I think a lot comes because I think training matters a lot. It like sets your worldview and mental models and of course I think being trained in like economics and policy making, I have a very systemic approach to things often where of each like little action. Also you do you think of what are called externalities, how it affects other things, you know, what are the possible other incentives it's creating in the system, which is very painful as a startup founder to have, of course, because, you know, you think of all the risks actually, because I am just trained like that, right, to think of the risk, to think of the buyers. And so actually it plays to an advantage for us for sure, to collaborate with people in the healthcare system because they see how we talk, how we build, how our protocols are, how we think through everything, and they for sure feel much more assured than just being another tech company trying to, you know, who's not thought of like the incentives of health or, you know, the, the 2% cases where it could go wrong, which matters, of course. so I think on that part, I think we find the collaboration actually quite easy and productive and fruitful on the part of, with women. We are building for I mean, our big bet is that in the long run, it will be seen as a positive that initially, it might feel, like, a bit painful that. Why do these guys talk so much about evidence and how they actually build everything and, you know, about the protocols, you know, I just want to, you know, improve my health. But I think, yeah, the rigor of it, we are hoping, like, we really think also, health is at this crossroads where women in India are, ah, like, really demanding. Not to be just told, keep do this, buy this, but rather be like, hey, tell me my choices. Let me choose. Right?

Divya: It's very interesting. Like, so, I've known of Beri for a long time, right? Like, of course, I've known of it from the first iteration.

Aditi: You helped us a lot.

Divya: No, but, like, this time, my PM's was really horrible, and I've noticed that, that, like, when I do running, but I don't do strength training. My PM's is really bad when I do strength training, like, my PM's is, like, much more manageable. Like, if I'm doing strength training, like, I would not even realize. And I think it is something genetic because it is something similar for my sister also. If she's doing strength training, her period pain is absent. If she does only cardio, then, like, it is, like, pretty bad.

Aditi: What are interesting inside?

Divya: So I was so irritated that I went and I asked Berry, why is this happening to me? Why is my life so bad right now? And then it was like, ah, it could be this. And, like, while they both create endorphins, but they create different kinds of endorphins, and then cortisol levels are different, and some things I was like, okay, now I feel somewhat soothed by this science. Fine.

Aditi: Okay, Betty, you haven't given me the solution, but, okay, thanks for the science till then.

Divya: yeah, I think that it was interesting just, like, observing my behavior that time also, because how between the purchase behavior and knowing that the purchase is going to happen, there is, like, a long gap sometimes. Like, so you might be aware of a product and you might decide to use it at an x amount of time, and there are, like, events that lead up to it. So, like, in my case, for example, I like the people who are building this thing. I trust the product. I'm even helping build the product. But, like, for the first time, when I authentically, I would say this was an authentic use case where I was like, okay, I need help, and I'm gonna go and use this product because I know that it can help me, right? Now, right? Like, but there was just this gap. It was just interesting to observe my own behavior while I was in pain and while I was using it, like, a third party, like, out of body experience of observation was also happening. I should note this down.

Aditi: Yeah, that's super interesting. And did you get any insights on, like. Because it was, I guess, totally organic, right? You just thought of it and you were like, let me ask. Bury you.

Divya: Yeah. In the last, maybe like, few months, what has started happening is, like, when I have a question, and especially it's this question of not purely logical variety or purely informational variety, I go and ask GPT my questions. And I think, like, that behavior, likes, has slowly started translating into other areas where, like, earlier, I would have gone and wanted to ask, like, a friend of mine who is a doctor now I don't have any doctor friends, so I can't do that. But, like, now I've realized, like, for example, if I have a coding question, I'll go and ask GPT. I will not go and ask my sister. you know, at a subconscious level, that was what primed me to just be like, okay, go and ask the bot about it, because the bot, like, probability that the bot knows why this is happening, if this is a real thing.

Have you noticed that people gaslight themselves when thinking about their own health

Have you noticed that, like, people sort of semi gaslight themselves when they are thinking about their own health? Like, especially women, they would, like, try to sort of minimize it or stuff like that? Have you guys encountered that?

Aditi: Yeah, I mean, I think tons. Lots. I mean, I think overall, we are, like, I think getting the insight that of two things, like, a lot of times, like, women just don't know how to express their, what they're feeling. Especially with things like period pain or anything with our reproductive system and all, we've been told so much that this is something, being part of a woman, that it's so quote unquote normal that I would say personally, even me, when we started working on this actively on mental health, I was always like, I don't have period pain. But as I started, like, tracking stuff and, like, how. Seeing how my cycle is. And then I actually started documenting if I was having a painkiller during my first day or second day, and I was like, oh, I actually, like, do have this, you know? And it's crazy. It's like, I think mentally, like, PNS is even harder, right? Because it's much tougher to capture. But even with, like, period of physical pain, I would say I also did not capture it. And so we feel a lot of times when we, like, talk to women more, we describe it. We describe our pain. Other people saying, give the vocabulary, give a severity scale. Then they're like, oh, yeah, actually, I just have to lie in bed for the whole day. And then you're like, yes. And then they'd be like, so I might say I have fever pain. Yes. So it's so deep. You're totally right. It's gaslighting yourself.

Divya: Like, there is this thing in psychology where if you articulate something, if you name something, then, like, you make it real. And, like, the pain, quote unquote, lessens, but also it becomes more real. So now you have to incorporate it in your identity. Otherwise you can keep it separate. I wonder if it is also that. That, like, you know, if you just accept that, yeah, once a month for three days, I am in a lot of pain, or, like, my life is really hard. Then suddenly you're like, okay, but I'm not a weak person. And, like, that's the part that. Of your identity that it suddenly, like, you know, sort of clashes against. Okay, this is, like, slightly dark, but, I was recently listening to a, video essay where they were discussing about how when women are asked outrightly that have they been victims of sexual assault, they will say, like, more often than not, they will say, no, I haven't. But then they will describe, like, encounters with their partners or, like, you know, with family members or something, where they would describe exact symbols, symptoms, and they would just be like, no, but I have not been a victim of anything. And I feel like when you were describing, it's a little bit like that.

Aditi: Yeah, that's super interesting, this idea of. I didn't know this psychology concept. So, yeah, it's good, what you're saying. So the point is, but we'll have to remove that stigma. Right. I think because a lot of these things, especially, I would say with, sexual assault, like, there's so much that you are a victim. M then. Right. And I. So that way, even in menstrual pain, I'm guessing with pcos now, we say there's definitely that label which, like, women do not want because there's so much fear around it. Health is so much about fear, about.

Divya: Insecurity, and interesting usage of word health is so much about fear. Do you want to, like, talk more about that?

Aditi: Oh, so I think, like, when I started working on preventive health, so there's, like, the psychological concept of lost aversion and, like, gain. Like, so basically, you can frame the same thing as for, like, when I was working in maternal health as, oh, if you take iron tablets, your child will be so healthy and, you know, look like this, you know, will grow. Well, the other way of framing it is that, oh, if you don't eat the tablet, your child might die as soon as it's born, or the child will be, you know, one kg, right? So one is like, fear inducing, the other is mean. And. And initially, some studies had shown, with small sample sizes in terms of settings, that loss eversion mechanism works stronger for certain framing. And, you know, much more about marketing. I don't know what concepts, like marketers, of course, use a lot of psychological concepts, and I don't want to pinpoint. I don't want to pinpoint the use. But, I think in health, often, I would say, like, the notifications I get from a lot of labs and everything I would classify as loss aversion and, like, fear inducing. you know, do you have Covid? like, you know, kind of. That kind of way. Alert. Are you popping pills unknowingly or something like that? Again, you can add more to this, but I think there are some theories that the human brain gets attracted to more of these negative emotions.

Divya: they're stickier. They're stickier rather than being attracted, they are just, like, stickier because, like, the evolutionary psych, which is whatever, like, you know, very sketchy. but like, the evolutionary psych explanation is the person who gets afraid every time the, like, you know, the bush rustles that, oh, my God, it's a tiger, I must run away is, like, so much more likely to have survived than the person who's like, ah, it's probably nothing.

Aditi: Yeah, I think so. Yeah, that's the balance. So for me right now, healthcare, I mean, especially in India, but also globally, is, like, often, the messaging has been very fear inducing. I think, like, the public health system I know, like, in UK is really trying to change the framing, collectively, overall. So around cancer also, for example. Right? And so, yeah, so for me, I think, like, I would say, like, it is very, like with, when we talk to women now also, we are like, people are in fear. Like, oh, do I have a fibroid baby? Like, you know, your period is like, lead, bye. Six days. And, you know, people are freaking out. You know, like, have I got pcos?

Divya: I also wonder if, like, you know, that might also have something to do with the fact that, like, a lot of times, women are just given the diagnosis of, oh, something must be wrong. With your uterus because you are a woman. So either you need to lose weight or something is wrong with your uterus. So maybe like there is also the fear there.

Aditi: Yeah, I think definitely. I think like our understanding and take on that has become that. Of course there are like, let's say a lot of these women's health topics are especially super under researched. Less is known even by like super specialists and the whole healthcare system. But we feel like everyone has the right to get clear, honest, transparent information, right? Like to know that this is what even I as a doctor know, this is what the health, what is what science can tell you. So like for example, let's take PM's. Actually the cause is not known, like actually what the mechanism is. But then like if I go to my gynecologist and I'm like, hey, I feel like suicidal, like two days before my period, the gynecologist should be able to explain to me that, you know, this is really common. It happens like this. Science does not know exact reason. So I think like we m, or at least personally, I really see that I would want that for myself.

Have you come across people who want explanations and just want to be told

And I also feel like a lot of the narrative has been often coming from like, let's say in economics experts. Also key, you know, you just tell people what to do. They don't have the capacity to evaluate their own choices. You know, like a, bit pedantic like that, right? And yeah, I don't know, like I can do that. So I don't see why the people who want to do that, right?

Divya: Have you come across people who don't want explanations and just want to be told what to do? Like what percentage of your audience would you say falls into that category?

Aditi: Good question. Like, can't say clearly, but the only data point I can give is that, at least on our product, we do have like science bits which people can choose to read. and from top of my head, like people do, like 30% people do read that, choose that, see it. So, and also women are coming and asking questions also of why. So not just like how, questions of how to, you know, relieve my pain, but also like, oh, why am I having, you know, let's say heavy bleeding? Is that normal? So there are actually a lot of questions on trying to understand your own body, which people are asking at least I think that will only increase. Till now, the narrative, especially with women, has been like, don't ask questions. Right.

Divya: So interesting.

Is there any part of like being in research that you miss

Is there any part of like being in research that you miss?

Aditi: Good, question. I really used to, like, we have seminars. So, like, you have a lot of seminars where people, like, present their work. They're, like, intellectually super stimulating. So it's not just about ideas, but it's like then ideas where people have, in a way, they've become experts in that idea and they've gone so deep and you think so deeply about something which could be really specific. So at an intellectual level, because often these things are quite a, It is interesting. But then also from. So I think I really miss the seminars, I have to say. Yeah, I mean, I used to really like people. I was collaborating with my co author.

Divya: Like, we must tell Saraswati about this.

Aditi: Oh, yeah. My current ones are like, so, yeah, I don't know. Academicians are a bit crazy, right? Like, so they're big, they're very quirky.

Divya: I think, though, that, like, you know, when you are someone who has a very precise definition of who you are, then, like, you know, even slight deviations from that would feel very different. So, like, for example, to somebody who's in academia, like, somebody who's working in media or as an artist, they would all seem similar. But, like, as somebody who works in, like, you know, media, I'm like, no, a producer feels very different from a director who feels very different from an artist, who feels very different from an actor. Right. And, like, if you're an actor, you can even tell, like, you know, more differences between people.

Aditi: I know. So that's why in the, beginning, you just called me an economist. I was like.

Divya: You'Re like, why are you using the most generic term for me? That's not who I am.

Aditi: Yeah, identity is super confusing. Yeah. I define myself as an economist.

Divya: How do you define yourself now?

Aditi: Not an economist. change maker. No, no, I'm joking.

Divya: Okay, so you're not comfortable yet with calling yourself a change maker?

Aditi: Oh, definitely not.

Divya: Like, there is this, like, joke amongst the creative types that, like, it takes them quite a while to call themselves an artist. Like, I have been working in art and around domains for, like, what, 15 years at this point. I still don't fully feel comfortable calling myself an artiste. I'm like, but I'm not an artist. I'm, a designer. And I do this and I do that, but not an artist.

Aditi: True. But I think with the creative things, it's very, very tricky. Like, it's so hard to meet people who are. So. My partner, husband, he works in films now, but he used to do music before, and with all musicians, it's such a huge thing. If you say that they are a musician, were a musician, it's kind of like, no, no, no, I'm m not a musician. So I mean, I totally, I think with creative things it's really, yeah, tricky and hard and it's believable because, yeah, it's so subjective. Right. In a way. I mean, you know, you've thought more about it.

Divya: I mean, like, you are the person who was like uncomfortable with calling yourself a change maker, even though you want to make change at scale. I know, but which is what a change maker is.

Aditi: But once the change is made, then maybe I would be, yeah, I think I would just say I am, I am a, I'm a, ah, problem solver that.

Divya: Is like the most analytical people's like scapegoat world. They're like, what do you do? I love solving interesting problems, guys. That's how I'm gonna define myself, which is not a definition at all, but okay, I'll let you have that one.

In startup, there are always goals; in research there are no goals

Would you say like the nature of collaboration between people who work in like, you know, how is it different working with somebody in close proximity when you are aiming for like a far out goal and there are no intermediary steps, so to say, and then working with somebody where you do have a far out goal, but then you are also thinking, okay, next week we gotta do this, and then the week after that we gotta do this.

Aditi: Yeah, I mean, very different. So I think, good question. Like in research there were often like no goals or anything planned for like could be months actually, which I think will like make some people faint or have a heart attack. So it's very interesting because startup has so much uncertainty and research has so much uncertainty. Like someone has asked me like, what is harder? Because uncertainty is generally hard. I think in some ways I found the research uncertainty harder. In terms of, in research though, like, you have a job and you're getting paid. I think in startup it's more the money part of it is more like, I would say stressful. Uncertain. Yeah. Because in terms of, in research, usually you have a job, you're paid, and then, but in terms of like say in a startup, it's like what you said totally correctly, that there are always goals, right. At least at a quarter level, then like, and you have like very clear outputs, right. There's always going to be an ah, output which is coming out. There's not very long periods of ideation or you know, just open the box and just like roam around there. whereas in research, it's like you are supposed to push the frontier even actually finding a problem, at least in kind of the economics I was trained. It is so hard because you have to find a problem statement which is new and which is solvable, solvable by you, like, so it's a very small, with not much help because you don't get a lot of help from, I mean, like professors, right, people who are experts at the topic. So I would say it's way harder then. The point is you put in a lot of time and then it's very high probability your idea doesn't work out, and then it's like, you. So, yeah, it's, it's quite hard to research. so working with people. So. So in the research part, I think it's very, always self driven, even with collaborators, or if they're senior collaborators. No one sets, like, really any goals for you. There will be some, often at, like, project levels, but it is such a self driven thing. I mean, because tomorrow, like, you could be like, waking up and not motivated and not do anything. And frankly, I don't think in most research places anyone will ask you or pull you off. Like, m your supervisor will also be like, yeah, it's up to you. Sure. You won't get your PhD, right? So it's so high on self accountability that actually the other people are more for like, jamming and brainstorming and pushing the frontier, solving things together, then, like, actually not. You're not like co workers in the sense I feel like, you know, like a startup or a normal workplace where you have many more accountability mechanisms, where you are more as a team working towards a thing. So even in research, if you're working on the same paper with other people, yeah, it's somehow like the dynamic is quite different. It's still very self driven.

Sadeena says she likes working with co-creators in startup world

Divya: Would you say you like doing the co creation, that comes in startup world?

Aditi: yeah, I really like it. So I used to always think I really like working alone because in a context, that's what you do, and I am very self driven. And so even when I was working on projects or papers with three people, four people, but, like, startup collaboration is like 100 x intensity of that. so I was actually quite unsure if I would like such high level of collaboration. Like, let's say now, of course, at the daily level, we, me, saraswati, our team, we collaborate so much. I really like it. I just need, like, some time to still work on my own. So basically, I think there are different types of thinking people like to think in different ways. And I am the thinking kind of person where I need to see something, I need to take my time, make up my mind about it and come back. Some people are really like on the spot sharp. Like they don't want to think alone about it. But so I think, like, I still always need that. So even in a startup setup, someone will say like, oh, we should do this campaign. I'll be like, okay, can I sleep on it? Can I think about it?

Divya: So, yeah, I think startups need more people like you who think about stuff slightly more long term.

Aditi: What is the startup call? Which got funded this week?

Divya: Seven.

Aditi: So that's why I'm also so excited because his temperament is also, of course, I feel like quite balanced and very sort of say, holistic how he thinks. And also I was so excited. I'm like, my God, it's such a positive energy, for the indian, startup ecosystem.

Divya: Yeah, there is a lot of buzz about it. Yesterday I was at an AI event where, doctor Pratish's co founder was there from Sarvam. yeah. Like people were swarming him all the time. Very rightly so. But yeah, it was really, it was. There is a lot of, specially in the AI ecosystem, there is like a lot of positive vibes happening right now. I didn't know that I would learn so much about economics.

Aditi: I didn't know I could talk about economic world. No one asked me about it.

Divya: Yeah, I think like, we just ask people about weird things that they don't generally talk about.

Aditi: No, I mean, as long as it's interesting. It gives very interesting mental model and framework to think about just life. I feel awesome.

Divya: Thank you so much.

Aditi: Sadeena subscribe M.