Graduate Program or Regular Job

Austria!

In terms of progression is it better to get in under a graduate program or is it better to get a regular entry level position at a company?
If it makes any difference, I have a PhD.

callaway92

If you feel like you want to stay with a company for the foreseeable future then I'd say go for the grad program if you have to.

However, I must imagine that if you want to make moves up quickly in your profession, which I'd assume you do after doing a PHD then you should want an entry level position.

After doing a PHD I feel you would be putting yourself down by doing a Grad Job. You should have no need for one.

Turtle_

callaway92 wrote: »

After doing a PHD I feel you would be putting yourself down by doing a Grad Job. You should have no need for one.

Depends on the field. Sometimes a PhD adds no ability to do a day-to-day job in the real world because of the split between practical and theoretical. Often people who are very theoretical by nature are drawn to research, whilst people good in practice just go straight to work. Experience in research is no guarantee that a person will be any good at the job at all, it shows they're academic and well motivated.

Another point to consider is that often graduate programmes specifically take account of situations where a new entrant has a PhD. The main benefits of grad programmes are usually getting diverse experience and a structured path to professional qualifications.

There's no simple answer. It very much depends on the specifics of the individual, their research, and the specific roles and programmes available.

jive

Austria! wrote: »

In terms of progression is it better to get in under a graduate program or is it better to get a regular entry level position at a company?
If it makes any difference, I have a PhD.

From your post history I assume this is science related. In that case, go for an entry level position and not a grad job. If you've a PhD you are well qualified and will progress; if you're in a grad programme you will be on a structured programme for 2-3 years. Once you get some GMP experience you will be able to move company for a lot more $$$, times are good in the pharma/biotech sector at the moment. Getting the first job can be tough and you might have to accept any old crud to get some funds flowing but after gaining some industry experience you will get to where you want to go. Plus, you will see what areas you are interested in once you start working with and chatting with people in industry.

conor222

What field is it in?

Austria!

Thanks for the replies everyone. Useful stuff. The areas I'd looking at are Biotech/pharma/Medical Devices.

To summarise the response:
Grad programs do take into account PhDs sometimes.
Grad programs can provide diverse experience and structured path
You can progress quickly once you have the first industry experience under your belt.
You might be stuck in an entry level position for a year, but you can get stuck in a Grad Program for 2-3 years

My concern was that an entry level position is so simple there's no chance to excel or impress, whereas with a grad program there are more opportunities to stand out because you'd be competing against peers, and the money would probably be better with a grad program too (though I'm not motivated by money too much).

So my remaining questions are
Are there are much tests or monitoring of grad program candidates so they can stand out? I guess this depends on individual grad programs so I'll try to find that out the specifics myself too.
What are my prospects after a 9 month entry level job? Because I am quite surprised at how difficult it is to get a job now with a PhD. I'm well over 150 applications, with only 1 interview. Is that 9 months GMP experience going to make it that much easier to even get another job, let alone a much better job?

callaway92

Honestly, I'd say go for entry level. Do a year or so and then move on somewhere else to bigger and better money.

I don't know this, but I'd imagine a year's worth of entry level including a PHD would look just as good as a grad role for two years or so.

Why is there no chance to excel/impress in an entry level position? There'd probably be more authority on you in that position rather than in a grad position.

Austria!

callaway92 wrote: »

Why is there no chance to excel/impress in an entry level position? There'd probably be more authority on you in that position rather than in a grad position.

I worked in lab testing food before. It was trained monkey stuff, and I don't see how anyone could be better at it than anyone else realistically, and there was nothing in place to monitor employee performance, apart from clock in sheets.