Jacopo Bertolotti
23 April 2009
Ideal vs. Real in your early career
Posted in PhD life, TipsIn an ideal world you finish high school having a very clear idea on what you want to do in your life. Then you opt for the very best university in that field, you graduate with very high grades and then you apply for a PhD in a fantastic group in a different university (in a different country). By the time you finish your PhD you accumulated a decent amount of (nicely cited) publications and people in your scientific community start to know about you. At this point you apply for a post-doc somewhere else (once again a fantastic group in a different country) and start your unstoppable run to the top.
In the real world things have the unpleasant habit to be a bit less shiny. Of course there are exceptions, but most of the time you are not really sure what you want to study at university (sometimes you are not even sure you really want to enter university). Even if you make up your mind and decide for a particular course of studies you might not be able to choose wisely where to enrol. Unless in your country there is one or two very famous universities on the subject you opted for chances are that you will end making a decision based on more trivial matters (how close is to home? how expensive it is? will I be able to afford a room and enough food during the years away from home? any of my friends is enrolling in the same place? etc.)
Now you are a student at the university of your dreams but, sadly, not all of your teacher is as good as you hoped. Some of them (hopefully few) are just a plain disaster, a few are just not really willing to devote their energy to teaching. If you add to this the fact that (with a few notably exceptions) you are not Einstein the final result is that you will end your years at university with good but not exceptional grades. In short, you are smart, you are good, but you don’t really stand out from the crowd. Although there are people who think that being a B student is not bad at all this is not going to make your life easier.
Once you finally graduate you have to search for a PhD. Don’t be fooled, choosing a PhD is something meant just for la crème de la crème. If you are an honest, hard working, but average student you will have to search for one. Depending on the country you live in (or the country where you would like to make your PhD) you might have to convince the head of some group, pass an exam or whatever. Hints on where it is best to apply can be found somewhere else on this blog but everyone will tell you that changing city/country/continent is the best option. This is far from being unreasonable; changing completely the place you are working in will expose you to new ideas and different approaches. Chances that you will benefit from this are very high. But, as usual, there is a “but“: there are countless possible reasons that might prevent you to move abroad (or even to a not-so-close city). Maybe you are married (or even just seriously engaged) and your wife/husband already has a job and it’s not really willing to abandon it for the sake of your career. Maybe your parents are no more so young and independent as they used to be and it is unwise to leave them alone for an undetermined amount of time. Maybe the salary to cost of life ratio of the post-doc position in the place you would like is not good enough to allow you to survive (and, maybe, to sustain your husband/wife for some time). So, what it happens if you are not really able to go abroad? Are you doomed to failure? Not necessarily, but you must be aware that remaining in the same university not only means that you will be less exposed to different and novel ideas, but also that you will encounter a smaller number of good occasions for your career. If you wasn’t able to move for your PhD there is a high chance that you won’t be able to do it when you will be searching for a post-doc, when you will be searching for a researcher position or when you will try to become a professor. Doing your whole academic career at the very same university is possible but definitively not easy.
Unless you are extermely lucky or extremely smart (better both) your early career will probably be scattered with difficulties and you won’t be able to evercame all of them just with dedication and hard work. Nevertheless you will never know if you can do it unless you try. I wish you good luck.
Follow
24 Apr 2009 19:41, Mirjam
I am not sure what your point exactly is, but personally I frequently find people that didn’t take the straightforward route and that had to fight a bit to achieve their goals much more interesting characters with more experience and better ideas. The straightforward route without sweat can lead to narrowmindedness, unrealistic expectations and no backbone to fight for what you want. Hopefully potential employers are able to recognize these qualities too.
Comment on the side 1: I get the impression it hardly matters what you did as an undergraduate. Things seem to become more serious at the PhD level, but even then there is a lot of time to develop and catch up on things.
Comment on the side 2: sometimes you have to make temporary sacrifices (e.g. living apart from your partner for a couple years) to gain something in the long run. Some people are too focussed on the short-term aspects of their choices.
26 Apr 2009 14:56, Otto Muskens
@Mirjam, I agree with you that some ‘self-made’ aspects can make people much more interesting. Career builders who do a PhD in a famous group and then some years of postdoc at Harvard are likely to have succes in science. There are however many other less obvious pathways which can produce equally (or more) capable scientists in the end. The decisive factor are peoples’ individual qualities, which can be stimulated along the way through either successes or hardship.
27 Apr 2009 10:10, jacopo
Professors and experienced researcher might not notice that but in most cases young people (starting university, starting the PhD or even starting the post-doc) lack the most basic knowledge on what they should expect for their career. Of course there are exceptions, but most of them (I should say “of us” since I’m just in my early post-doc) are exposed to unrealistic models (Enrico Fermi graduated at 21, but you cannot really expect that from any modern student) that create the false impression that the only sensible way to get a career at all is to be a genius and that a genius will never face any real problem. This create arrogant and “shark-like” young scientists that try with every possible mean to create an image of “young brilliant scientist” for themselves. This is far from healthy for science. Young people should be aware (on a deep level, not just on the surface of their mind) that you can be a good scientist even if you are not the first in your class since primary school to university, and they must be aware that becoming a good scientist is not a smooth path and that they will have to make choices.
@Mirjam: I’m not as optimistic as you are regarding the capacity of employers to recognize qualities. But maybe it’s just me 🙂
On your second comment I agree but I’m also aware that sometimes you just don’t have to possibility to choose. Or, to put it better, choosing what’s best for your career might imply a price that is too high to pay.
2 May 2009 10:17, Mirjam
*If an employer really doesn’t recognize any other qualities than a silly degree at a famous place then I seriously question whether you should want to work for such a short-sighted person. If the reason is that the person is famous and you think it increases your chances later on then you are as much part of maintaining that system as they are… It should be possible to convince any reasonable person of your own qualities if these happen to be different from degrees at famous places. Maybe I am idealistic, but if you want to change the system then you shouldn’t bend over for it.
*I agree that young scientists should be made aware of the fact that it is not only swift and fancy careers that count, but I would say that most scientists around us are not examples of a ‘wunderkind’. I think perception plays a large role too in this case. Related to this: somehow many Dutch (and maybe other Europeans?) have this idea that if someone else does well this is bad for you yourself. As if there isn’t ‘enough for everyone’ to share… This indeed leads to shark-like behavior. I am not going to claim that the US is perfect in this respect (sharkiness may be a bit of a human trait too), but I find that people there value much more the idea that (1) you can create your own opportunities, independent of the success of other people and (2) everyone benefits if someone else does well (e.g. your colleagues in the same department). Makes it much more fun to collaborate, without dirty political games!
*Of course, in some cases the price to pay for a certain step in your career may be too high. But in order to develop you have to push your own limits too. I think a lot of people are scared too easily by the thought of having to live in a somewhat sub-optimal way for a limited time in order to get ahead. Silly example: many Dutch freak out at the thought of having to live more than 100 miles from the place where they were born and keep their friends or apart from their partner for 1 or 2 postdoc years. But is this really such a disaster? Somewhat more reflection beyond ones initial emotional reaction sometimes isn’t a bad idea…
*disclaimer: if you think I am picking too much on the Dutch here, don’t worry, that is just because I know them best, as I am Dutch myself
15 Jun 2009 11:47, Ludovico Cademartiri
Hello all,
this is my first post in this wonderful blog. I would like to compliment everybody for the very insightful comments from which I am learning a lot.
I would just like to say that Jacopo’s perspective is, to my opinion, very true. Undergrads are widely inexperienced with the career aspect of their job. Hence many happen to make the wrong choices just because they think they are the only choices they have.
@Jacopo: Regarding being a B-level student. I think being a B level students depends on what the mark has been measuring. Certain skills are not measured by our educational system (emotional intelligence, ability to focus, time management, interpersonal skills, etc..) and all these things, in my limited experience, are somehow more important than your sheer intelligence in becoming a professional scientist… As undergrad we believe that if we are brilliant we will make it, until you discover that the world is full of extremely brilliant people, and you are not even close to match them. And that is when most people give up…
@Myriam: I work in the US and I can say as well that it is true that personal success is not seen as a problem by anybody. Everybody is thought to gain from the success of somebody close to them. And this has very important repercussions also on how they select their candidates…
@Otto: by your post I qualify completely as a “career builder” (I have been in a famous group for PhD and now doing a postdoc at Harvard in an even more famous group) 🙂 I hope I won’t have to feel discriminated 🙂 All I can say is that people I have talked to around the world have a very distorted idea about Harvard, the people working there, and what it means to be from Harvard.