Moving from PhD into real world

randomname2005

Hi all,
Im coming to the end of my PhD [hopefully! ] and looking at moving into the real world. For those of you who went straight from undergrad to PhDs, how did you find the transition, and did you find the lack of experience (presuming the only experience you had to your related field was summer/intern experience) affected your job prospects?

R

Red Alert

only thing i remember from deciding to start my phd last year was a couple of employers saying either that a phd meant no job or that they'd only pay you as if you came out of college.

CathalMc

It's probably best if you mention what area your PhD is in - a PhD in Humanities is a different beast to a PhD in Engineering for instance.

Incidently, during my internship in a multi-national electronics company a few years ago, one of the technical managers recommended doing a PhD.

simu

I intend to stay in the unreal zone of academia forever!

We really need more info about what field you're in to discuss this question, though!

Red Alert

simu wrote:

unreal zone of academia forever!

Me too

randomname2005

Computer science. (And thanks for the replies!)

r3nu4l

To be honest, I went from postgrad to postdoc, go t sick at teh lack of real opportunities so moved to the real world.

To begin with you may get paid slightly more than a regular graduate but not much more. It's certainly not enough for you to think doing the PhD was worth it.

However, having the PhD makes it easier to move up the ladder more quickly once you have a couple of years under your belt. There are some postions in pharma where a PhD is an absolute requirement, I imagine IT is the same.

Michael Collins

r3nu4l wrote:

...There are some postions in pharma where a PhD is an absolute requirement, I imagine IT is the same.

Yep, lecturering for one.

scojones

Michael Collins wrote:

Yep, lecturering for one.

A PHD is not a requirement for lecturing. While attaining a masters you can do grinds and fill in for lecturers. Once you have your masters you can lecture. I'm sure this depends on the college you're in though.

r3nu4l

scojones wrote:

I'm sure this depends on the college you're in though.

Agreed, in most University departments a PhD is an absolute must, especially in Science as most lecturers also run research labs. As well as a PhD, these people must have a good publication track record and demonstrate an ability to raise research funding as well as good financial acumen.

For other departments/faculties, this is not such an issue, especially Arts.

Esmereldina

r3nu4l wrote:

Agreed, in most University departments a PhD is an absolute must, especially in Science as most lecturers also run research labs. As well as a PhD, these people must have a good publication track record and demonstrate an ability to raise research funding as well as good financial acumen.

For other departments/faculties, this is not such an issue, especially Arts.

:eek: A PhD would be an essential requirement for pretty much all lecturing posts in humanities departments too (exceptions would be perhaps smaller or private colleges, or that rare lucky person who gets a few lecturing hours in a university while finishing PhD). PhD is a minimum requirement though (academic posts in humanities are very competitive as there aren't very many of them) and you would really need to have a good publication record too. The ability to raise funding is perhaps less important as having money to run labs and buy expensive equipment (or whatever you guys spend your money on ) is not essential to humanities research, which basically comes down to sitting down and reading books all day...

CathalMc

Question for the Op:
What was your research on? And most importantly, is it in active research/development in industry?

I ask because r3nu4l mentioned that in a downbeat (but perfectly correct ) way that

...you may get paid slightly more...
...makes it easier to move up the ladder more quickly...
...There are some postions ... where a PhD is an absolute requirement...

This is one facet of a PhD that identifies a person as a research engine, self-motivated, organised etc..

There is a second element here perhaps more pertinent to the tech industries - the PhD identifies you as an expert in your particular area, possibly THE world expert in your research topic, and absolutely on-top of the cutting edge. If your research and/or research area is of serious interest in industry when you graduate then you would be in a different ballgame.

Does anyone have this experience?

randomname2005

CathalMc wrote:

Question for the Op:
What was your research on? And most importantly, is it in active research/development in industry?

I ask because r3nu4l mentioned that in a downbeat (but perfectly correct ) way that

...you may get paid slightly more...
...makes it easier to move up the ladder more quickly...
...There are some postions ... where a PhD is an absolute requirement...

This is one facet of a PhD that identifies a person as a research engine, self-motivated, organised etc..

There is a second element here perhaps more pertinent to the tech industries - the PhD identifies you as an expert in your particular area, possibly THE world expert in your research topic, and absolutely on-top of the cutting edge. If your research and/or research area is of serious interest in industry when you graduate then you would be in a different ballgame.

Does anyone have this experience?

As mentioned earlier my PhD is in computer science, and specifically working on stereoscopic depth reconstruction, which is a popular research area because it is part of augmented reality and a whole host of other applications.

Its always interesting to get different perspectives on doing a PhD! Of course supervisors are very upbeat and express how great it is, but people who have gone through it seem to have less optimistic opinions!!!

R

r3nu4l

randomname2005 wrote:

Its always interesting to get different perspectives on doing a PhD! Of course supervisors are very upbeat and express how great it is, but people who have gone through it seem to have less optimistic opinions!!!

A lot of PhD students feel this way because they are so tied up in their projects. It's easy to see how much is not going well, where your frustrations are etc and less easy to see the work as others see it.

When you take a step back and look at it from an outsiders point of view, not knowing what you know, it is exciting. It can be a real buzz to do this once in a while, to truly step back. We often feel taht our work is being swallowed up in the huge amount of work being done in the area but I was delighted to see that some of my publications are still being cited by others to support their research. That's a nice feeling.

randomname2005

r3nu4l wrote:

When you take a step back and look at it from an outsiders point of view, not knowing what you know, it is exciting. It can be a real buzz to do this once in a while, to truly step back. We often feel taht our work is being swallowed up in the huge amount of work being done in the area but I was delighted to see that some of my publications are still being cited by others to support their research. That's a nice feeling.

Indeed the ability to see the wood from the trees!

R

satchmo

In my case, having done a PhD in 3D graphics, I probably wouldn't have gotten the job I have now if I didn't do the PhD. Not necessarily because of the qualification itself (although it did help in the goal-oriented, self motivated' aspects that employers like), but mostly because of what I was exposed to during the course of my research and how that related to my current job. Having said that, good luck and better timing was a big factor too! I was also fortunate that the research group I was in had good leadership and (as a result) good funding.

I probably would have learned more by now if I had gone straight into industry; however the chances of me getting my current job or anything close to it straight out of college would have been zero, so all in all I'm happy with how things went.

dudara

I completed a PhD in electron transport in a particular semiconductor material. But by the time I finished, I was sick of the pettiness of academia, as well the tightness and limitations imposed by such a specialised area of study. At this stage, I also had 2 years part-time lecturing experience under my belt as well, so I knew that I didn't want to continue in academia.

So I left, and joined a Big 4 firm working as a management consultant, and so far it's been a great, fun and challenging experience. I've had to learn loads of new material, but having a PhD in a mathemical and logical subject has really benefitted me.

randomname2005

Cheers, at least there seems to be some advantages to having one!!!
R

dK1NG

simu wrote:

I intend to stay in the unreal zone of academia forever!

Red Alert wrote:

Me too

gotta agree with that!

scojones wrote:

A PHD is not a requirement for lecturing. While attaining a masters you can do grinds and fill in for lecturers. Once you have your masters you can lecture. I'm sure this depends on the college you're in though.

these days it has become much more important - up until 5 yrs ago it wasnt strictly necessary, but nowadays its often difficult to get an interview without a phd! (in the humanities anyway)

the people with masters that get temporary positions often do this for a yr or two (basically, like teaching assistants a few yrs back), before enrolling for their phd.

Esmereldina wrote:

:eek: A PhD would be an essential requirement for pretty much all lecturing posts in humanities departments too (exceptions would be perhaps smaller or private colleges, or that rare lucky person who gets a few lecturing hours in a university while finishing PhD).

i got poxed this semester - got asked to do 2hrs every second week:)