My goodness, Thom! The subset of your work that I know is so important, and so damned excellent. From half a world away I had no idea about this. You lay out so much of what is wrong in how organisations recruit and how disciplines coalesce. For all the suits who cap on about “breaking down silos” but build budgetary units =structures that reify those “silos”, you’d think there would be tried and workable ways that every institution has to make better hiring strategies happen. Everywhere!
Thank you for this really important and yes awfully sad post!
Hi Rob. Thank you for the kind words! You're right that creation of budgetary units encourages silos, even if/when specific individuals within those units aren't siloed in their thinking. I was naive to all of this when I first started out.
There are definitely better ways but it will take brave and strong leadership to bring that about. It takes a lot of effort to turn massive institutions.
I fear this is a reflection on humans, rather than on you Thom. Other sectors have analgous dysfunction, very good people get treated abominably. I'm not an academic but have been avid in trying to get to the bottom of big questions and your papers were key parts of the jigsaw. That you have not gained due recognition is shocking. Wishing you health and success.
Thank you, very kind. You're right of course that some of this is just people. But equally, some of it is the structure of institutions, and the incentives and rewards they create.
Thanks for sharing!! Truly thankful. Your experience helps me understand my own. I finished my Interdisciplinary PhD 20 years ago and decided, from the start, not to look for a job in academia but to go back to my previous career as a management consultant. Because I had previous experience working w business clients in different sectors of industry, the structural rituals of academic life seemed unappetizing once I got to understand its inner workings. In my opinion, what you describe is a structural problem created by the hyper specialization academic departments need to attract students, grants, sponsors, and reputable researchers; second, of the lack of incentives the various academic departments have to achieve business-like efficiency in terms of employee onboarding in particular and general management in general; and, third, of your own burning question and motivation which led you to follow an unortodox specialization. I admire your commitment and perseverance and hope that writing in this open forum will help you achieve your goals.
And yes, I agree on the factors you identify. The first (hyper specialisation) lots of people talk about. The second is far less recognised but as important, if not more so. Academics rightly enjoy the informality of their roles, but it too often slides into unseriousness and unprofessionalism, and there are insufficient structural incentives to do better. Some Govts have made efforts but the specifics are often crass and ineffective.
Thanks for sharing, Thom. It's good you included this much detail, including what you felt along the way.
As someone in the uncertain early postdoc stage, I find this quite useful! And weirdly heartening and disheartening at the same time. As someone with a somewhat similar background and interdisciplinary ideals, I often feel the pang of uncertainty. (Thankfully I have an extensive support group, which I'm learning to use more and more).
I agree that the current incentives exacerbates this uncertainty more than it needs to, and I too have wondered why academics aren't more outraged. We're losing a lot of people, with less privileged or non-academic backgrounds, more original or longer paths, non-disciplinary ideas, or just the natural desire to have a family and friends. And lots of great ideas and contributions with them.
It's a real privilege to be able to nerd out on my passions daily, and I understand the temptation to do only that. Academia is really really great most days. But we shouldn't pretend we're ethereal beings only interested in ideas, with no desire for food, shelter or human comfort. This post feels like a step in the right direction.
We do lose lots of people but that is inevitable given how many PhD graduates there are. (I would advocate for far fewer PhD graduates, and directing those funds towards stable "Research Scientist" jobs.)
Btw I liked your paper on institutions. I hope we get to talk in person sometime sooner or later.
I was thinking about you the other day and I was wondering what you were up to, so fortuitous timing to stumble on this, even though it makes for hard reading at times (although the writing itself is excellent).
I was astounded to read about the level of unprofessionalism that you have encountered during interviews, which is way worse than anything I have encountered outside academia. Sadly, I find the the employment situation less surprising, and I think almost everyone in my PhD cohort has eventually transitioned away from academia.
Thanks for writing this, I look forward to reading more of your writings now that I found you here!
Yeah, I have experience of non academic sectors so I know they are generally much better about professional treatment. (Although, not always. There’s always one or two arseholes.)
I'm currently in Berlin, and I myself transitioned to product management. I enjoy the work and transition to software development, though I did enjoy getting something I did during my undergraduate published last year. Having two small children, dancing has been on a bit of a hiatus...!
Hi Thom – as I already mentioned on Bluesky, I had no idea this was where you were coming from when we were arguing about the incentives for wikipedia the other week. In fact, it is precisely because I thought we were two professors that I thought it was important to give my alternate perspective on both those incentives and infrastructure (which are not the point of the present post), because I'd seen too many people get harmed by doing what they *believed* (perhaps falsely) SHOULD be right rather than going with what more often works. For example, the people who passionately believed that knowledge should be free and fell into the terrible incentive structure of pay-to-publish. But I undersold the main paper describing my PhD too, like a lot of those people did.
I do have a full professorship now, but I also spent 10 years as a postgraduate student, 1 year postdoc, then 10 years as an assistant professor (lecturer.) I could do that latter because I played two safeties. After not getting an offer I expected for the one job I got an interview for a US job search, I applied to UK jobs and accepted a salary as low as my postdoctoral one had been. (Another thing that bothers me now – people saying it's impossible to live on UK salaries, or no American would do that.) So first, I applied to the UK, and second to Computer Science, even though I thought it was the most boring of my disciplines, but because there were a lot of jobs. I assumed I could move soon after, and was completely wrong. I did tons of interviews, mostly to be closer to my partner. I also did the long distance relationship from 2006-2020.
Now I work in Germany, where everyone assumes you must be German to even consider applying for a job there, as if it were the only country with a fascist or genocidal history. I'm lucky. There's definitely a lot of luck (preparation (including open mindedness) meets opportunity) in academia.
I had people say exactly what they said to you – that their department would be way better if they took people like, but that would never happen. My partner had exactly what happened to you in Spain happen to him in the Netherlands. He's still not a professor, but he now has a permanent research scientist job (and a h-index above most full professors at our school.)
I disagree with you that universities refuse to keep talent because they want to just look international. A lot of us want new colleagues (including subordinates) to teach us things we don't know, and we want our best junior people to go learn things we can't teach them. I have always tried to get my best students places at better universities than my own, and often succeeded at least for their postdoc. Others of my colleagues have tried to keep talent close to home and subordinated, and I've often thought THAT could be exploitative. Though I've also seen it done out of mutual respect and moderated ambitions.
You are right that there is pettiness and corruption in many institutions, inside and outside of academia. Honestly, I see it as more likely to survive in academia than in business because our institutions are under less selective pressure, but I also do not see it everywhere.
The baseline thing is that we academics produce more PhD students than we need to replace ourselves, and we need to accept that – we need to build a "circular economy" that includes people doing awesome postgraduate research, but being absolutely informed and supported about the chances they are taking. I've written about that here: https://joanna-bryson.blogspot.com/2014/02/its-our-job-to-make-doing-phds-better.html
I hope you find a great job. Vienna should be fantastic for you, though professors teach a lot there for very little money, I hear. My partner and I incidentally also got passed over by CEU, which we were very enthusiastic for – me for a conventional experimental psychologist, him for someone Hungarian (which incidentally ensuring they had half Hungarian professors did not save CEU in the end.) But let me know if you think I might know any one in evolution of culture there that you don't, I'd be happy to try to help.
Bath Computer Science is still hiring. They keep losing people to industry.
I feel bad for you, admire your candor, and you’re clearly a bright guy, but when you compared yourself to Einstein I got a better idea of why you might have gotten many rejections.
The comparison lies in the emphasis on theoretical synthesis, focus on foundational questions and the potential for high impact in the relevant fields. Why do you think ambition and enthusiasm for one's fields is off putting?
My goodness, Thom! The subset of your work that I know is so important, and so damned excellent. From half a world away I had no idea about this. You lay out so much of what is wrong in how organisations recruit and how disciplines coalesce. For all the suits who cap on about “breaking down silos” but build budgetary units =structures that reify those “silos”, you’d think there would be tried and workable ways that every institution has to make better hiring strategies happen. Everywhere!
Thank you for this really important and yes awfully sad post!
Hi Rob. Thank you for the kind words! You're right that creation of budgetary units encourages silos, even if/when specific individuals within those units aren't siloed in their thinking. I was naive to all of this when I first started out.
There are definitely better ways but it will take brave and strong leadership to bring that about. It takes a lot of effort to turn massive institutions.
I fear this is a reflection on humans, rather than on you Thom. Other sectors have analgous dysfunction, very good people get treated abominably. I'm not an academic but have been avid in trying to get to the bottom of big questions and your papers were key parts of the jigsaw. That you have not gained due recognition is shocking. Wishing you health and success.
Thank you, very kind. You're right of course that some of this is just people. But equally, some of it is the structure of institutions, and the incentives and rewards they create.
If ever there was a reason to be rich, it must be to fund Research Chairs like this. Good luck, Thom!
Thanks for sharing!! Truly thankful. Your experience helps me understand my own. I finished my Interdisciplinary PhD 20 years ago and decided, from the start, not to look for a job in academia but to go back to my previous career as a management consultant. Because I had previous experience working w business clients in different sectors of industry, the structural rituals of academic life seemed unappetizing once I got to understand its inner workings. In my opinion, what you describe is a structural problem created by the hyper specialization academic departments need to attract students, grants, sponsors, and reputable researchers; second, of the lack of incentives the various academic departments have to achieve business-like efficiency in terms of employee onboarding in particular and general management in general; and, third, of your own burning question and motivation which led you to follow an unortodox specialization. I admire your commitment and perseverance and hope that writing in this open forum will help you achieve your goals.
Hello! Thank you for the supportive words :)
And yes, I agree on the factors you identify. The first (hyper specialisation) lots of people talk about. The second is far less recognised but as important, if not more so. Academics rightly enjoy the informality of their roles, but it too often slides into unseriousness and unprofessionalism, and there are insufficient structural incentives to do better. Some Govts have made efforts but the specifics are often crass and ineffective.
Thanks for sharing, Thom. It's good you included this much detail, including what you felt along the way.
As someone in the uncertain early postdoc stage, I find this quite useful! And weirdly heartening and disheartening at the same time. As someone with a somewhat similar background and interdisciplinary ideals, I often feel the pang of uncertainty. (Thankfully I have an extensive support group, which I'm learning to use more and more).
I agree that the current incentives exacerbates this uncertainty more than it needs to, and I too have wondered why academics aren't more outraged. We're losing a lot of people, with less privileged or non-academic backgrounds, more original or longer paths, non-disciplinary ideas, or just the natural desire to have a family and friends. And lots of great ideas and contributions with them.
It's a real privilege to be able to nerd out on my passions daily, and I understand the temptation to do only that. Academia is really really great most days. But we shouldn't pretend we're ethereal beings only interested in ideas, with no desire for food, shelter or human comfort. This post feels like a step in the right direction.
Hi Julien. I'm very glad the post was useful :)
We do lose lots of people but that is inevitable given how many PhD graduates there are. (I would advocate for far fewer PhD graduates, and directing those funds towards stable "Research Scientist" jobs.)
Btw I liked your paper on institutions. I hope we get to talk in person sometime sooner or later.
Thanks, that's very kind! Would be very happy to chat next time we run into each other.
I hope things pick up for you, Thom. You deserve a good job.
I was thinking about you the other day and I was wondering what you were up to, so fortuitous timing to stumble on this, even though it makes for hard reading at times (although the writing itself is excellent).
I was astounded to read about the level of unprofessionalism that you have encountered during interviews, which is way worse than anything I have encountered outside academia. Sadly, I find the the employment situation less surprising, and I think almost everyone in my PhD cohort has eventually transitioned away from academia.
Thanks for writing this, I look forward to reading more of your writings now that I found you here!
Sebastian! Hi, nice to hear from you.
Yeah, I have experience of non academic sectors so I know they are generally much better about professional treatment. (Although, not always. There’s always one or two arseholes.)
Where are you these days and what are you up to?
I'm currently in Berlin, and I myself transitioned to product management. I enjoy the work and transition to software development, though I did enjoy getting something I did during my undergraduate published last year. Having two small children, dancing has been on a bit of a hiatus...!
Ah, we were in Berlin last year, next time we're around I'll get in touch. Congratulations on the kids!
Hi Thom – as I already mentioned on Bluesky, I had no idea this was where you were coming from when we were arguing about the incentives for wikipedia the other week. In fact, it is precisely because I thought we were two professors that I thought it was important to give my alternate perspective on both those incentives and infrastructure (which are not the point of the present post), because I'd seen too many people get harmed by doing what they *believed* (perhaps falsely) SHOULD be right rather than going with what more often works. For example, the people who passionately believed that knowledge should be free and fell into the terrible incentive structure of pay-to-publish. But I undersold the main paper describing my PhD too, like a lot of those people did.
I do have a full professorship now, but I also spent 10 years as a postgraduate student, 1 year postdoc, then 10 years as an assistant professor (lecturer.) I could do that latter because I played two safeties. After not getting an offer I expected for the one job I got an interview for a US job search, I applied to UK jobs and accepted a salary as low as my postdoctoral one had been. (Another thing that bothers me now – people saying it's impossible to live on UK salaries, or no American would do that.) So first, I applied to the UK, and second to Computer Science, even though I thought it was the most boring of my disciplines, but because there were a lot of jobs. I assumed I could move soon after, and was completely wrong. I did tons of interviews, mostly to be closer to my partner. I also did the long distance relationship from 2006-2020.
Now I work in Germany, where everyone assumes you must be German to even consider applying for a job there, as if it were the only country with a fascist or genocidal history. I'm lucky. There's definitely a lot of luck (preparation (including open mindedness) meets opportunity) in academia.
I had people say exactly what they said to you – that their department would be way better if they took people like, but that would never happen. My partner had exactly what happened to you in Spain happen to him in the Netherlands. He's still not a professor, but he now has a permanent research scientist job (and a h-index above most full professors at our school.)
I disagree with you that universities refuse to keep talent because they want to just look international. A lot of us want new colleagues (including subordinates) to teach us things we don't know, and we want our best junior people to go learn things we can't teach them. I have always tried to get my best students places at better universities than my own, and often succeeded at least for their postdoc. Others of my colleagues have tried to keep talent close to home and subordinated, and I've often thought THAT could be exploitative. Though I've also seen it done out of mutual respect and moderated ambitions.
You are right that there is pettiness and corruption in many institutions, inside and outside of academia. Honestly, I see it as more likely to survive in academia than in business because our institutions are under less selective pressure, but I also do not see it everywhere.
The baseline thing is that we academics produce more PhD students than we need to replace ourselves, and we need to accept that – we need to build a "circular economy" that includes people doing awesome postgraduate research, but being absolutely informed and supported about the chances they are taking. I've written about that here: https://joanna-bryson.blogspot.com/2014/02/its-our-job-to-make-doing-phds-better.html
I hope you find a great job. Vienna should be fantastic for you, though professors teach a lot there for very little money, I hear. My partner and I incidentally also got passed over by CEU, which we were very enthusiastic for – me for a conventional experimental psychologist, him for someone Hungarian (which incidentally ensuring they had half Hungarian professors did not save CEU in the end.) But let me know if you think I might know any one in evolution of culture there that you don't, I'd be happy to try to help.
Bath Computer Science is still hiring. They keep losing people to industry.
I feel bad for you, admire your candor, and you’re clearly a bright guy, but when you compared yourself to Einstein I got a better idea of why you might have gotten many rejections.
The comparison lies in the emphasis on theoretical synthesis, focus on foundational questions and the potential for high impact in the relevant fields. Why do you think ambition and enthusiasm for one's fields is off putting?
“In Physics you can get a Nobel Prize for theory and many people have done. In Psychology, I have learned, you can barely get a job.”
I mean… that’s the spirit (?)