My guests today are Biliana Rajevic, Head of External Communications at Quantum Brilliance and co‑founder of Quantum Women, Rachel Rayner, a science communicator and comedian, and Alison Goldingay, a quantum researcher at UNSW. We discuss the “Elevating Quantum Women’s Voices” program, an initiative designed to empower women in the quantum industry to communicate effectively and build their visibility. They share insights from the program’s curriculum, such as the power of storytelling, adapting to different audiences, and the specific challenges of presenting on Zoom. Rachel describes her “Quantum Comedy” shows that blend humor with physics, while Alison and Biliana demonstrate the program’s “60-second challenge” by explaining single-photon detection and diamond-based quantum computing in plain English. We also explore the broader importance of diversity in the quantum ecosystem, their dream dinner guests from history, and much more.
Transcript
Yuval: Hello Alison, hello Biliana, hello Rachel. Thank you so much for joining me today.
Rachel:Hello, thank you for having me. Thank you so much for having us.
Yuval: So, Alison, who are you and what do you do?
Alison: Yes, hi, I’m Alison Goldingay. I am a quantum researcher at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia. It’s really exciting. I get to be in the lab quite a bit. What we’re doing is working on photonic control. We’re working on the creation and detection of single photons. I can tell you more about that, but we’re very excited about it and the future and how we could use it for a whole variety of quantum applications.
Yuval: Wonderful. And Biliana, who are you and what do you do?
Biliana:Yes, hi, I’m Biliana Rajevic. I wear a few hats. In my day job, I work at Quantum Brilliance, and we are a leading quantum diamond technology company developing hardware, software, and diamond materials. My role here, when I first started two and a half years ago, was leading strategy, and I’ve since shifted into leading external communications. And then, with my other hat, in my spare time, I am a co‑founder of a charity called Quantum Women, with our goal to really help elevate and promote women who are working in quantum.
Yuval: And Rachel, how about you? Who are you and what do you do?
Rachel:Hi, I am Rachel Rayner. I’m a communications expert specializing in presentation and performance for TV, video, radio, and stage, because each medium is slightly different. I really enjoy those differences and helping people tell their stories and shape what they want to say to each medium. Like Biliana, I have a few hats. I’ve been touring the country for a while, doing quantum comedies on stage in arts festivals and things. I also do PR and marketing as well within a company. So there’s quite a few things, but yeah, I think communications expert sort of sums up what I do.
Yuval: And I think in the context of this call, you’re also a coach in a program. Could you tell me a little bit about the program—what the goals are and who the participants are?
Rachel:Yeah, exactly. It’s an incredible program. There’s a pool of us coaches and mentors. It was part of an application process to apply to be a coach in the program, so we had to show we had proper credentials. The program is really focusing on communication and helping people within the quantum industry—helping women within the quantum industry—elevate their voice. I love a program name that tells you exactly what it is right off the bat. And yeah, it’s about getting women who are working in quantum, just like Alison, and making sure they’ve got the tools to be in a room and be heard and be on the stages, be on TV—really talking about the work they’re doing, the work their companies are doing, and being a visible presence in the quantum industry. I really think this program is a great step on that path to getting more women in quantum visible everywhere.
Yuval: What’s quantum about it? I mean, other than people in quantum, isn’t that a skill set that’s probably required in many other industries?
Rachel:Yeah, absolutely, but I think— and I know Biliana can answer this better— it’s an opportunity to connect with this industry. It’s a really new industry, so it’s a chance to do diversity and equality right from the beginning in ways that we missed in physics back in the 1920s, that sort of thing. You know, we didn’t have a lot of women there. We’re at this frontier of quantum engineering, quantum science, quantum physics in a new way. So let’s ensure that the women coming through do have the skills to be visible from the beginning. I think that’s how I read it. But Alison, do you have another take on that?
Alison: Yeah, absolutely. I think communication is so important, no matter what industry you’re in. But I do find it to be particularly challenging being a researcher, and particularly in the field of quantum, because—as we just experienced—when people ask you what you do, it can be difficult to explain that coming from a quantum background. To be able to be taught how to communicate well is really important. It’s really great to have the opportunity to learn how to distill complicated concepts down to simple ideas that people can understand, and that is critical in order to show people how quantum will be useful for them in the future. Otherwise, people will think, “Well, that’s really interesting, but I don’t get it,” so it’s on us, partially, to make sure that people can understand.
Yuval: So, Alison, now that you’re close to the end of the program, what have you learned? If there was one thing that you know now that you didn’t know six or eight weeks ago, what would that be?
Alison: The key thing I’ve learned is how important it is to personalize everything that you are doing in the communication space. I always knew that it’s important to look up who your audience is—to understand what they know—and tailor your communication accordingly. But the extra mile that I’ve learned about here is to think about what your audience actually needs, and to not just assume that they are happy to sit there and learn, but to think about what they actually need and how my presentation can answer that need.
Yuval: And Rachel, tell me a little bit about the syllabus. I mean, how do you start? How do you continue? How many people are in the programme, by the way?
Rachel:Oh, that’s a good question. I should know how many people are in the program. I want to say there’s maybe 60 of us.We have Arabella McPherson, who does this wonderful program on presenting with influence and impact. That’s the major kind of step in this program, and that’s every fortnight. Then, in the in‑between weeks, we get together in smaller groups and tailor what we’ve learned in those bigger sessions to these smaller groups and to everyone’s individual goals. It’s a great opportunity to explore the themes, explore the exercises that were done in the bigger class, and then really hone in: Which bits did we want more practice with? Which do we really want to pull out? Which ones didn’t quite fit with what I’m hoping to get out of the course? So we tailor and shape that and look at it and say, “Well, this is your goal, and this is what we were learning here—actually, you can use it in this way to get there.” It’s really fluid. It’s really personalized from that structure of having those coaches with the smaller sessions. The curriculum is really just all these different steps in communicating that I think, as a communications professional, you tend to take for granted. It’s nice to have this group and be reminded that this isn’t something everybody knows. It’s exactly the same for the researchers. You’re in this field; you assume everyone knows exactly what you mean when you say “quantum spin,” and it’s not the case. Sometimes I find myself doing it too, but in the communications space. So it’s been really nice to meet together and explore all these things.
Yuval: It is true that “spin” in the communication space means something completely different.
Rachel:Very different. Very different.
Yuval: And Alison, I’m guessing you had to do a stand‑up in front of 60 other people and present, and so on. Is there a lot of hands‑on training this way?
Alison: Yes. Well, that’s the event that’s happening tonight in just a few hours’ time. We have an opportunity to put everything we’ve learned together and go up on stage. We’re going to be doing some panel events, talking about different topics that are important to us and, in the meantime, practicing how to communicate. One thing I think we’ll see a lot of tonight is storytelling—I’m hoping—since that was one of the key messages from the course. Hopefully we can connect over that and realize that there is a place for storytelling, even in something so complex. Such a complex field as quantum still requires a human aspect, so that’s what we’ll be doing tonight.
Yuval: Rachel, I may have misheard you, but I think you said “quantum comedy” earlier. Could you explain what quantum comedy is, or give us an example?
Rachel:I use the term “quantum comedy” because—to quote a line from Ant‑Man—do you just put the word “quantum” in front of it and it sounds cooler? Yes. But I had quite a few of the participants in this course come and watch it. They were like, “Oh, atoms and the Standard Model—haven’t thought about that for ages.” So now I’m going, maybe it’s not as quantum as I thought it was. I do these series of one‑hour, one‑woman shows that I take around to arts festivals where the first one was about the photon and exploring light and how we interact with light. So it’s really how we’re interacting with the quantum world on a day‑to‑day basis. The newest show is about the atom and building a Standard Model—so you can build an atom from scratch—and what that means for our experiences of the world. I try to do it in a funny way. I try to do it in an artistic way. My aim was to show artists that you can draw so much inspiration from science, but it seems what I have done is brought scientists to art festivals, and that as well I’m very happy with.
Alison: I’ve attended Rachel’s comedy shows, and I do think they’re so funny. If you don’t mind, Rachel, I’d love to share one of your jokes, which is the concept of a woman scientist and a male scientist. So just to recap what that means: We have, throughout history, talked about “female scientists.” The fact that they’re female means that they have to be called a “female scientist.” But in Rachel’s show, she mentions all kinds of male scientists and “scientists.” I just love that—to flip that idea and to empower women to see that not only can they do quantum, they can do comedy, and they can even do quantum comedy. So I highly recommend her shows. They’re fantastic. Thank you.
Yuval: Absolutely. And Biliana, how did this program come together? What was the inspiration, and how long did it take to put it together?
Biliana:It’s actually something that started five or six years ago for women who work in finance, to be honest. It was somebody here in Australia who was very keen to increase the representation of women on panels, at conferences, and also increase the engagement and representation of women overall in the alternative investments industry. He went out and started to invite these women to panels, and a lot of them would say no. This was a head‑scratcher for him—like, this doesn’t quite compute. So he and a few others started speaking with women to figure out what the barriers are, even when you’re given the opportunity and tapped on the shoulder. There were things like, “I don’t think anybody wants to hear me,” “This is just not what I do,” “I don’t feel comfortable,” “I don’t think I have anything to say.” They set out to change that and developed this program with a C‑suite communications expert, and the way it’s structured has been very deliberate. For example, there are four group training sessions, and in between those are four coaching sessions, and at the bookends there is a launch event and a closing event. Each coaching session is specifically crafted. It’s small teams—we have about five participants—and there are also two coaches. That’s deliberate so that there isn’t a mentor‑mentee kind of relationship, but rather a friendly and collegiate atmosphere. It’s also so coaches aren’t the only people with the “authority,” but have an equal, push‑and‑pull kind of environment. In each of the sessions, different topics are discussed. One is about how you feel prepared—which is quite interesting, because about 80% of the participants said that they are good at preparing a presentation, and then after the first training session it became obvious that “preparing” is something different. It’s not just about your slides and what you’re going to say, but actually researching your audience so you can have power and influence. Other sessions are around anticipating difficult questions, how to do storytelling and engage with your audience, and how to manage your nerves and create confidence in yourself. It’s been a very deliberate structure. When I saw that for the women in finance, I said we need to take this to the women working in quantum with slight tweaks. Quantum Australia, which was about to be formed at the time—about a year, year and a half ago—became a natural partner for us to jointly deliver this program. The initial, unofficial feedback has been great, and that’s why it’s great to bring Alison and Rachel here rather than me telling you how great I think it is. These are the women who have participated both as participants and coaches in it.
Yuval: I had the pleasure of interviewing Michelle Simmons on this podcast. I know Catherine Foley is also from Australia. I haven’t had her yet, I guess, but hope springs eternal. Do you think the situation in Australia is any different than in, say, the UK or the US? Or do you think this kind of program should be exported, so to speak, to other countries?
Biliana:I think it absolutely should be exported, and we have started talking to some entities in Europe. This is a rather large production, to be honest, because it’s not just about finding the participants and the coaches and delivering the program that already exists. A big part of how this is delivered is that the group training sessions take place at other corporations, because this is not something that we should do in silos—we need buy‑in from various industries and partners. Our launch happened at KPMG’s offices. Our closing is going to be at AWS. In between, we’ve had DIRAQ, Quantum Brilliance, Jones Day, Gilbert and Tobin—two law offices—and the Semiconductor Sector Service Bureau host these sessions and have senior people from those organizations see and partake in this. We are definitely starting to think about how to export it. A big part of the program is happening in person, so we are going to have to think about how to incorporate some virtual elements, because otherwise logistically it might be very difficult to manage. But it is the same everywhere. It is the same in many other industries, too. Especially in quantum, the absolute number—the pool of women—is not that big. We have to make sure that we incorporate everyone’s viewpoint as this industry is being developed. Especially on the scientist side, these are women who are super passionate about what they’re doing. It would be such a shame to have them self‑select out at any point of their careers. Some reasons might be valid, which is fine, but if there are reasons we could have helped mitigate or challenges we could have helped remove, I think we all should try to do that.
Yuval: Rachel, Biliana mentioned Zoom. As a communication expert, is there a difference in preparing for a face‑to‑face meeting versus a Zoom meeting, and is that covered in the course?
Rachel:No, we don’t go into that sort of granular detail. I think the course is good in that foundation stuff of, like, “This is my voice, and I’m going to elevate my voice. I’m going to empower my voice.” We haven’t had anyone in our smaller groups talk about those sorts of differences, but there are differences. Then there are the things that are similar across both—the knowing your audience (so important!), knowing who you’re talking to—that is the same everywhere. Making sure that you’re looking after your voice so that you’re speaking well, and managing nerves—those are going to be the same across all these things. It’s not just for the stage. Meeting someone in person in a meeting room—it’s still really important that you know who you’re talking to, you’re managing your nerves in some way, and you’re prepared.
What I would say if you were interested in the difference between meeting someone in person and meeting on Zoom: there’s a lot more body language when you’re in person, and most of our communication is through body language. We did that in the course—so much is in body language. It’s how you’re standing; it’s how you’re posing. We did some good posture exercises the other day, which I think are great. You’ve got to think of your whole presence. You want to get to a point where you’re not consciously thinking about it—that it just becomes second nature—and that’s just practice. But when you’re on a Zoom, you’re in this box. You’re in this box. It’s about coming through in that box. It’s about looking down the camera, because if you’re looking down the camera, you’re making eye contact. Being comfortable with that difference—the artificialness of looking down the camera so that you’re making eye contact with the person you’re talking to—it’s much less natural than meeting someone in person. So there are things to practice so you’re still very natural. There’s also the question of what to do with your hands. When you’re in person, you’ve got a lot more space for your hands. I’m breaking all the video‑conference rules now by moving my hands too much so that they’re popping in and out of frame—and that’s so distracting. So there are all these things to think about in the different mediums.
Biliana:And I also think—something I was told a few years ago—is to not just rely on your computer camera when you’re talking on Zoom. I went and got another camera that I hook up, and those are the details you don’t necessarily think too much about, or sometimes you just let slide. You keep saying, “Oh look, it’s an internal work call,” and whatnot, but it’s really important to think about how you present yourself every time you go on a Zoom call. Like I said, there are a lot of other things that you lack—you can’t look another person in the eye and other things like that. So how do we make sure you show up polished on a Zoom call?
Rachel:And that the camera angle isn’t up your nose.
Yuval: Alison, now that you’re almost graduated from this course, let’s assume you’re at a cocktail party with non‑quantum people. For quantum people, if you say, “Oh, I work on single‑photon detectors,” most of them would understand, I think. But for intelligent non‑quantum people, how do you explain what it is that you do?
Alison: I like to call it my quantum camera, because that is what it is, but on a very minute scale. I think people can understand something relevant to their everyday life. So if I say I’m making this camera that can detect really, really tiny pieces of light, they get it a lot more than if I spend 10 minutes trying to explain what a photon is and go on a nerdy side tangent so they can understand the technical part of it. It also brings in the element of excitement for the future. I find people are straight away wanting to know about the applications. If you say, “I work on cameras that are going to be useful for a whole bunch of different things,” people can believe that—since cameras are so useful for us for a whole bunch of different things right now.
Biliana:Let me add—that’s an interesting point you make—because Arabella, who is delivering this program, actually gave everybody a challenge. She has no quantum experience. I think she used to be an opera singer and an actress. She told everybody that they should send in a 60‑second max video of what it is that they do in a way that she will understand. I was speaking to somebody else just last night who’s taken up that challenge, and her first take was three minutes. So you start off there, and then you have to start thinking about how to make it shorter and shorter, but still stay true to what you’re doing. It’s quite a challenge. She got it to, I think, 62 seconds. But it does take time to really think about how to explain to the non‑quantums in a way that’s accurate, that you’re not compromising what you do, but also in a way that gets them hooked on what you do and makes them more curious.
Alison: I find that people are much more interested in the “why” rather than the “how” or the “what.” We spend our lives in the how and the what, but “why” is actually the question they want answered. I took up this challenge as well, and I enjoyed trying to think about how to explain all this. I wasn’t sure if I should even use the word “photon”—how do you explain a single‑photon emitter without the word “photon”? I turned to storytelling, which is another skill that Arabella has been teaching us, to paint a story for a character—how this is going to be useful to them. My story was about data security. In Australia we had a significant data‑security breach that one company—maybe I shouldn’t mention—experienced in 2022, which affected one third of Australians. Most people can relate to that because they either had their data hacked or knew someone who did. Putting it in a personal realm where people can relate is another great skill that Arabella has been teaching us. The problem is that telling the story takes half of the minute, so you’re only left with 30 seconds to explain why I’m telling you this story—but it was a good challenge.
Rachel:And I’m going to jump in quickly because Alison jumped in about my comedy. I know Alison has also been practicing comedy on the stage—trying to turn the work that she does into comedy—and I’ve seen it, and it was fantastic. It was fantastic. Thanks.
Yuval: Quantum Brilliance—and I think I had Andrea Tabacini on this program to talk about Quantum Brilliance—but let’s see you practice what you preach. Explain to us, in 60 seconds, what it is that you do.
Biliana:Sixty seconds—so we’ll see if we end up putting this live, but this is how I have explained some things to non‑quantums, and they have appreciated it. We basically receive a synthetic diamond from a synthetic‑diamond supplier, and we need to prepare that diamond to fit into our solutions that we’re developing for areas such as quantum computing or quantum sensing. But when we receive that diamond, it’s not at the quality that’s needed for these applications. Our scientists prepare it in various different ways. Then they start implanting the qubits inside the diamond. They then overgrow it with another piece of diamond and, because of diamond’s properties, once you overgrow it and encase it in diamond, it can operate at room temperature. It forms part of a diamond chip, and that diamond chip then goes into a quantum computer, or it can go into a quantum sensor. I might have to send you a recording of a much more polished version so I don’t upset people here. I usually say, “The diamond is not up to snuff, and we start preparing it.”
Alison: I love the visual—you can picture it as you talk about it.
Biliana:I usually do that—then encasing—and then it’s a diamond chip.
Yuval: Yeah, I mean, diamond computers are a girl’s best friend, right? That’s been well known for many years.
Biliana:If we go back a little bit, I want to mention—when we were talking about the program—that we have 26 women going through the program right now and 10 coaches. It’s also important to mention that these are not just scientists. The quantum industry needs a lot more people with different skill sets. We have people who work at quantum companies who are in operations, in design, in other areas, and in finance. They’re also taking part in this, but the commonality is that they’re either working in quantum or being touched by quantum.
Yuval: You know, there’s a saying that goes something like, “I learned a lot from my teachers, but also from my students.” I’m curious for Rachel, as a coach here—we earlier heard what Alison learned in the course—but Rachel, have you learned anything from the participants while coaching in this course?
Rachel:Yeah, exactly—sorry—yes, I absolutely have. And I wouldn’t say I’m instructing in this course; I’d say I’m there as a coach and mentor in the communications space, to help everyone talk about what they’re doing, to target messages, and facilitate conversation. I definitely don’t feel like I’m instructing. I don’t want to be instructing. It really is that group thing where we’re learning from each other. I have learned a lot. I’m so excited about what’s happening in quantum in Australia right now. I wasn’t fully aware of it. I knew there was a lot happening, but now, meeting the people on the forefront of this, is really great. I’m definitely learning a lot more about our domestic capabilities in quantum—how talented the people are coming through. And I’m learning more things about communication as well. There’s always more to learn, even if you’ve spent your life in a field. There are great refreshers. I’m really enjoying that, too. It’s been fabulous. I can’t speak highly enough of Biliana and the team in putting this together. It’s really amazing. I think I’m learning from people, and the best way to coach and mentor is to really listen, right? I’m getting a chance to listen to all these wonderful people talk about their stories and their work, and I’m just so inspired. I am really, really inspired.
Biliana:And there have been changes. You can see slight changes in people throughout this program as well, because our goal after this is to find ways to proactively help these women put their theory into practice and start creating a greater pool of people who can participate at conferences. It is great to see current senior women at panels and events, but they can’t split themselves five different ways. We need to create a greater pool so that there can be many more voices showing up at more events.
Rachel:Yeah, and I’m finding myself looking for opportunities to get people to practice what they’ve been learning as well. One of the organizations I work with has weekly lunch‑and‑learn sessions. I can organize for some of the people in the courses to come in and present. I’m finding all these spaces for people to practice. I love creating opportunities for people, and it’s nice to have that vision on at the moment and be looking for those opportunities.
Yuval: As we get to the end of our conversation today, I wanted to ask each of you the same hypothetical. If you could have dinner with one of the quantum greats, dead or alive, who would that person be? Maybe Biliana first, then Rachel, and then Alison.
Biliana:I don’t think I know all the quantum greats, but I think I would actually have— and I’ve met him in the past— dinner with John Martinis, because I think now, with the Nobel Prize, he could probably— he is in the quantum greats category. The reason is I’m curious to have a conversation about what’s next—not just what’s been—but what’s coming now, given all the developments that have happened around the science and the technology over the past three, four, five years. I’d be curious to understand his perspective on where we are heading.
Yuval: And Rachel?
Rachel:Mine would be Margrethe Bohr, Niels Bohr’s wife. I think she would be really interesting because it sounds like, by all accounts, they wrote all his papers together, and she really helped him craft his message and explain what he wanted to do. I would love to talk to her and say, “Oh my gosh, what was his first attempt like?” It sounds like she really helped him craft these big ideas that he was thinking about so they could actually get out into the world and be shared and catch on, and I think her work is so important to his story. I would love to hear all about building those theories and writing them out in a way that could reach a bigger audience.
Yuval: Alison?
Alison: Yeah—I have a small comment first, which is I’ve heard the same of Einstein’s wife, and I haven’t fact‑checked this, but I think it would be so interesting to talk with her. But if I had only one, then I would choose Marie Curie. I know that she’s quite famous and probably a common answer to that question. But I do think of that photo from the Solvay Conference where it’s all the male scientists and her. I’m inspired to see her there in that photo, and I’d love to ask her what it was like to hold her own in that space. What a way to show that women can do it all—to win not just one but two Nobel Prizes. I’d love to hear how she reflected on her Nobel Prize when she had won, and then if anything changed when the second came about, because I think that’s so inspiring. To learn from her about how she balanced her life and her work would be quite an inspiring conversation.
Yuval: Alison, Rachel, Biliana, thank you so much for joining me today.
Alison: Thank you so much for having me.
Biliana:Thank you. Thank you for having us.
