As excited as I am to start my new job, I've had some mixed feelings about pursuing this route. Working as a curriculum writer in career education doesn't require the exacting touch of a molecular biologist, or a PhD. Like many people, I struggled with the idea that I might be "wasting" my education. For a long time I was looking for jobs in industry because I wanted to believe all those years of hard work would pay off in form that I could predict. But, the longer I looked, the more hurdles I put in my own way- I don't wanna be at the bench, I can't do sales or marketing, I'm over academia, I don't want to travel 50%... Whether or not I was aware of it, I was backing out of science. There is something like a mourning process when you give up on your dreams- and eventhough I can't say it was My Dream to become some big deal scientist, it was certainly the path that I'd been fixated on for so long.
This transition might have felt easier if I had any certainty about where I'd go instead. There were lots of options, but I was resistant to admit I was backing away from science, and equally unwilling to back away from science completely. Maybe I could find work at the science center? Or as a medical writer? Or something that would use my science in a way that I felt more comfortable with? Does such a job exist? And even though I had tons of misgivings about traditional careers in science, it was easy to be nitpicky about other careers as well. Work at a non-profit? The pay is terrible. However, I felt like I was living with the pressure of using this PhD, and I tried to let that go.
Over the spring, I recognized that I didn't have a hard time
convincing people I should be able to write well. This was part of my
internship, part of my dissertation, part of my contract work, and
something I was enjoying. Fortunately or not, just being able to write
doesn't paint a clear career path. Meanwhile I seemed to have a really hard time convincing anyone I would be a good scientist- there was always some technique or experience that I didn't have yet, like ADME or animals or even clinical trials. By this point, I felt desperate to work and figured I should reconcile myself to working outside of science. And contracting with this new client was going well. I like the work- thinking about teaching- an awful lot more than teaching itself. When I thought only about the job, I loved it, it felt like a great fit, but when I would think about keeping it for any period of time I felt guilty that I wasn't doing something in my field (whatever I believed that to be anymore). Eventually I decided I'd rather be someone who "failed to be a scientist" than someone who "failed to get a job, ever." I expect these feelings of guilt to pass. I'm good at my job, and not everyone can do this type of work, which does make me feel like I am using my education and experience.
Even as I felt better about this transition stick, I started to have more criticisms of any potential employer. Specifically, we create educational models for schools and teachers who can afford to buy them. Does this undermine the public school system? Does it really help teachers and students? Although I actually think we do more good than not, my client's work was in a flattering piece by Fox News, which certainly gave me pause. Is this work that I should do? This feeling surprised me a lot. Finding a career that I felt comfortable with was one thing, now I was feeling skittish about actually taking a job? After talking with some friends, I realized that there is usually some component of the work that seems.... not quite right. I know someone who selflessly works at a food bank that buys their supplies from Walmart since they have the cheapest prices. A physician charges people for medical care, just because they lost the health lottery. I rationalized that even if I were working to cure cancer, I'd eventually wonder about the ethical sourcing of my suppliers (all those plastics come from China), the footprint of my lab, or whether my work was taking money from other more promising projects. It's just the reality of the working world. Like I said, I really do think that this type of work provides support for rather than undermining public schools. Working with start-ups, I realized I preferred the honesty of admitting that "we have to make money to stay afloat" compared to the nebulous assessments that result in success for grant funded operations.
Really, for me the emotional journey had three major hurdles: the idea that I needed an Important Job because of the PhD, the idea that the PhD was a waste if I wasn't in science, and the idea that I needed to work (as a saint) for saints. Getting over that has helped me find a job a like in a field that interests me. I'm not using my "science" persay, but I got the job in part because I can learn and write very quickly. The PhD wasn't a waste, and I expect in the long-run may allow me more upward mobility.
Showing posts with label job hunt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label job hunt. Show all posts
Sunday, October 21, 2012
Monday, October 15, 2012
I got a job!
I've been waiting to write this blog post for longer than I've been blogging here. It's a pretty big day! I accepted my offer letter and am officially going to be a curriculum writer with one of my favorite clients!
I've got lots of reasons to feel good about this (it's a job!), but I wanted to walk back through some of the key choices and experiences that helped me actually get into a position to take a job I'd never hear of in an industry that didn't exist when I entered school (Lo', those many years ago...).
I struggled a lot with the idea of really moving into a field that is very distant from my previous work. The job (write a HS curriculum about vocational programs) is certainly not something I need a PhD to do, or a background in virology. I'll write more about that struggle later, but there were some things I did in grad school that did help me get this job. And not just the "hard work and transferable skills" stuff. I designed a course for undergrads that I taught one semester. I enjoyed designing the course, but was petrified as an instructor. That made me think I didn't want to get into education (one reason I hesitated to pursue this). I also wrote a lot, and made an effort to develop that as a skill. This was mostly just a couple manuscripts and a dissertation, but while I had colleagues who would rather die of papercuts that put words to paper, I enjoyed the process. (Although I did totally hate parts of it too). I hated revisions, so this made me think I was too sensitive to let writign be my primary skill. By the time I left grad school, I knew I didn't want to be at the bench forever, and I was scared to teach or write. Nifty.
The day I stopped working I started volunteering at the Carnegie Science Center. I believed that I probably had some workplace competencies that etc.) my adviser would not be able to speak to (showing up to work on time, dressing appropriately, and I wanted some structure in my long, tedious days of job hunting. This transformed into a much more responsible position that I had been able to predict, and I was able to (among other things), write and execute scalable demos (for 1-many students, and for all ages). I did handle a small budget and some other project management skills, but developing demos was the key.
I made a HUGE effort to build up my LinkedIn profile. I did everything anyone suggested there, including improving my profile to include all my skills and experience, not just my science background, and joined tons of groups. One group I joined (Possibly a subgroup of Science Jobs- the Freelance group), someone asked for help writing some science lessons. It didn't sound like anything I'd done before, but I wrote some letter with hubris that said I've got a PhD, I worked at the science center, I can totally smash you lessons. This lead me to my first client, Words & Numbers. Work there was sporadic, and after having tried plenty of other routes, I realized I had months of experience in this field (curriculum development), and there seemed to be a lot of off site opportunities. While I was trying to amass more clients, I ran across an ad for a local company in this industry and applied- again with a letter I thought was ridiculous. I've often that that I should amend this entry to say that as crazy as I thought the letter was, it was read, and I got the job- well, not the job I applied for but I was able to quit working at the bank to take on writing full time.
After working with them for several months, telling everyone there how much I enjoyed it and how interested I was in more work (and several contract renewals), I decided to take matters into my own hands and told the guy who hired me I was looking to apply to another job at the company. This prompted a discussion about how I could continue to work with his team in a more permanent basis that VERY SLOWLY (I sent that first email in August) turned into a full time job offer. Tada!
Obviously, I couldn't have predicted this combination of things, and a lot of the other stuff I was doing prepared me to respond well to what turned out to be the key opportunities. A few things turned out to be help for me. I never got good at 'leveraging contacts' to open doors to invisible job opportunities. I did met loads of folks who gladly shared information about their careers, but I decided that the easiest way to impress someone was by doing the job- that's why I volunteered and took contracts. And that did give me a chance to impress the people who gave me my job. And of course, I work for a company that makes online curricula for credit recovery and educational development. 5 years ago the publishing industry wasn't prepared for ebooks, and now there are any number of companies making mixed media learning tools. It's just not a job I could have gotten prepared for by any traditional route.
I promise at least one more write up on the internal components of getting and taking this job as well.
I've got lots of reasons to feel good about this (it's a job!), but I wanted to walk back through some of the key choices and experiences that helped me actually get into a position to take a job I'd never hear of in an industry that didn't exist when I entered school (Lo', those many years ago...).
I struggled a lot with the idea of really moving into a field that is very distant from my previous work. The job (write a HS curriculum about vocational programs) is certainly not something I need a PhD to do, or a background in virology. I'll write more about that struggle later, but there were some things I did in grad school that did help me get this job. And not just the "hard work and transferable skills" stuff. I designed a course for undergrads that I taught one semester. I enjoyed designing the course, but was petrified as an instructor. That made me think I didn't want to get into education (one reason I hesitated to pursue this). I also wrote a lot, and made an effort to develop that as a skill. This was mostly just a couple manuscripts and a dissertation, but while I had colleagues who would rather die of papercuts that put words to paper, I enjoyed the process. (Although I did totally hate parts of it too). I hated revisions, so this made me think I was too sensitive to let writign be my primary skill. By the time I left grad school, I knew I didn't want to be at the bench forever, and I was scared to teach or write. Nifty.
The day I stopped working I started volunteering at the Carnegie Science Center. I believed that I probably had some workplace competencies that etc.) my adviser would not be able to speak to (showing up to work on time, dressing appropriately, and I wanted some structure in my long, tedious days of job hunting. This transformed into a much more responsible position that I had been able to predict, and I was able to (among other things), write and execute scalable demos (for 1-many students, and for all ages). I did handle a small budget and some other project management skills, but developing demos was the key.
I made a HUGE effort to build up my LinkedIn profile. I did everything anyone suggested there, including improving my profile to include all my skills and experience, not just my science background, and joined tons of groups. One group I joined (Possibly a subgroup of Science Jobs- the Freelance group), someone asked for help writing some science lessons. It didn't sound like anything I'd done before, but I wrote some letter with hubris that said I've got a PhD, I worked at the science center, I can totally smash you lessons. This lead me to my first client, Words & Numbers. Work there was sporadic, and after having tried plenty of other routes, I realized I had months of experience in this field (curriculum development), and there seemed to be a lot of off site opportunities. While I was trying to amass more clients, I ran across an ad for a local company in this industry and applied- again with a letter I thought was ridiculous. I've often that that I should amend this entry to say that as crazy as I thought the letter was, it was read, and I got the job- well, not the job I applied for but I was able to quit working at the bank to take on writing full time.
After working with them for several months, telling everyone there how much I enjoyed it and how interested I was in more work (and several contract renewals), I decided to take matters into my own hands and told the guy who hired me I was looking to apply to another job at the company. This prompted a discussion about how I could continue to work with his team in a more permanent basis that VERY SLOWLY (I sent that first email in August) turned into a full time job offer. Tada!
Obviously, I couldn't have predicted this combination of things, and a lot of the other stuff I was doing prepared me to respond well to what turned out to be the key opportunities. A few things turned out to be help for me. I never got good at 'leveraging contacts' to open doors to invisible job opportunities. I did met loads of folks who gladly shared information about their careers, but I decided that the easiest way to impress someone was by doing the job- that's why I volunteered and took contracts. And that did give me a chance to impress the people who gave me my job. And of course, I work for a company that makes online curricula for credit recovery and educational development. 5 years ago the publishing industry wasn't prepared for ebooks, and now there are any number of companies making mixed media learning tools. It's just not a job I could have gotten prepared for by any traditional route.
I promise at least one more write up on the internal components of getting and taking this job as well.
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
What's negotiable?
Lately, I've been trying to learn a bit about negotiation. Specifically, what is negotiable at the start of a job. I have a general sense that the starting salary is, but I don't know how I would ask for that. I've also heard plenty of internet blabber that Everything Is Negotiable. But at the very least, no one is going to want to sit down with the new hire and negotiate every little dumb detail about the job before they are clear you are pretty much onboard. So I surveyed some friends and colleagues to see what is common to expect from a professional job, and what/how to ask for other things.
Basically, everyone said you should negotiate your salary, and this was across the spectrum of "Take'em for all their worth!" to "it never hurts to ask." What was interesting to me what what was suggested as things to factor into this number. A friend said, you have to get out of "Ohmigosh, I'll do anything to work for you!" sucker mode, and move quickly into, "My skills are valuable, and valued at X price." But really, if you think of yourself, your potential, you as The Whole Package, it can be hard to distill all that into one number, especially when it's hard to gather objective evidence about your market value.
Several people (with enough work histories I am inclined to believe them) said vacation, health insurance and retirement aren't usually negotiable. But I need to find out about them so I can adjust the required salary accordingly. Terrible health plan? I'm going to need extra cash to make up for the fact that your competitors would include this in my package. Several people recommended I look at Glassdoor.com and Salary.com to be sure that the number was in the range for the position, and use this as the start point to add extra salary on to.
As for these other things, what can a professional still expect these days? Healthcare is a yes. Hopefully details of the plan can be made available before just accepting that "Health Plan" = "Good." There should be a 401K, with matching, most people said matching at 5% was standard (still), although it may take time to vest. I heard 3-4 weeks of paid vacation. I find that odd, since my husband only gets 2 weeks of "vacation time'" but he also gets another 10 days of holidays during the year. I suppose it all works out. The idea is, if an offer is lacking in any of these things, you ask for more salary to make up for it (since that makes for good leverage). No one addressed how to respond if these were all above average- probably thank your lucky stars and keep your mouth shut.
I also asked about other things like parking, bus pass, gym membership and other random perks. Most people said it's ok to ask for and about those things, but I should wait until the salary number is already lined up. When the question of salary is still on the table, it seems like you might walk. And it would be weird to turn down a job because you had to get your own bus pass, right? Or worse, if you are fussing about the parking, you are cool with the crappy salary number, right? You often have more leverage for those little things at that point. By the time an employer has gone through the HR hoopla to get you that far, they are keenly aware of how much they want you and need to make you happy to get you. Of course, if it was generally considered that these perks were valued by employees and available, they might think to mention it during the hiring process. That being said, the corporate goon who hires me might not be aware of how amazingly liberating I think it is to work flex time, so I will ask rather than assume someone will tell me about this nonsense. If I have learned anything in looking for a job, it is that what is important to me as a job-hunter is not what is important to a potential employer.
And then tactics. With luck, the employer will make the first offer, which gives you a number to start from. Countering with 5-10% more (and valid, sound reasoning), seems pretty much expected. Since I am terrible with arithmetic under pressure, I would make a table of annual and monthly salary numbers to compare with. I also heard that it is ok to take day to think about it- do your due diligence, and prepare a thoughtful counter offer. (Seriously? That's allowed??) And the valid, sound reasoning for your counter offer should include other offers, previous salary, the accepted salary for the industry etc., not so much personal budget issues (I've got this HUGE mortgage).
That's what I've learned so far about negotiations. This seems like a pretty key moment to have a spine and stick up for yourself, which isn't a good time to decide you dont't need one. I should probably practice this stuff.
Basically, everyone said you should negotiate your salary, and this was across the spectrum of "Take'em for all their worth!" to "it never hurts to ask." What was interesting to me what what was suggested as things to factor into this number. A friend said, you have to get out of "Ohmigosh, I'll do anything to work for you!" sucker mode, and move quickly into, "My skills are valuable, and valued at X price." But really, if you think of yourself, your potential, you as The Whole Package, it can be hard to distill all that into one number, especially when it's hard to gather objective evidence about your market value.
Several people (with enough work histories I am inclined to believe them) said vacation, health insurance and retirement aren't usually negotiable. But I need to find out about them so I can adjust the required salary accordingly. Terrible health plan? I'm going to need extra cash to make up for the fact that your competitors would include this in my package. Several people recommended I look at Glassdoor.com and Salary.com to be sure that the number was in the range for the position, and use this as the start point to add extra salary on to.
As for these other things, what can a professional still expect these days? Healthcare is a yes. Hopefully details of the plan can be made available before just accepting that "Health Plan" = "Good." There should be a 401K, with matching, most people said matching at 5% was standard (still), although it may take time to vest. I heard 3-4 weeks of paid vacation. I find that odd, since my husband only gets 2 weeks of "vacation time'" but he also gets another 10 days of holidays during the year. I suppose it all works out. The idea is, if an offer is lacking in any of these things, you ask for more salary to make up for it (since that makes for good leverage). No one addressed how to respond if these were all above average- probably thank your lucky stars and keep your mouth shut.
I also asked about other things like parking, bus pass, gym membership and other random perks. Most people said it's ok to ask for and about those things, but I should wait until the salary number is already lined up. When the question of salary is still on the table, it seems like you might walk. And it would be weird to turn down a job because you had to get your own bus pass, right? Or worse, if you are fussing about the parking, you are cool with the crappy salary number, right? You often have more leverage for those little things at that point. By the time an employer has gone through the HR hoopla to get you that far, they are keenly aware of how much they want you and need to make you happy to get you. Of course, if it was generally considered that these perks were valued by employees and available, they might think to mention it during the hiring process. That being said, the corporate goon who hires me might not be aware of how amazingly liberating I think it is to work flex time, so I will ask rather than assume someone will tell me about this nonsense. If I have learned anything in looking for a job, it is that what is important to me as a job-hunter is not what is important to a potential employer.
And then tactics. With luck, the employer will make the first offer, which gives you a number to start from. Countering with 5-10% more (and valid, sound reasoning), seems pretty much expected. Since I am terrible with arithmetic under pressure, I would make a table of annual and monthly salary numbers to compare with. I also heard that it is ok to take day to think about it- do your due diligence, and prepare a thoughtful counter offer. (Seriously? That's allowed??) And the valid, sound reasoning for your counter offer should include other offers, previous salary, the accepted salary for the industry etc., not so much personal budget issues (I've got this HUGE mortgage).
That's what I've learned so far about negotiations. This seems like a pretty key moment to have a spine and stick up for yourself, which isn't a good time to decide you dont't need one. I should probably practice this stuff.
Sunday, September 2, 2012
Stability in Science Careers
That recent post, about how you need a post-doc to be a scientist, is a place holder for one part of my internal dialogue on what I am supposed to be doing with my life. For the last couple weeks I've been quite busy with two big curriculum development contracts and my business development internship, which got me thinking two things: 1) I can stay on this track of having work and getting paid and not worrying about the bills for a pretty long time. 2) I think I want to know where my career is going more than that. So ideas were had, contacts were pinged and a bunch of things happened last week.
1) I was accepted into a 6 week training program for PhDs to become Freelance Medical Writers.
2) I was offered a part-time tech position at my internship to support writing grants and getting investors to support myself full-time in a scientist role.
3) I pre-interviewed for a post-doc with an innovator I know from my first internship at C4C.
4) I spoke to my favorite current client about moving into a more permanent role with them.
Each of these four things clearly takes my career (and my life) in a completely different direction. I'll discuss more about my hesitation to give up freelance work, with zero commute and my own priorities on how to spend my time etc etc, soon. But today I wanted to talk about my discussion about the post-doc job.
Since moving out here, I have not had a chance to connect with many people who really know my skills and abilities AND understand the job market in Seattle. This innovator/faculty member happens to be someone I endeared myself to as a professional (believes I am smart, a quick learner and creative), has been here for several years and is married to someone finishing a post-doc and looking at the job market right now. The conversation started with the usual, "What do you want to do after a post-doc?" type questions which I answered vaguely ("work, y'know, in industry probably"), but I was able to articulate the things I do know. It's important to me to stay in Seattle. It's important to me to have stability in my career- which is why the soft money research institute or grant funded academic role do no appeal. And that got us onto a fairly horrifying tangent about the state of science. Yup, payline at this institute are around 10%, which is making it hard to get and retain good scientists. Many of those folks move on to the larger pool of positions in Industry (we've got Amgen, Dendreon, Zymogenetics, Novo Nordisk and more here), but those employers are resorting to more brutal hiring practices themselves with limited investor funds and shrinking pipelines.
Bench laborers (and I can confirm this is a lot of highly experienced PhDs, not just techs- just look on LinkedIn) are hired for project for 6-18months, then laid off when the project ends. This used to be the case that folks would just move around from hiring pool to hiring pool fairly seamlessly, but these days Pharma does much less Research, and limited development. Those projects are becoming fewer and farther between as the pipelines are drying up, and the pool of highly qualified people looking to get back on the bench is becoming deeper and deeper as the layoff times last longer and more people leave academia to give it a shot. I have met too many scientists here who are among the long term unemployed. One way to deal with that problem is move for a job, which is where the #ScienceNomads tag came from. I don't want to be spending 6 months out of every two years looking for a job. Sure you could think of that big Industry salary as the equivalent of a 9 month academic position, but I just don't think this will work for me.
It's been said a lot: science is no longer a meritocracy. Sure, you have to be good at science, but just being smart and working hard isn't enough to ensure you a job. Writing a grant with solid science and important questions that is in the 90th percentile of all grants submitted might not get funded. Being perfectly qualified for a position might not be enough where there is a list of lay-offs hoping to get rehired. For someone in my position, I don't just need to get my first job to make it- I will probably be fighting for a job for the next couple decades.
This was really the final piece I needed. I've seen the unemployed researchers, I've seen the openings I have no hope of scoring, I've seen the work histories of people on LinkedIn who have a handful of different positions for every decade they stayed at the bench. I just don't think I am going to be a scientist who works at the bench ever again. Or maybe it's better to say I don't have to work at the bench- I've got other opportunities to be paid to work hard and be smart. That OK. My last experiment was making alginate worms for the Science Center, and that's a high note I am happy to go out on. I'm feeling quite at peace with that.
1) I was accepted into a 6 week training program for PhDs to become Freelance Medical Writers.
2) I was offered a part-time tech position at my internship to support writing grants and getting investors to support myself full-time in a scientist role.
3) I pre-interviewed for a post-doc with an innovator I know from my first internship at C4C.
4) I spoke to my favorite current client about moving into a more permanent role with them.
Each of these four things clearly takes my career (and my life) in a completely different direction. I'll discuss more about my hesitation to give up freelance work, with zero commute and my own priorities on how to spend my time etc etc, soon. But today I wanted to talk about my discussion about the post-doc job.
Since moving out here, I have not had a chance to connect with many people who really know my skills and abilities AND understand the job market in Seattle. This innovator/faculty member happens to be someone I endeared myself to as a professional (believes I am smart, a quick learner and creative), has been here for several years and is married to someone finishing a post-doc and looking at the job market right now. The conversation started with the usual, "What do you want to do after a post-doc?" type questions which I answered vaguely ("work, y'know, in industry probably"), but I was able to articulate the things I do know. It's important to me to stay in Seattle. It's important to me to have stability in my career- which is why the soft money research institute or grant funded academic role do no appeal. And that got us onto a fairly horrifying tangent about the state of science. Yup, payline at this institute are around 10%, which is making it hard to get and retain good scientists. Many of those folks move on to the larger pool of positions in Industry (we've got Amgen, Dendreon, Zymogenetics, Novo Nordisk and more here), but those employers are resorting to more brutal hiring practices themselves with limited investor funds and shrinking pipelines.
Bench laborers (and I can confirm this is a lot of highly experienced PhDs, not just techs- just look on LinkedIn) are hired for project for 6-18months, then laid off when the project ends. This used to be the case that folks would just move around from hiring pool to hiring pool fairly seamlessly, but these days Pharma does much less Research, and limited development. Those projects are becoming fewer and farther between as the pipelines are drying up, and the pool of highly qualified people looking to get back on the bench is becoming deeper and deeper as the layoff times last longer and more people leave academia to give it a shot. I have met too many scientists here who are among the long term unemployed. One way to deal with that problem is move for a job, which is where the #ScienceNomads tag came from. I don't want to be spending 6 months out of every two years looking for a job. Sure you could think of that big Industry salary as the equivalent of a 9 month academic position, but I just don't think this will work for me.
It's been said a lot: science is no longer a meritocracy. Sure, you have to be good at science, but just being smart and working hard isn't enough to ensure you a job. Writing a grant with solid science and important questions that is in the 90th percentile of all grants submitted might not get funded. Being perfectly qualified for a position might not be enough where there is a list of lay-offs hoping to get rehired. For someone in my position, I don't just need to get my first job to make it- I will probably be fighting for a job for the next couple decades.
This was really the final piece I needed. I've seen the unemployed researchers, I've seen the openings I have no hope of scoring, I've seen the work histories of people on LinkedIn who have a handful of different positions for every decade they stayed at the bench. I just don't think I am going to be a scientist who works at the bench ever again. Or maybe it's better to say I don't have to work at the bench- I've got other opportunities to be paid to work hard and be smart. That OK. My last experiment was making alginate worms for the Science Center, and that's a high note I am happy to go out on. I'm feeling quite at peace with that.
Monday, August 27, 2012
Scientists don't have just a PhD
I don't want to be pessimistic about my job hunt. I have been learning a lot about careers, employment and how to get there over the last year, however, and it is quite obvious that Seattle does not support a job classification for people to be employed as scientists who have a PhD but no post-doc. Of course, if you know someone really well, if your PI is part owner in a start-up, maybe this can happen for you. But I've met a lot of people who work here, working as a scientist (at the bench) requires a post-doc. (For the record, working as a tech with a PhD is regarded as a very bad idea.)
For the last year, I've been quite confident that I could find something that wouldn't require a post-doc, and here is what I've come up with.
You don't need a post-doc to become a medical writer.
You don't (always) need a post-doc to teach, particularly at non-research schools.
You don't need a post-doc to get into patent law, or that arena of intellectual property, but you do need to pass the patent bar or have some significant business savvy.
And you don't need a post-doc to just have a job- many positions (again, not at the bench, but administration springs to mind) don't actually require that PhD in the first place, but if you can make the case that you are well qualified it shouldn't preclude you working.
So if just a job is the goal, a PhD is great- it shows you can work hard, learn challenging things, juggle multiple projects with changing priorities. But you might not use your science at all. And frankly using that science is what people will pay the most for.
Now I am wondering, it's been a year, and I still don't have my dream job (although I am a lot less dissatisfied with contract work), and I don't actually know what that dream job looks like (I've found fixating on a single position has not been that good for me). Perhaps I should keep trying things to see what sticks. Right now I am looking at medical writing.
For the last year, I've been quite confident that I could find something that wouldn't require a post-doc, and here is what I've come up with.
You don't need a post-doc to become a medical writer.
You don't (always) need a post-doc to teach, particularly at non-research schools.
You don't need a post-doc to get into patent law, or that arena of intellectual property, but you do need to pass the patent bar or have some significant business savvy.
And you don't need a post-doc to just have a job- many positions (again, not at the bench, but administration springs to mind) don't actually require that PhD in the first place, but if you can make the case that you are well qualified it shouldn't preclude you working.
So if just a job is the goal, a PhD is great- it shows you can work hard, learn challenging things, juggle multiple projects with changing priorities. But you might not use your science at all. And frankly using that science is what people will pay the most for.
Now I am wondering, it's been a year, and I still don't have my dream job (although I am a lot less dissatisfied with contract work), and I don't actually know what that dream job looks like (I've found fixating on a single position has not been that good for me). Perhaps I should keep trying things to see what sticks. Right now I am looking at medical writing.
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Is this enough job?
There are lots of things to like about my current gig. It's never boring, I'm paid between fine and well depending on who I am working for, and it's really gratifying to have work. But I continue to blog and look for other opportunities because this doesn't seem like enough, somehow. Don't get me wrong, I am busy as all heck. Two of my contracts are committed to about 40 hours a week, and I have another with regular weekly deadlines, so I'm working lots. I just can't really see this working out long term. Am I going to be 35 and juggling 3 clients every week? The sensible thing to do is keep multiple clients, when one doesn't need me as much, I can still get paid. But maybe the magic number there is two.
And then there is the bureaucracy. I should figure out a better system for keeping track of my invoices, so I don't spend 30 min trying to submit an invoice for $350. It really eats into my effective hourly rate. For some irrational reason, I loath signing contracts too, which is a pretty regular feature of my work. I don't mean to complain, but these were problems I didn't really want to have when I got "a job."
An opportunity has come up that I should think about, but I am really having a hard time making the comparison. My internship (at the surface chemistry company) needs a part-time tech. They like me, and I think the company has a lot of promise if they can be well managed. Although, is a part-time tech position in a chemical company a step up from making fine money in my living room? Is this the opportunity I have been hoping for to get "industry experience," or is being a tech going to be a black mark on my CV that will create a life-time of hurdles for me? Is inventorying monomers and validating SPR results better than writing about IT and Biology and thinking about how kids learn?
A parallel to this entry, I'm going to write soon about mentors.
And then there is the bureaucracy. I should figure out a better system for keeping track of my invoices, so I don't spend 30 min trying to submit an invoice for $350. It really eats into my effective hourly rate. For some irrational reason, I loath signing contracts too, which is a pretty regular feature of my work. I don't mean to complain, but these were problems I didn't really want to have when I got "a job."
An opportunity has come up that I should think about, but I am really having a hard time making the comparison. My internship (at the surface chemistry company) needs a part-time tech. They like me, and I think the company has a lot of promise if they can be well managed. Although, is a part-time tech position in a chemical company a step up from making fine money in my living room? Is this the opportunity I have been hoping for to get "industry experience," or is being a tech going to be a black mark on my CV that will create a life-time of hurdles for me? Is inventorying monomers and validating SPR results better than writing about IT and Biology and thinking about how kids learn?
A parallel to this entry, I'm going to write soon about mentors.
Monday, July 16, 2012
I'm self-employed
When I stopped working, I felt like I lost an important part of my identity. I had been working for years and years in the pursuit of my PhD, and once I earned it, I had nothing left to replace that project with. People always ask, "What do you do?" and I would cringe and mumble about being 'between things,' or apologize for being a new grad. Even knowing that I had a pathetic response to that question, repeated rehearsals of a better answer always sounded canned and false. Sure, I can say I am a freelance writer/editor/marketing intern, but it's such a weird arrangement that I never see that look of understanding from the questioner and I abruptly change the subject.
Recently, I've had a fair amount of contract work. I've started a new (paid) internship (stemming from my contacts at the C4C). It occurred to me that I don't have time to look for a real job for a while, I'm too busy making money. I'm still making up my mind if what I do now is worth the taxpayer investment in my education, but after a year of seeking a little self-respect, it feels righteous to make a sold paycheck. My phone rang this morning with someone asking if I would be interested in a two month contract, and I got to say I am booked solid for the next two months. I would rather be worried about how I am going to get all this work done than how I am going to get work.
This morning, I was asked, "What do you do?" and without hesitation I said, "I'm self-employed." How cool is that?? I'm still looking for a long term solution, but I'm so happy to have a short term solution that seems to fit really well.
Recently, I've had a fair amount of contract work. I've started a new (paid) internship (stemming from my contacts at the C4C). It occurred to me that I don't have time to look for a real job for a while, I'm too busy making money. I'm still making up my mind if what I do now is worth the taxpayer investment in my education, but after a year of seeking a little self-respect, it feels righteous to make a sold paycheck. My phone rang this morning with someone asking if I would be interested in a two month contract, and I got to say I am booked solid for the next two months. I would rather be worried about how I am going to get all this work done than how I am going to get work.
This morning, I was asked, "What do you do?" and without hesitation I said, "I'm self-employed." How cool is that?? I'm still looking for a long term solution, but I'm so happy to have a short term solution that seems to fit really well.
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
Happy Birthday to my Ph.D.
I've been dreading writing this post. Today marks 1 year since I defended my Ph.D., 1 year since I started introducing myself as "Dr. Sandlin" (I'm kidding, I never do that). It's been a year since the idea of finishing grad school stopped being abstract. A year ago today, I gathered all my favorite people around and enjoyed a fantastic party to celebrate all the hard work and good friends that got me to the magnificent point of potential that is graduation day. I remember thinking that nothing could ever be as hard as graduate school was.
Confession: I did not love my dissertation project with my whole heart and soul. It was a good project, and it was important work, and it gave me some great training opportunities, but I had not always dreamed of being a polyomavirus researcher. As a result of my work, the world has not responded with a greater need for polyomavirologists. So I always knew that what I was doing would be confined to my graduate school experience and that I needed to find some other way to make something of my career. I wanted to be able to transition away smoothly, and look back confidently and say "I was right, I didn't need a post-doc to do what I wanted to do."
This marks a big day for me. I don't have a real job yet. I don't know what I want to do with my career, and I don't know if it will be possible to do in Seattle, even though I knew I would have this problem. That sucks.
On the one hand, it's been a good year. I've done a lot of things I couldn't have done if I hadn't gone to graduate school (Scientist in Residence at the Carnegie Science Center, STEM panelist, instructional design, and I get to meet people all the time). Sometimes I hate living in the shadow of this degree, but it has helped me open doors for myself. And I get to live in Washington, where my family and friends are (not the ones I went to grad school with-but they'll all be moved in another year or so anyway).
On the other hand, this isn't what I wanted for myself. I freelance because it's a kind of work I can do that helps pay the bills, not because it's what I aspire to do. After a year of looking for my dream job, it's about time to get real, and just get a real job. To me, this doesn't mean finding a post-doc, it means settling into some non-dream career path with full-time work and waiting for the economy to turn around. I guess it's time to admit that my aspirations are getting in the way of having any form of success. I met someone at the UW who is looking for a virologist to help their drug discovery project. It's not a post-doc position, it's a scientist job and I applied.
So what else have I learned? I've tried lots of things- that's what the blog was meant to cover. Not all these experiments have panned out. Blogging has not made me some important voice for my peers, but it has given me a nice outlet for some of these ideas. The same for Twitter. I'm generally too embarrassed to tell people I meet in person about either, so it's hard to connect these to my real life. Volunteering and interning have felt useful, but neither has led to job offers. I didn't want to become the blogger for the struggles of the underemployed PhD. It's time to think a bit more about how some of these activities fit into my ultimate goal of being employed, and how to best use my energy to get there.
Confession: I did not love my dissertation project with my whole heart and soul. It was a good project, and it was important work, and it gave me some great training opportunities, but I had not always dreamed of being a polyomavirus researcher. As a result of my work, the world has not responded with a greater need for polyomavirologists. So I always knew that what I was doing would be confined to my graduate school experience and that I needed to find some other way to make something of my career. I wanted to be able to transition away smoothly, and look back confidently and say "I was right, I didn't need a post-doc to do what I wanted to do."
This marks a big day for me. I don't have a real job yet. I don't know what I want to do with my career, and I don't know if it will be possible to do in Seattle, even though I knew I would have this problem. That sucks.
On the one hand, it's been a good year. I've done a lot of things I couldn't have done if I hadn't gone to graduate school (Scientist in Residence at the Carnegie Science Center, STEM panelist, instructional design, and I get to meet people all the time). Sometimes I hate living in the shadow of this degree, but it has helped me open doors for myself. And I get to live in Washington, where my family and friends are (not the ones I went to grad school with-but they'll all be moved in another year or so anyway).
On the other hand, this isn't what I wanted for myself. I freelance because it's a kind of work I can do that helps pay the bills, not because it's what I aspire to do. After a year of looking for my dream job, it's about time to get real, and just get a real job. To me, this doesn't mean finding a post-doc, it means settling into some non-dream career path with full-time work and waiting for the economy to turn around. I guess it's time to admit that my aspirations are getting in the way of having any form of success. I met someone at the UW who is looking for a virologist to help their drug discovery project. It's not a post-doc position, it's a scientist job and I applied.
So what else have I learned? I've tried lots of things- that's what the blog was meant to cover. Not all these experiments have panned out. Blogging has not made me some important voice for my peers, but it has given me a nice outlet for some of these ideas. The same for Twitter. I'm generally too embarrassed to tell people I meet in person about either, so it's hard to connect these to my real life. Volunteering and interning have felt useful, but neither has led to job offers. I didn't want to become the blogger for the struggles of the underemployed PhD. It's time to think a bit more about how some of these activities fit into my ultimate goal of being employed, and how to best use my energy to get there.
Monday, June 25, 2012
Transition story
I have been thinking quite a bit about my transition story, especially in the context of story telling. As a blogger, I can tell stories as long and convoluted as I like, but as a job hunter I need to get this baby tamed into one tweet. So I got to thinking about stories and how they are told. Following a comment from the previous transition post, I did a little research on the basic elements of a story. A story has a character- usually a protagonist, and a challenge. A good story has a beginning a middle and an end. And for a short story, that is probably all I can get in there.
At the start of my story was me, before I started graduate school. I can go back and read my admission essay (gawdawful) and senior seminar writing assignments to remember what I was thinking about then. What I wanted then was rather vaguely to "help people" and "change the world." I went to graduate school because I knew that science provides the tools to that, and because I thought that I could explore what I meant by "change the world." I never really WANTED to be a professor, but at the time, the idea of getting dragged into academia seemed inevitable and not that bad. Unlike 4 years at a liberal arts college, graduate school is not meant to be a journey of self discovery, so I never really got to the bottom of that question.
But, I did learn several things about myself that lead me to believe I am not well suited for academia or a bench position. I'm very much a big picture person. I need to finish things, by which I mean I like short time frames and dynamic content. I like working with a team. I enjoy writing. I'm not ready for the responsibility of being in charge of other people. Grant funding scares me. I am happiest when I am working on several different things- like assays for two different stories, running a journal club and creating career workshops for grad students. I get bored easily. When my experiments don't work, I feel like a terrible human being. In the context of my story, all this needs to get distilled down into something more pointed that leads me in a new direction.
And this is the part of the story I am struggling with. In my perfect transition story, I would know where the story ends. You know, "I went to graduate school because I thought that was the best way to cure cancer, but I have a bigger impact on how people with cancer are treated as an FDA regulator." Or "Graduate school appealed to me because I thought I could have an impact on people's lives, but I found that teaching had a more direct and fulfilling impact." The story I was using for a while was "I wanted to go to graduate school because science solves complex problems. Some of the most complex problems we have right now are in policy, and I think I can bring science to bear on those problems." This story oversimplified my interest in living in the same time zone as my family, and the challenge of a two-body problem. While most of the story has slipped away, I now tell people that "I moved to Seattle over the winter, and I am committed to finding a way to make my career here." That's not where my story ends, but it is where I got stuck telling it.
My view of my own career has taken a lot of collateral damage over the last year- I just don't believe that I am going to find a track to jump on and find smooth sailing until retirement. I also don't believe that what I do next is going to be tied to what I was doing before. For better or worse, this means I expect to pick a story, see where it gets me, and maybe write a new one in a couple more years. I'm not quite ready to decide where my story is today, but I am closing in on a version that might look something like this.
At the start of my story was me, before I started graduate school. I can go back and read my admission essay (gawdawful) and senior seminar writing assignments to remember what I was thinking about then. What I wanted then was rather vaguely to "help people" and "change the world." I went to graduate school because I knew that science provides the tools to that, and because I thought that I could explore what I meant by "change the world." I never really WANTED to be a professor, but at the time, the idea of getting dragged into academia seemed inevitable and not that bad. Unlike 4 years at a liberal arts college, graduate school is not meant to be a journey of self discovery, so I never really got to the bottom of that question.
But, I did learn several things about myself that lead me to believe I am not well suited for academia or a bench position. I'm very much a big picture person. I need to finish things, by which I mean I like short time frames and dynamic content. I like working with a team. I enjoy writing. I'm not ready for the responsibility of being in charge of other people. Grant funding scares me. I am happiest when I am working on several different things- like assays for two different stories, running a journal club and creating career workshops for grad students. I get bored easily. When my experiments don't work, I feel like a terrible human being. In the context of my story, all this needs to get distilled down into something more pointed that leads me in a new direction.
And this is the part of the story I am struggling with. In my perfect transition story, I would know where the story ends. You know, "I went to graduate school because I thought that was the best way to cure cancer, but I have a bigger impact on how people with cancer are treated as an FDA regulator." Or "Graduate school appealed to me because I thought I could have an impact on people's lives, but I found that teaching had a more direct and fulfilling impact." The story I was using for a while was "I wanted to go to graduate school because science solves complex problems. Some of the most complex problems we have right now are in policy, and I think I can bring science to bear on those problems." This story oversimplified my interest in living in the same time zone as my family, and the challenge of a two-body problem. While most of the story has slipped away, I now tell people that "I moved to Seattle over the winter, and I am committed to finding a way to make my career here." That's not where my story ends, but it is where I got stuck telling it.
My view of my own career has taken a lot of collateral damage over the last year- I just don't believe that I am going to find a track to jump on and find smooth sailing until retirement. I also don't believe that what I do next is going to be tied to what I was doing before. For better or worse, this means I expect to pick a story, see where it gets me, and maybe write a new one in a couple more years. I'm not quite ready to decide where my story is today, but I am closing in on a version that might look something like this.
I went to graduate school because I have always thought deeply about my own education. Rather than teaching in just one classroom, I want to bring the same kind of passion that propelled me to be a successful student of science to a wide range of students, which I why I am an instructional designer.Thoughts?
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Interview with a Former Molecular Biologist
This networking thing is still a real challenge for me. I'm working hard to introduce myself in terms of where I am going (I'm a
freelance editor and I work in instructional design) instead of where I
was (I have a Ph.D. in Molecular Biology). When you start with the
second one and then say, "I am looking for a job," you get a look that
says 'how smart do you think you are?' and someone suggests you get a
job at a University. 'Uh, I had one of those,' and I usually get too flustered trying to explain why after 10 years at the bench I would walk away form that, instead of focusing on what I am doing to develop better communication skills. I had this problem again at a networking event for Women in Science that was part of the Seattle Science Festival recently. It was a great mix of people in outreach (ALL the museums were there), trainees and working professionals. One of the people I met there introduced herself as a "Former Molecular Biologist." Fortunately, she agreed to meet with me after the event and tell me a bit about that path.
She realized in graduate school she wasn't going to stay at the bench, and ended up working at Science Magazine. Some of her experiences won't be relevant to the current job market, but she understood that. For example, she said that science writing these days is possible to break into, but it can be a bit dicey to make a living at it. Places like Wired Blogs or SciAm blogs make it easier to have a voice, but they don't cut big checks. From there she transitioned into her current position as a usability expert at Philips. They design new products, and she helps engineers make them impossible to use incorrectly. We actually talked very little about her current job, although I'm curious about it now.
What we talked about instead what how to make that first step away from the bench. She is fortunately very well connected to many people who had moved away from bench science at various career stages, and had a lot to say about what worked well for them. Her biggest piece of advice was to create a transition story for yourself. A good story can save you from that flustered babbling in and scenario. And I need a story that shuts the door on a career as a scientist. Not burn the bridge, just make it clear that I am going somewhere else now. These days I feel like grad school is a bit of a black hole- I just can't move beyond the clutches of having a Ph.D. and the trappings of an academic career path.
In her case, she enjoyed the challenge of research, but wanted much more human interaction. She had a friend who was often in an organizational role in lab, and moved from a post-doc to an Operational position. Her partner took a couple classes in bioinformatics and enjoyed the computation, and ended up in a support role a tech company. See how that works? And no one says to them, "but your dissertation work seemed so promising..."
So how does the transition story come together? She suggested I go back to what motivated me to go to grad school in the first place, because that probably hasn't fundamentally changed. Then think about where I want to go, and weave the story so that my transition to this new place I am going (that suits my motivations and values) is inevitable. In her case, she loved the process of solving problems, but found bench work was too small scale for her. Helping teams catch and solve problems is much more inline with her interests and abilities. She said most people have had a transition of some sort, and if you tell the story with optimism, they can identify with it.
What does this mean for me? I'm still working on my own transition story. More on that as it develops.
She realized in graduate school she wasn't going to stay at the bench, and ended up working at Science Magazine. Some of her experiences won't be relevant to the current job market, but she understood that. For example, she said that science writing these days is possible to break into, but it can be a bit dicey to make a living at it. Places like Wired Blogs or SciAm blogs make it easier to have a voice, but they don't cut big checks. From there she transitioned into her current position as a usability expert at Philips. They design new products, and she helps engineers make them impossible to use incorrectly. We actually talked very little about her current job, although I'm curious about it now.
What we talked about instead what how to make that first step away from the bench. She is fortunately very well connected to many people who had moved away from bench science at various career stages, and had a lot to say about what worked well for them. Her biggest piece of advice was to create a transition story for yourself. A good story can save you from that flustered babbling in and scenario. And I need a story that shuts the door on a career as a scientist. Not burn the bridge, just make it clear that I am going somewhere else now. These days I feel like grad school is a bit of a black hole- I just can't move beyond the clutches of having a Ph.D. and the trappings of an academic career path.
In her case, she enjoyed the challenge of research, but wanted much more human interaction. She had a friend who was often in an organizational role in lab, and moved from a post-doc to an Operational position. Her partner took a couple classes in bioinformatics and enjoyed the computation, and ended up in a support role a tech company. See how that works? And no one says to them, "but your dissertation work seemed so promising..."
So how does the transition story come together? She suggested I go back to what motivated me to go to grad school in the first place, because that probably hasn't fundamentally changed. Then think about where I want to go, and weave the story so that my transition to this new place I am going (that suits my motivations and values) is inevitable. In her case, she loved the process of solving problems, but found bench work was too small scale for her. Helping teams catch and solve problems is much more inline with her interests and abilities. She said most people have had a transition of some sort, and if you tell the story with optimism, they can identify with it.
What does this mean for me? I'm still working on my own transition story. More on that as it develops.
Tuesday, June 5, 2012
New Contract and a Leave of Absence
Some interesting opportunities have opened up, and I want to document some of the choices I've made and why. In another fit of "Maybe I'll just apply for some OTHER crazy job!" I put my hat in the ring for a position as a developmental editor with a curriculum development company in Seattle. Remember, I wrote a ridiculous letter and put in for a position that a hundred people had already applied for? Well, I got a call back the next day (Ha!).
The call was from the director who confessed that he was too swamped to hire a developmental editor because they were behind on writing. It's a growing company with some very interesting projects, and the just need some extra hands right now. Would I be willing to take on a writing contract?
My feeling on writing contracts is that they are a good way to make money, but not really a career. When you work off-site, you don't hear about things like new openings, or extra work or other things that would make it easier to advance your position. They are a growing company, but will I get a chance to grow with them? And frankly, I find working off-site boring. I miss having awesome coworkers. That being said, I've also come to realize that contract work is what is developing my CV these days, and frankly I do like the work. And the money.
So I agreed to take on a 5 week writing contract. But it sounds like a 40 hour/week position. (Oh, and I'll be paid hourly, unlike my work with Words and Numbers where I bill per task). I consider contract work one of 3 jobs I juggle currently, and so I knew I'd need to push back on the other two. I notified my internship I was going to be away, and that I am planning to send them a status update this week. The scary conversation was to tell the bank I was going to need some time. I'm just a teller, so I didn't figure they would be interested in making concessions for me- but for a 5 week contract, it seems stupid to walk away from a steady pay-check.
I thought a lot about how to have this conversation- I knew I needed to ask for something, so I tried to ask in a way that made them feel like they were generous to offer (not that they OWED me this- Here's to negotiation training!). And I also tried to be really clear about what was already decided, and what wasn't. I have accepted a contract. It is a great opportunity for me. It will take up all my time. I don't want to leave you guys in the lurch, and I am not sure how to do that best. To his credit, my manager was very excited for me, and was able to give me everything I need to make this work. I'll be at the bank for 2 more weeks, and then I am going on a leave of absence. In August, I'll get back in touch and get my old position back. I may be at a different branch when I come back, but I shouldn't have to reapply for my job. I'm glad that I asked for that, because it makes taking this contract much less intimidating- as I said, it's a contract, not a career.
The call was from the director who confessed that he was too swamped to hire a developmental editor because they were behind on writing. It's a growing company with some very interesting projects, and the just need some extra hands right now. Would I be willing to take on a writing contract?
My feeling on writing contracts is that they are a good way to make money, but not really a career. When you work off-site, you don't hear about things like new openings, or extra work or other things that would make it easier to advance your position. They are a growing company, but will I get a chance to grow with them? And frankly, I find working off-site boring. I miss having awesome coworkers. That being said, I've also come to realize that contract work is what is developing my CV these days, and frankly I do like the work. And the money.
So I agreed to take on a 5 week writing contract. But it sounds like a 40 hour/week position. (Oh, and I'll be paid hourly, unlike my work with Words and Numbers where I bill per task). I consider contract work one of 3 jobs I juggle currently, and so I knew I'd need to push back on the other two. I notified my internship I was going to be away, and that I am planning to send them a status update this week. The scary conversation was to tell the bank I was going to need some time. I'm just a teller, so I didn't figure they would be interested in making concessions for me- but for a 5 week contract, it seems stupid to walk away from a steady pay-check.
I thought a lot about how to have this conversation- I knew I needed to ask for something, so I tried to ask in a way that made them feel like they were generous to offer (not that they OWED me this- Here's to negotiation training!). And I also tried to be really clear about what was already decided, and what wasn't. I have accepted a contract. It is a great opportunity for me. It will take up all my time. I don't want to leave you guys in the lurch, and I am not sure how to do that best. To his credit, my manager was very excited for me, and was able to give me everything I need to make this work. I'll be at the bank for 2 more weeks, and then I am going on a leave of absence. In August, I'll get back in touch and get my old position back. I may be at a different branch when I come back, but I shouldn't have to reapply for my job. I'm glad that I asked for that, because it makes taking this contract much less intimidating- as I said, it's a contract, not a career.
Monday, May 28, 2012
Disclaimer: I'm educated, not handicapped
When moving outside of academia, it's sometime hard to know how to address having a Ph.D. Lately, I've been trying not to overemphasize it (I'm a strong communicator and critical thinker who happens to have a Ph.D), but I think I am missing an opportunity to talk about what I really learned in graduate school. A lot of the feel good literature for Ph.D.s thinking about finding a new career path teaches us to recognize the value of the Ph.D. in terms of communications skills, teamwork, independent work, critical thinking... Sometimes I forget that other people (and I mean hiring managers), don't read this stuff. I have certainly written cover letters where I failed to address some of those secondary job requirements. I'm not sure if that cost me the job, but "strong communication skills," "attention to detail," or "Proficiency in Microsoft Word" sometimes seem to obvious to state.
Then again... I met someone a while back who was really surprised, could barely contain his surprise, that I was such a capable communicator. Not that I did anything out of the ordinary, he just assumed I would speak only in math equations and that I'd never hear a word he said. He really thought I'd be handicapped by my education. He was thinking about ways to get kids into STEM fields, and gave me one of those "geeks don't have social skills" lines that made me sigh. I carefully corrected him, scientists don't always value their interpersonal skills, but it is impossible to be successful in science if you cannot write a grant that present a compelling argument to fund your work or present a clear story of your novel finds that gives you credibility with your colleagues. He was sold, but it reminded me that a huge part of communication is understanding your audience. If I am applying to a position where a Ph.D. is unexpected, I should probably explain why I think that 5 years in drug discovery provides me enough professional experience to be successful in a new role. I gotta remember that to some people, a Ph.D. is for those who are too single minded to make it anywhere but in that chosen field. And saying, "This job isn't as hard a grad school," isn't likely to win any hearts or minds.
Currently, I am applying for a hot curriculum development position (LinkedIn can tell you how many people have applied- I'm #117. I suspect my application won't be read, or if it is, it will be forgotten. I'm developing the materials for similar positions, so what the heck- I'm being ridiculous and possibly memorable). My short cover letter explains my background and interesting in the position, but I felt it needed more. They wanted someone with a BA in Comm, so I included this paragraph.
Briefly, I want to address some of the other job requirements that may not seem obvious given my background. I earned my Ph.D. in molecular biology by taking the lead on a large collaborative project that involved investigators in 3 states, so I am familiar with team work, collaboration and the value of interpersonal skills. This project allowed me to share my work in both papers and talks for an audience of highly educated skeptics, so I have developed strong communication skills, attention to detail and a thick skin. As a freelancer working off-site, I have mastered independent work and time management.
Too much? My new, fatalistic attitude about the job hunt is helping me to try new things. But approaching every job thinking, "well, I already don't have this job, how bad can it get?" might not be the fast lane to my dream job.
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Post-quiz analysis and reflection
That quiz I posted last week prompted a MAJOR spike in blog traffic. Thanks to everyone who participated. It was gratifying to know that I can drive traffic to the blog, if I want/need. It's also pretty obvious that my usual low number of visitors is not the reason I am still searching for a job.
Although I am leaving the quiz open for anyone else who wants to take it, I wanted to throw down a little analysis. (So go ahead and add new answers, make my analysis irrelevant). My big fear in putting together the quiz was that an overwhelming majority of respondents would say they had a brief job hunt with no struggle. Unfortunately for everyone who had to sweat it out, this wasn't the case. It's not rare to have a job with minimal job effort (you know, compared to the MAJOR effort that was earning the Ph.D. in the first place) (19% of participants report their job hunt was 0 months, 8/36 reported having no major barriers in their job hunt). But it's pretty far from the norm.
On the other hand, people often tell me that being on the market as long as I have been is no big deal. Again, more than half of respondents DID get their position in less than a year. So it's ok to feel like this is taking longer than I thought it should. I find it terrifying that a FIFTH of respondents said it took more than 2 years to find a job (22%), which is terribly long time to be seeking the stability of a job. In a future post, I will have more to say about the STEM Skills Gap Crisis (15/36 reported having difficulty finding jobs that meet their qualifications), but for now it should be clear to us all that there is no "usual" way Ph.D.s get that first job- and it's probably because there are so many directions to go from here.
Today I got to chat with one of the other interns about her job hunt, she post-doced in comp bio, then took a staff position for a year and a half before deciding to leave academic science and has been looking for a position while doing some consulting for about a year. She is hoping to spin-off with a company that she's been working with for a couple months. She reminded me that lots of people post-doc while they are looking for a position, eventually everyone goes somewhere. It helps keep your skills from getting stale, even if it doesn't add anything else. Because how long can you be out of your field and still claim to be an expert in it? As she was saying this, I was reaching for a paperbag to breathe into with one hand and starting to surf "post-doc uw" with the other.
But I stopped myself.
She has a really good point, you don't want your skills to get stale. That's actually why I've been working so hard to get more communication experience as an intern and a contractor. If I took a post-doc, I couldn't do that. And then I would be letting go of the skills I've been working so hard on and I enjoy so much. I asked my editor at Words and Numbers to be a professional reference for me, and she agreed. I'm clearly not wasting my time, this is just MUCH slower than I wanted.
I have a looming anniversary. I defended my Ph.D. at the end of last June. In just a couple months, I won't really be a 'recent' graduate anymore. So I look back at what I've done with a year all to myself. It hasn't been lucrative, but I've learned a lot, taken on and conquered some new challenges and developed new contacts and skills. I don't know how long that will feel sufficient, but I'm not going to give up on this dream yet.
Although I am leaving the quiz open for anyone else who wants to take it, I wanted to throw down a little analysis. (So go ahead and add new answers, make my analysis irrelevant). My big fear in putting together the quiz was that an overwhelming majority of respondents would say they had a brief job hunt with no struggle. Unfortunately for everyone who had to sweat it out, this wasn't the case. It's not rare to have a job with minimal job effort (you know, compared to the MAJOR effort that was earning the Ph.D. in the first place) (19% of participants report their job hunt was 0 months, 8/36 reported having no major barriers in their job hunt). But it's pretty far from the norm.
On the other hand, people often tell me that being on the market as long as I have been is no big deal. Again, more than half of respondents DID get their position in less than a year. So it's ok to feel like this is taking longer than I thought it should. I find it terrifying that a FIFTH of respondents said it took more than 2 years to find a job (22%), which is terribly long time to be seeking the stability of a job. In a future post, I will have more to say about the STEM Skills Gap Crisis (15/36 reported having difficulty finding jobs that meet their qualifications), but for now it should be clear to us all that there is no "usual" way Ph.D.s get that first job- and it's probably because there are so many directions to go from here.
Today I got to chat with one of the other interns about her job hunt, she post-doced in comp bio, then took a staff position for a year and a half before deciding to leave academic science and has been looking for a position while doing some consulting for about a year. She is hoping to spin-off with a company that she's been working with for a couple months. She reminded me that lots of people post-doc while they are looking for a position, eventually everyone goes somewhere. It helps keep your skills from getting stale, even if it doesn't add anything else. Because how long can you be out of your field and still claim to be an expert in it? As she was saying this, I was reaching for a paperbag to breathe into with one hand and starting to surf "post-doc uw" with the other.
But I stopped myself.
She has a really good point, you don't want your skills to get stale. That's actually why I've been working so hard to get more communication experience as an intern and a contractor. If I took a post-doc, I couldn't do that. And then I would be letting go of the skills I've been working so hard on and I enjoy so much. I asked my editor at Words and Numbers to be a professional reference for me, and she agreed. I'm clearly not wasting my time, this is just MUCH slower than I wanted.
I have a looming anniversary. I defended my Ph.D. at the end of last June. In just a couple months, I won't really be a 'recent' graduate anymore. So I look back at what I've done with a year all to myself. It hasn't been lucrative, but I've learned a lot, taken on and conquered some new challenges and developed new contacts and skills. I don't know how long that will feel sufficient, but I'm not going to give up on this dream yet.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Survey: How long does a job hunt take?
I had dinner with the person who got me my internship, and she told me that spending "only a year" job hunting after earning my PhD isn't something to be frustrated about. She said she spent the last year of her post-doc scrambling to get something together and STILL had no where to go for months. I've heard several variations of this story, but how common is it?
Two questions, and then you can see the answers. Please share this around so we can get a bigger response.
Quizzes by Quibblo.com | SnapApp Quiz Apps
The survey will give us a little perspective, but feel free to add
additional details into the comments (what field, when was your job
hunt, which job finally felt like "the first job," or what finally
worked). Thanks for your participation and encouragement!
UPDATE: For those who would like to see the results without taking the quiz, you can find them here.
UPDATE: For those who would like to see the results without taking the quiz, you can find them here.
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Project Job Hunt 4: Risk Assessment
As promised, a risk assessment for my Project. To keep it organized (and because I'll need this for the Network and Schedule), I've converted the WBS into a task list. I take the lowest level of division from that outline which are the specific things that need to be accomplished and from there I can assess each task for possible failures. I've changed the verbage on some of these that need a bit more detail to stand independently or be more specific, manageable tasks (see 1.1.4). I will be adding my assessment of failure (what would failure look like here?), and how I plan to deal with that directly in the list.
1.1.1 Take Meyers Briggs
1.1.2 Take Strengths Finder
1.1.3 Ask colleagues for career recommendations
1.1.4 Soul Searching: Define 'adequate' in terms of job satisfaction, use of skills, pay and potential for mobility
For all the 1.1 tasks, I may find recommendations I don't approve of- in which case I will keep assessing. I may find that the jobs I should target are not common in the the Seattle Job market. This is one reason to assess how I want to use my skills (transferable and technical) so that I can be more flexible given the limitations of the job market. Overall, I am not too worried about failure here, as I have already begun this process.
1.2.1 Target employers
1.2.2 Target job titles
If I include the limitation that my target employers and titles must be in Seattle, this might be overly limited. In this case, I will go back to the 1.1 tasks and reassess (deferring risk). This might might be part of the quality control for these sections- 1.1 is not complete until 1.2 can also be complete.
1.3 Informational interviews to refine target positions and employer
If I can't get people to talk with me, this may prove to be difficult. I am (often) sharing the risk on this task by asking for introductions through my network.
2.1.1 Prepare Resume
2.1.2 Prepare CV
2.1.3 Prepare Cover letter
2.1.4 Prepare Networking Brief
2.1.5 Prepare Statement of research interests (?)
Failure for any of these documents would be if they are prepared too poorly to earn me a job. To mitigate this risk, I always have a proofreader, and will seek out peers to read updated versions of these documents as they drastically change form. Basic quality control should manage the risk here.
2.2.1 Update Job Board search clients
2.2.2 Update CV/resume on file with job boards
2.2.3 Contact Recruiters
One issue when working with recruiters is that if a candidate gets submitted multiple times for a job, companies will sometimes drop them, due to confusion over who gets paid the finders fee. I will only work with recruiters who can be clear about which positions they are submitting me for, so that I don't shoot myself in the foot by also submitting myself. Further, working with a recruiter may limit my ability to negotiate the job package (pay, benefits etc) later on. I am totally cool with this if it means I still get a job (accepting the risk).
2.3.1 Ping network for opportunities
2.3.2 Add to network though mixers and introductions
One worry about these types of tasks is that it isn't clear when I am "done." In managing my time, if too much time is spent on this part of the project, I might never move to completion. But these are still important steps. It's possible these tasks are outside the scope of this project, or that they might be administrative in nature (something that will be done to support the project (like a status update meeting), but doesn't have a specific schedule for completion of the project). To deal with this risk, I am going to arbitrarily remove these from the schedule. I'll still be doing these, but if managed separately they aren't as likely to bung up my schedule.
3.1.2 Find nice interview clothes
I might have unfashionable taste. I am willing to risk my career on this. (Risk accepted.)
3.1.1 Practice Interviews
3.2.1 Use Glassdoor to find relevant salary info
3.2.2 Practice Negotiation
This is another area where perspective will be very helpful. I will attempt to share some of this risk by practicing with other job hunters and recruiters so that I can get as many different types of feedback as possible. Another consideration for this is that I will want to be prepared with these relatively close to getting interviews etc., these may be repeated at various intervals depending on the length of the project.
*3.3 Apply for jobs
3.4.1 Phone or email to follow-up
3.4.2 Use excel to keep follow-up schedule organized
This is the riskiest section of the project. If this doesn't work (ie, task completion doesn't lead to desired outcomes), I'll be repeating these tasks. I'm not really sure how to deal with this type of iterative process, except to expand my definition of 'task completion' to having something to move forward with (like an interview scheduled, etc.) What if that never happens? Oh, it keeps me up at night... I will mitigate this risk by focusing on applying for jobs I am a reasonable candidate for, and using the other tasks in the project to support this effort. I'm not comfortable trying to transfer or share this risk, since this is my responsibility to solve this problem. The remaining risk, I just have to accept and not get too hung up on, right?
One thing I've realized just going through the risk assessment is that spending a little more time with the plan has helped me to understand it better. I've re-written some of the task titles, and thought a bit more about the order these should be done in. I didn't uncover any big surprises, but I'm also more confident that there won't be any big surprises because I've thought about these tasks individually and in the context of the whole project. Now I see why so much effort is put into the planning stages of well-executed projects.
1.1.1 Take Meyers Briggs
1.1.2 Take Strengths Finder
1.1.3 Ask colleagues for career recommendations
1.1.4 Soul Searching: Define 'adequate' in terms of job satisfaction, use of skills, pay and potential for mobility
For all the 1.1 tasks, I may find recommendations I don't approve of- in which case I will keep assessing. I may find that the jobs I should target are not common in the the Seattle Job market. This is one reason to assess how I want to use my skills (transferable and technical) so that I can be more flexible given the limitations of the job market. Overall, I am not too worried about failure here, as I have already begun this process.
1.2.1 Target employers
1.2.2 Target job titles
If I include the limitation that my target employers and titles must be in Seattle, this might be overly limited. In this case, I will go back to the 1.1 tasks and reassess (deferring risk). This might might be part of the quality control for these sections- 1.1 is not complete until 1.2 can also be complete.
1.3 Informational interviews to refine target positions and employer
If I can't get people to talk with me, this may prove to be difficult. I am (often) sharing the risk on this task by asking for introductions through my network.
2.1.1 Prepare Resume
2.1.2 Prepare CV
2.1.3 Prepare Cover letter
2.1.4 Prepare Networking Brief
2.1.5 Prepare Statement of research interests (?)
Failure for any of these documents would be if they are prepared too poorly to earn me a job. To mitigate this risk, I always have a proofreader, and will seek out peers to read updated versions of these documents as they drastically change form. Basic quality control should manage the risk here.
2.2.1 Update Job Board search clients
2.2.2 Update CV/resume on file with job boards
2.2.3 Contact Recruiters
One issue when working with recruiters is that if a candidate gets submitted multiple times for a job, companies will sometimes drop them, due to confusion over who gets paid the finders fee. I will only work with recruiters who can be clear about which positions they are submitting me for, so that I don't shoot myself in the foot by also submitting myself. Further, working with a recruiter may limit my ability to negotiate the job package (pay, benefits etc) later on. I am totally cool with this if it means I still get a job (accepting the risk).
2.3.1 Ping network for opportunities
2.3.2 Add to network though mixers and introductions
One worry about these types of tasks is that it isn't clear when I am "done." In managing my time, if too much time is spent on this part of the project, I might never move to completion. But these are still important steps. It's possible these tasks are outside the scope of this project, or that they might be administrative in nature (something that will be done to support the project (like a status update meeting), but doesn't have a specific schedule for completion of the project). To deal with this risk, I am going to arbitrarily remove these from the schedule. I'll still be doing these, but if managed separately they aren't as likely to bung up my schedule.
3.1.2 Find nice interview clothes
I might have unfashionable taste. I am willing to risk my career on this. (Risk accepted.)
3.1.1 Practice Interviews
3.2.1 Use Glassdoor to find relevant salary info
3.2.2 Practice Negotiation
This is another area where perspective will be very helpful. I will attempt to share some of this risk by practicing with other job hunters and recruiters so that I can get as many different types of feedback as possible. Another consideration for this is that I will want to be prepared with these relatively close to getting interviews etc., these may be repeated at various intervals depending on the length of the project.
*3.3 Apply for jobs
3.4.1 Phone or email to follow-up
3.4.2 Use excel to keep follow-up schedule organized
This is the riskiest section of the project. If this doesn't work (ie, task completion doesn't lead to desired outcomes), I'll be repeating these tasks. I'm not really sure how to deal with this type of iterative process, except to expand my definition of 'task completion' to having something to move forward with (like an interview scheduled, etc.) What if that never happens? Oh, it keeps me up at night... I will mitigate this risk by focusing on applying for jobs I am a reasonable candidate for, and using the other tasks in the project to support this effort. I'm not comfortable trying to transfer or share this risk, since this is my responsibility to solve this problem. The remaining risk, I just have to accept and not get too hung up on, right?
One thing I've realized just going through the risk assessment is that spending a little more time with the plan has helped me to understand it better. I've re-written some of the task titles, and thought a bit more about the order these should be done in. I didn't uncover any big surprises, but I'm also more confident that there won't be any big surprises because I've thought about these tasks individually and in the context of the whole project. Now I see why so much effort is put into the planning stages of well-executed projects.
Saturday, May 5, 2012
Project Job Hunt: Risk Assessments
Risk Assessment is the part of Project Management that I'd like to learn more about. It seems very relevant for research. The Project, as defined, relies on the success of all the outcomes. In science we are more likely to take on projects that aren't guaranteed to succeed compared to other fields (cure for cancer vs. build a better tooth brush). Risk Assessment is meant to look at the various components of the project, consider how they might negatively impact the success of the project and make choices about how to deal with those eventualities during planning. What if you sat down at the beginning of your dissertation and your PI said, "I'd like you to cure brain cancer. If that doesn't work, you should probably characterize the ways that curing brain cancer is different than treating other cancers. Either way, you can publish and graduate." Even though this is eventually what happens to most of us, this is more likely to happen in year five than year 1.
Risk should be identified in the planning stage, and decisions should be made about each risk. These should be assessed from both quantitatively and qualitatively. Will you spend all the remaining grants funds to solve this problem? Will you be too beat down and burned out after tackling this to ever lay eyes on another pipette ever again? Things that put the project off schedule or budget are more quantitative, those that negatively impact the team or the quality are quality issues. Should these risks be mitigated, transferred, deferred, reduced, shared, accepted or avoided? Let me present research relevant examples for each, because I am studying.
There is a risk that you might have the wrong construct from a previous student- you mitigate that risk by sequencing or otherwise verifying the identity before doing any real experiments with it. I often struggled to grow the quantities of HeLa cells I needed for my experiments, the risk was transferred when I bought the cells I needed. Some risks are deferred, you wait to run those expensive follow-up experiments that might derail the project until after the grant renewal. Always running multiple samples and controls reduces the risk that you are just viewing and anomaly. Taking on a collaborator can help share risks in a productive way- you can't do MUD-PIT, and they don't know much about growing yeast- sharing risk can decrease it as well. In research especially, there is a high probability that whatever we are working on might not work- we accept that risk, including the consequences on time, money and talent. The alternative is to avoid it, don't run experiments that you don't have confidence in, staying away from high risk-high reward avenues.
What does this mean for my Job Hunt Project? Well, I go back and look at each of those tasks, and try to think about what failure might look like. Some of this is just more rigorous quality control- I'll be sharing the documents (CV, Resume etc) I create with peers to be sure that I am presenting myself well. One reason it is important to do this in the planning stage is that risk assessment might create new tasks, which will need to be incorporated into the plan/schedule downstream. Since this is such an important idea, I am going to split this into two posts- my next post will provide the actual risk assessment.
Risk should be identified in the planning stage, and decisions should be made about each risk. These should be assessed from both quantitatively and qualitatively. Will you spend all the remaining grants funds to solve this problem? Will you be too beat down and burned out after tackling this to ever lay eyes on another pipette ever again? Things that put the project off schedule or budget are more quantitative, those that negatively impact the team or the quality are quality issues. Should these risks be mitigated, transferred, deferred, reduced, shared, accepted or avoided? Let me present research relevant examples for each, because I am studying.
There is a risk that you might have the wrong construct from a previous student- you mitigate that risk by sequencing or otherwise verifying the identity before doing any real experiments with it. I often struggled to grow the quantities of HeLa cells I needed for my experiments, the risk was transferred when I bought the cells I needed. Some risks are deferred, you wait to run those expensive follow-up experiments that might derail the project until after the grant renewal. Always running multiple samples and controls reduces the risk that you are just viewing and anomaly. Taking on a collaborator can help share risks in a productive way- you can't do MUD-PIT, and they don't know much about growing yeast- sharing risk can decrease it as well. In research especially, there is a high probability that whatever we are working on might not work- we accept that risk, including the consequences on time, money and talent. The alternative is to avoid it, don't run experiments that you don't have confidence in, staying away from high risk-high reward avenues.
What does this mean for my Job Hunt Project? Well, I go back and look at each of those tasks, and try to think about what failure might look like. Some of this is just more rigorous quality control- I'll be sharing the documents (CV, Resume etc) I create with peers to be sure that I am presenting myself well. One reason it is important to do this in the planning stage is that risk assessment might create new tasks, which will need to be incorporated into the plan/schedule downstream. Since this is such an important idea, I am going to split this into two posts- my next post will provide the actual risk assessment.
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Project Managing My Job Hunt 2: WBS
Once the project has been defined and authorized, then the tasks can be defined and organized. This results in a work breakdown structure (WBS). The WBS helps define the budget, schedule and delegation. It is not in chronological order, but rather grouped by phases or task types. For example, in class we are working on a landscape project. Construction efforts are separated from the planting efforts, since these are likely to be dealt with by different aspects of the team. Again, in my case, all the tasks are my responsibility eventually, but it is helpful to me to see all the things I should be doing so I can determine whether I am spending my time appropriately. Creation of the WBS, and even the schedule and budget are still planning
Our teacher showed several ways these can be organized, either like the outline for a long paper, with headings like 0.0 Landscape the park
1.0 Landscaping
1.1 Plant Grass
1.2 Plant Trees
1.3 Make walkways... right?
Or like a phylogenetic tree. This would work better if I were doing this by hand. Since I am putting this together in Blogger, you'll see the paper outline version.
My professor specifically recommended to think global first, keep the organization light at first, and not to define any task which seems to burdensome to manage. Although he said it is common to refine to too much detail, and then remove tasks that don't seem worthy of being a line item on a schedule. (I'll be honest, I am not entirely sure I understand what he means).
For myself, this means I am creating a gross brainstorm of tasks, then organizing them into groups and subgroups and looking for gaps. It's an interesting exercise for the job hunt. I can imagine how on a larger project this might be a more iterative process with different teams weighing in on the essential tasks and predicted schedule and budget while the project is still in the planning phase. Oh, and things that don't end up on the WBS include administrative tasks, such as "meet to create schedule," "budget," or "update supervisors..." even though these things will likely happen as well.
0.0 Project Job Hunt
1.0 Define Job requirement
1.1 Assess my skills (transferable and otherwise)
1.1.1 Meyers Briggs
1.1.2 Strengths Finder
1.1.3 Ask colleagues for recommendations
1.1.4 Soul Searching
1.2 Define my job requirements (what is adequate?)
1.2.1 Target employers
1.2.2 Target job titles
1.3 Informational interviews to refine target positions and employer
2.0 Locate Job opportunities
2.1 Prepare targeted application materials
2.1.1 Resume
2.1.2 CV
2.1.3 Cover letter
2.1.4 Networking Brief
2.1.5 Statement of research interests (?)
2.2 Find sources for relevant jobs
2.2.1 Update Job Board search clients
2.2.2 Update CV/resume on file with job boards
2.2.3 Contact Recruiters
2.3 Network
2.3.1 Ping network for opportunities
2.3.2 Add to network though mixers and introductions
3.0 Secure the Job
3.1 Prepare for interviews
3.1.1 Practice Interviews
3.1.2 Find nice interview clothes
3.2 Prepare for negotiations on salary, benefits etc.
3.2.1 Glassdoor
3.2.2 Practice Negotiation
*3.3 Apply for jobs
3.4 Follow-up with applications
3.4.1 Phone or email
3.4.2 Use excel to keep these organized
*In the first version of the chart, I forgot this critical step. Aha.
Notice which tasks end up in the project and which don't. Working at my current job or taking contracts is not strictly in the scope of this project. Blogging is beyond the scope of this project. Taking the PM class is beyond the scope of this project. None of these are bad things, but this does reinforce the notion that I seem to spend time on things that aren't getting me a job. What the WBS contains are only tasks/deliverables that are essential to successful outcomes. <== How business literate do I sound now?!
I have a certain skepticism that this rigid structure can work for nebulous projects where there are many uncontrolled external factors (I'm gonna have a hard time putting a deadline on this). Research is another area that is hard to manage in this way. Next up, we'll talk about risk. For now, go ahead a gloat in that righteous feeling that 'if I'd done this in graduate school, I would have graduated in like 4 months!' I'll revisit that (Spoiler Alert: that feeling goes away.)
Our teacher showed several ways these can be organized, either like the outline for a long paper, with headings like 0.0 Landscape the park
1.0 Landscaping
1.1 Plant Grass
1.2 Plant Trees
1.3 Make walkways... right?
Or like a phylogenetic tree. This would work better if I were doing this by hand. Since I am putting this together in Blogger, you'll see the paper outline version.
My professor specifically recommended to think global first, keep the organization light at first, and not to define any task which seems to burdensome to manage. Although he said it is common to refine to too much detail, and then remove tasks that don't seem worthy of being a line item on a schedule. (I'll be honest, I am not entirely sure I understand what he means).
For myself, this means I am creating a gross brainstorm of tasks, then organizing them into groups and subgroups and looking for gaps. It's an interesting exercise for the job hunt. I can imagine how on a larger project this might be a more iterative process with different teams weighing in on the essential tasks and predicted schedule and budget while the project is still in the planning phase. Oh, and things that don't end up on the WBS include administrative tasks, such as "meet to create schedule," "budget," or "update supervisors..." even though these things will likely happen as well.
0.0 Project Job Hunt
1.0 Define Job requirement
1.1 Assess my skills (transferable and otherwise)
1.1.1 Meyers Briggs
1.1.2 Strengths Finder
1.1.3 Ask colleagues for recommendations
1.1.4 Soul Searching
1.2 Define my job requirements (what is adequate?)
1.2.1 Target employers
1.2.2 Target job titles
1.3 Informational interviews to refine target positions and employer
2.0 Locate Job opportunities
2.1 Prepare targeted application materials
2.1.1 Resume
2.1.2 CV
2.1.3 Cover letter
2.1.4 Networking Brief
2.1.5 Statement of research interests (?)
2.2 Find sources for relevant jobs
2.2.1 Update Job Board search clients
2.2.2 Update CV/resume on file with job boards
2.2.3 Contact Recruiters
2.3 Network
2.3.1 Ping network for opportunities
2.3.2 Add to network though mixers and introductions
3.0 Secure the Job
3.1 Prepare for interviews
3.1.1 Practice Interviews
3.1.2 Find nice interview clothes
3.2 Prepare for negotiations on salary, benefits etc.
3.2.1 Glassdoor
3.2.2 Practice Negotiation
*3.3 Apply for jobs
3.4 Follow-up with applications
3.4.1 Phone or email
3.4.2 Use excel to keep these organized
*In the first version of the chart, I forgot this critical step. Aha.
Notice which tasks end up in the project and which don't. Working at my current job or taking contracts is not strictly in the scope of this project. Blogging is beyond the scope of this project. Taking the PM class is beyond the scope of this project. None of these are bad things, but this does reinforce the notion that I seem to spend time on things that aren't getting me a job. What the WBS contains are only tasks/deliverables that are essential to successful outcomes. <== How business literate do I sound now?!
I have a certain skepticism that this rigid structure can work for nebulous projects where there are many uncontrolled external factors (I'm gonna have a hard time putting a deadline on this). Research is another area that is hard to manage in this way. Next up, we'll talk about risk. For now, go ahead a gloat in that righteous feeling that 'if I'd done this in graduate school, I would have graduated in like 4 months!' I'll revisit that (Spoiler Alert: that feeling goes away.)
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Project Managing My Job Hunt 1: Charter & Scope
My project management course has proven to be interesting, but I decided I would get more out of the process if I had a project to manage. If only I had a short-term, complex problem to solve that needed to balance schedules and outcomes... oh wait, I'm looking for a job. And that has proven to be an unruly, challenging project. I am hoping that applying the PMI principles to the hunt will help me get organized, and reinforce what I am learning in class. Here goes.
The first week of class, we talked about defining a charter and scope. The charter grants the authority for the project, the scope defines the bounds of the project (which should be temporary in nature).
In my case, I already have authority to find myself a job, but setting up the project in this way necessarily organizes other downstream events.
Notice how my charter includes some key phrases like "identify and secure employment," and "enlisting resources." In the next round, we'll be defining the necessary tasks to complete this project, and those phrases begin to suggest what some of them might be. One of the first things I am hoping to take on in the project is to more clearly assess what fields I might be able to apply my skills to, and then direct my applications to positions there, using appropriate tactics. If there were a budget or specific deadline, these would be included. Unfortunately, the job hunt has neither (this might turn out to be challenging in future steps).
Also, the charter is not very proscribed- it doesn't state that I will secure 'employment as a senior scientist in the operations division at Amgen.' A project isn't worth managing unless there is an element of creativity/problem solving that needs to occur during the time frame of the project. If the only creative exercise is to create the task list, which then is given to a team of automatons to complete without any further input, you may be micromanaging. But, there is also an outer limit- I don't have to figure out what I am doing with my WHOLE life, just my next job.
The first week of class, we talked about defining a charter and scope. The charter grants the authority for the project, the scope defines the bounds of the project (which should be temporary in nature).
In my case, I already have authority to find myself a job, but setting up the project in this way necessarily organizes other downstream events.
Sandlin's Job Hunt Project Charter and Scope:
This charter grants authority to Sandlin to find adequate employment, including enlisting necessary resources and refining the outcomes of the search (which must include a definition of 'adequate'). This project is only intended to identify and secure her next full-time employment, not necessarily future employment opportunities.
Notice how my charter includes some key phrases like "identify and secure employment," and "enlisting resources." In the next round, we'll be defining the necessary tasks to complete this project, and those phrases begin to suggest what some of them might be. One of the first things I am hoping to take on in the project is to more clearly assess what fields I might be able to apply my skills to, and then direct my applications to positions there, using appropriate tactics. If there were a budget or specific deadline, these would be included. Unfortunately, the job hunt has neither (this might turn out to be challenging in future steps).
Also, the charter is not very proscribed- it doesn't state that I will secure 'employment as a senior scientist in the operations division at Amgen.' A project isn't worth managing unless there is an element of creativity/problem solving that needs to occur during the time frame of the project. If the only creative exercise is to create the task list, which then is given to a team of automatons to complete without any further input, you may be micromanaging. But, there is also an outer limit- I don't have to figure out what I am doing with my WHOLE life, just my next job.
Friday, April 27, 2012
Job opportunties for PhDs?
If you read any academic/career blogs for the PhD audience, you are probably aware of the debate about the over-production of PhDs. Are there too many? What jobs are they supposed to get? For some fields (chemistry especially), there is an painful mismatch between training and industry needs. Chemjobber started some nice dialogue about the opportunity costs of grad school in response to a Chronicle Article by Jon Bardin, a chemistry grad student and science writer who talked with excitement about the many directions a person can take graduate training. I agree, there are many places you can take a PhD, teaching high school for example, but many of those positions don't require the PhD which can make a burnt out graduate feel like the years of toil were for naught. DocFreeride responded very candidly about the risks of going to graduate school (it's not a guarantee for a job). These are all great articles, and I would encourage you to look at the comments section of each.
Some may point to the low unemployment rate for those with PhDs as evidence that there is not a mismatch. First, remind yourself that this number only accounts for those who have had a job that pays into unemployment- grad students and post-docs in between positions don't count. I would like to respond to this, as a technically 'employed' PhD. Someone asked me recently on a particularly optimistic day if getting my PhD was worth it. And I responded that I'll always be able to find work (editing papers for China or taking contracts, for example), but as someone who has invested so much time in my professional development, I have ambitions to find a fulfilling career. And that has proven to be much harder than I might have thought.
I was meeting recently with a couple of other out of work scientists (casualties of the boom-bust Seattle Biotech market). One of them walked me through his current career plan:
Plan A- Dream job as a scientist.
Plan B- Full time work using transferable and technical skills.
Plan C- Contract work using any transferable skills.
Plan D- any type of work. His unemployment is running out, so Plan D is a major focus.
I was starting to complain that I had just achieved Plan D- I can pay my bills, but now I spend all my time running around like a crazy person between 3 jobs and networking events and try to spend a few minutes sending out applications. This is not the dream- I never aspired to be a full-time job hunter.... but both of these scientists (politely) told me to stuff it. They knew too many scientists who had lost their homes, spouses and lives as a result of not being able to find a job of any sort. Am I really career savvy for taking a part-time job? Is the most important skill that I learned as a graduate student the ability to work diligently on seemingly pointless tasks?
Well, it is one the skills I learned, but I prefer to think that my analytical ability and aptitude for critical thinking were more important. Another skill I learned is the importance of jumping through hoops when necessary (as expressed by the great @GeneWrangler). When I told these guys I was thinking about getting my CAPM, they were skeptical that I would learn anything I didn't already know. And that's not the point- you don't always get certified to learn things, sometimes you get certified to prove you are a joiner, that you can put up with the necessary Bureaucratic Stuff (BS) to get the job done. A tolerance for BS is important in some jobs, like it or not. Yes, it would be awesome if we could all be fairly evaluated based on our potential for success stemming from a thoughtfully objective assessment of our strengths. But in reality, we just have to find a way to be the right person, in the right place at the right time. I'm not willing to leave that to chance, so I am committed to polishing my candidacy in as many ways as I can in an effort to be ready for when opportunities present themselves. To me, having my PhD means I have the skills to overcome the issues that my field and job market have. I'm not sure what the solution looks like at the moment, but I have spent years looking for something with a much lower probability of success, so I know I got this.
Some may point to the low unemployment rate for those with PhDs as evidence that there is not a mismatch. First, remind yourself that this number only accounts for those who have had a job that pays into unemployment- grad students and post-docs in between positions don't count. I would like to respond to this, as a technically 'employed' PhD. Someone asked me recently on a particularly optimistic day if getting my PhD was worth it. And I responded that I'll always be able to find work (editing papers for China or taking contracts, for example), but as someone who has invested so much time in my professional development, I have ambitions to find a fulfilling career. And that has proven to be much harder than I might have thought.
I was meeting recently with a couple of other out of work scientists (casualties of the boom-bust Seattle Biotech market). One of them walked me through his current career plan:
Plan A- Dream job as a scientist.
Plan B- Full time work using transferable and technical skills.
Plan C- Contract work using any transferable skills.
Plan D- any type of work. His unemployment is running out, so Plan D is a major focus.
I was starting to complain that I had just achieved Plan D- I can pay my bills, but now I spend all my time running around like a crazy person between 3 jobs and networking events and try to spend a few minutes sending out applications. This is not the dream- I never aspired to be a full-time job hunter.... but both of these scientists (politely) told me to stuff it. They knew too many scientists who had lost their homes, spouses and lives as a result of not being able to find a job of any sort. Am I really career savvy for taking a part-time job? Is the most important skill that I learned as a graduate student the ability to work diligently on seemingly pointless tasks?
Well, it is one the skills I learned, but I prefer to think that my analytical ability and aptitude for critical thinking were more important. Another skill I learned is the importance of jumping through hoops when necessary (as expressed by the great @GeneWrangler). When I told these guys I was thinking about getting my CAPM, they were skeptical that I would learn anything I didn't already know. And that's not the point- you don't always get certified to learn things, sometimes you get certified to prove you are a joiner, that you can put up with the necessary Bureaucratic Stuff (BS) to get the job done. A tolerance for BS is important in some jobs, like it or not. Yes, it would be awesome if we could all be fairly evaluated based on our potential for success stemming from a thoughtfully objective assessment of our strengths. But in reality, we just have to find a way to be the right person, in the right place at the right time. I'm not willing to leave that to chance, so I am committed to polishing my candidacy in as many ways as I can in an effort to be ready for when opportunities present themselves. To me, having my PhD means I have the skills to overcome the issues that my field and job market have. I'm not sure what the solution looks like at the moment, but I have spent years looking for something with a much lower probability of success, so I know I got this.
Thursday, April 26, 2012
Experiment: Copy and Paste
We've all heard that more and more, computers are pre-screening applications for specific key words before a resume ever gets seen by a human. If you don't have the magic character string, you don't have a job. I've worried a lot about this, but wasn't really sure what to do about it. A colleague recently mentioned that to a computer "PhD" and "Ph.D." and "Ph-D" are unrelated. The surest way to hit the keywords is to use the form put in the ad.
And this got me thinking, I never know what the key words will be. If the ad contains the search terms, maybe my application should contain the ad? This morning, I am taking a new approach to resume writing. I find a job I think I am a good fit for, I copy the text of the ad, and trim that to meet my specific needs. "Builds professional relationships" becomes "Builds professional relationships as part of a large, interdisciplinary team." I'm not gonna lie, it kinda feels like plagiarism, but I am been assured that applicant creativity doesn't usually get picked out of pre-screening.
I'll let you know if it works, but here are a couple up-sides I noticed already:
1) It's impossible to apply for jobs I'm not pretty much a great candidate for
2) It's a way faster way to tailor my resume.
I've already applied to two associate positions this morning, so we might get a chance to see how this experiments pans out in the short run.
Side note: the consensus was that the cover-letter isn't really essential for key word searching, and that in many cases it isn't read. I always include a nice, but short one, figuring it doesn't get screened, but someday I'll be sitting with someone in an interview situation and they might read it before I walk in the room. This might be a waste of time.
And this got me thinking, I never know what the key words will be. If the ad contains the search terms, maybe my application should contain the ad? This morning, I am taking a new approach to resume writing. I find a job I think I am a good fit for, I copy the text of the ad, and trim that to meet my specific needs. "Builds professional relationships" becomes "Builds professional relationships as part of a large, interdisciplinary team." I'm not gonna lie, it kinda feels like plagiarism, but I am been assured that applicant creativity doesn't usually get picked out of pre-screening.
I'll let you know if it works, but here are a couple up-sides I noticed already:
1) It's impossible to apply for jobs I'm not pretty much a great candidate for
2) It's a way faster way to tailor my resume.
I've already applied to two associate positions this morning, so we might get a chance to see how this experiments pans out in the short run.
Side note: the consensus was that the cover-letter isn't really essential for key word searching, and that in many cases it isn't read. I always include a nice, but short one, figuring it doesn't get screened, but someday I'll be sitting with someone in an interview situation and they might read it before I walk in the room. This might be a waste of time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)