Advice for Getting a Job in the Real-World

Excellent advice! Recently in an advice column at The Chronicle, L. Maren Wood offered some good tips to Ph.D’s searching for non-academic jobs. All of her advice is spot on and in my opinion and very practical.

First, I will echo what Ms. Woods states right off the bat; it is difficult to get a job no matter what your degrees and experiences. Unless you are in health care, getting a job, especially when it is unplanned or unexpected, takes time and patience. The time it takes and the persistence needed to get a job is often an unexpected reality for academics looking to land a non-academic job.

Next, it can be extremely difficult for academics transitioning to non-academic jobs. Usually during this time there a great deal of angst, pain, anger, self-loathing, with a sprinkle of defeat. All of these emotions are completely legitimate because when academics leave academia they are leaving a place and a plan that had been been in place usually since age 18. But once the decision is made, each individual has to take off their academic garment and put on the business casual of the real-world. (I am using the term real-world in jest; often, academics are weary of the real-world because they have not fully experienced it.)

Back to the article; numbers two, three, and five all come down to learning how to sell yourself. Speaking in generalities, academics are not good at selling themselves; they usually think their research, CV, and writing should stand alone. But the reality is that when you are outside academia you have to learn how to talk about yourself in a positive and easy to understand manner. Unfortunately, some hiring managers view academics as egotists that are out of touch so be weary of how you come off and learn how to present your skills, abilities, and competencies to non-academics.

One of the most important skills that an academic can contribute is their ability to critically think. Being able to critically think is one of the strongest bargaining chips a Ph.D. has especially when selling it as an individual and team strength (the ability and desire to cooperatively work in teams). Along with selling abilities you must know how to sell ‘you’. The experience that you bring to the table as an academic is truly unique and when you allow you to be you, along with a good deal of confidence, you will have the best chance of getting that non-academic job.

Finally number seven. I think this is one of the most difficult aspects of non-academic jobs for academics; everything takes time. In whatever organization you end up at it takes time to learn the culture, to expand your network, to build your personal brand, and to impress the ‘right’ people. Some will care about your doctorate, some will not, but it takes years to move up in any organization.

Comments on the Comments:

I have to comment on some of the comments at the end of the article.

Doctor

A doctorate, to my understanding, is an academic title suitable for an academic or equivalent settings. In my world the only time I introduce myself as Dr. is when I formally start a one of my team meeting or when I teach.

Do I introduce myself as Dr. when I have meetings with other departments? No. Do I introduce myself as Dr. when I call someone in the organization? No. Do I require all my students to call me Dr.? No.

The only time I use the title doctor is when the situation requires it, which is rare. I do not omit my credential because I am ashamed, I omit the title because I know the culture of my organization, which is casual, and my boss emphasises performance outcomes no matter what your title (no free rides because of your degrees). You have to know your audience and be aware of when you can and should not use your academic title in non-academic settings.

Bosses without Doctorates

Many bosses in non-academic settings do not have doctorates; this is obvious. If you present yourself in an easy to understand, open, and friendly manner no boss will ever be threatened by you and if they are, do you really want to work for this person?

One Year of anonymousbjorn

anonymousbjorn is one year old! Over this past year a lot has changed; my son has gotten older, I moved into a new position at work, and I have consistently contributed to my higher education blog. 2013 was a good year.

The most important event of 2013 is my son slowly getting older. In 2013 he went from being a little baby to a babbling, walking toddler. The changes have been amazing and I would never trade them for anything. As I tell my team at work when talking about work-life balance:

- I only figured out that my purpose in life was to be a dad after I became a dad.

- Family is number one; work supports family; and while at work, enjoy yourself as much as you can.

The next event of 2013 was my new position at work. All I can say is that I have never been more challenged and stressed at work, but I am lucky enough to work with an amazing team that is always striving to do the best job possible and be successful in everything they do.  

And finally I have consistently contributed to anonymousbjorn. My original goal was to post two posts/articles per month and I posted 41 in a year; not bad. The goals of my blog were the following:

- Practice my writing and become more proficient at churning out articles;

- Develop a style that is academic yet accessible (I no longer want to publish in academic journals);

- Stay up-to-date on higher education issues all around the country (not just Arizona).

One year later I feel my writing style has improved but there is always room for improvement. I am always practicing how to write informative, brief articles (under 1000 words), that get to the point, state clearly the facts, and do not leave anyone confused or perplexed by the end.

But I must always remember that matter how old you are, how many degrees you have, or how much money you have; I am always a work in progress.

Help Yourself by Not Being Absurd

There are countless budget problems in higher education these days and because of this people are frustrated, disheartened, angry, and increasingly defensive. Each institution that is dealing with budgetary issues has a slightly different governance structure, various levels of shared governance, and processes for making difficult budget decisions. With that said when difficult budget cuts become a reality the best way to help yourself (and others) is to try to be positive and have constructive dialogues and when commenting on the situation, try not be absurd.

In a December article about budgetary issues at Cooper Union, the following is a statement by

a member of the 18-member panel looking to avoid financial complications at Cooper Union (other words were used besides complications) :

"Asked if he thought the administrators were trying to sabotage the majority’s work, Drogin replied, 'It’s a shame there’s evil in the world.'"

When I think of budgets, higher education, and elite institutions in Manhattan, I do not think of evil and using this term to describe an internal political issue at Cooper Union is absurd. There are many, many, many instances of what could be describe as evil all around this world, but a competing budgetary plan written by administrators is hardly ‘evil’. Are the students and faculty going to be taken out on the street of Cooper Square and E. 6th Street and be shot by the administrators? No; that is evil and this type of evil unfortunately does exist in the world.

In an article about Colorado State University-Pueblo, a professor of Sociology recently implied a comparison of the upcoming budget cuts and potential job losses to the 1914 Ludlow Massacre.

I don’t even know where to start but comparing budget cuts to a horrible conflict in 1914 where men killed each other and women and children lost their lives just because they were caught in the middle is absurd. The article quickly commented on the professor’s intention:

“He went on to say that, just like a century ago, those without power were being mistreated...His call to action was to urge people to oppose the cuts and attend a rally against them.

I agree that as a professor he can call for people to rally against mistreatment and budget cuts at Colorado State-Pueblo and that he is a passionate person. But sending an email to students and faculty members using such metaphors goes a bit beyond artistic or academic licence; comparing budget cuts to murder goes too far.

The other part of this story that is interesting is the comment on academic freedom.

“But aside from the debate over the budget cuts, Friday's action has infuriated faculty leaders, who say it is a violation of academic freedom, and a clear example of retaliation against a professor for speaking out against the administration.”

How is an email opposing budget cuts at your place of employment academic freedom? The email sent is not related to the professor’s teaching, writing, or research; it is related to his non-academic work life. I am 100% in favor of academic freedom but faculty members and faculty advocate groups cannot use academic freedom as a catch-all when they disagree with something; it dilutes the power and importance of academic freedom and confuses the general public (whom you are trying to gain support).

The unknowns at Cooper Union and Colorado State-Pueblo is how shared governance played a role in these two situations. Were faculty representatives included in the budget discussions? Were they listened to? Did the faculty fully participate and offer workable solutions? Did administration go rogue and just decide without consulting faculty members?

My only suggestion in situations like Cooper Union and Colorado State-Pueblo is to not be absurd when arguing your case. If you go to the absurd you lose your ability to effectively communicate, your position becomes blurred, you lose the ability to relate to others, and you lose the ability to persuade.

Big Time College Football: An Addendum

I am a happy blogger; I wrote 16 articles about big time college football starting in September and am ending my series with this addendum just after the season ended. The articles I wrote range in length from 230 words to the longest at over 1000 words with a grand total of somewhere around 8700 words; not bad.

After all of these letters, words, sentences, and paragraphs, what have I learned about big time college football? Well, I did not really answer any of the original questions from my original article but my inquiries (I won’t call it research) took me a different direction.

I learned that big time college sports, BCS Football and important I-A basketball teams make a lot of money. Besides BCS teams, most football programs throughout the country do not make much money and mainly break even (some are in the red) but the biggest and highest profile programs make millions.

I learned that big time college football is extremely important at certain schools while at others it is not. Large state research institutions usually have big time college football while private, ‘elite’ institutions vary.

I also learned that there are many articles calling for college football to change and many are calling for it to pro; including me. But I also learned that there are numerous voices, many within the status quo that do not want any type of change and justify the current system in a variety of different ways.

So what next? My next research project is going to be on higher education budgets and I am excited to see where that will lead me; but what about big time college football? Just the same old stuff and unfortunately, from what I have found, nothing will change. Florida State will try to defend their championship, the same teams will be continue to be in the top ten, another Heisman winner will have to wait a year to go pro, and the new playoff system, which is a long time coming, will solve all the controversies still outstanding in college football.

Big Time College Football: Cutting Athletics (except football)

Cuts, cuts, and more cuts. As I stated in my previous articles #budgetrealities and physics in Maine, programs and now athletics are being cut. In a brief article at Inside Higher Ed and at the official announcement, Temple University is going to cut seven intercollegiate athletic programs as of July 1, 2014. This will reduce the number of varsity sports programs from 24 to 17, which is in-line with other schools in The American Athletic Conference.

These cuts at Temple to me are logical and are following the ongoing trend in higher education because the reality is that schools cannot be everything to everyone anymore. It seems that back in the day, ten to forty years ago, many institutions (larger state and private) were trying to provide everything; offer every type of degree, have every sport, and be a one stop shop for their students. Today, because of funding realities, state and private institutions have to change and many of them are hedging their bets on high profile sports such as football and basketball while keeping other relatively popular sports.

Why keep football and basketball? They make money, and lots of it. According to the Equity in Athletics Data Analysis Cutting Tool, during the 2011-2012 season Temple’s football program made $16,961,995 with a profit of $0 (zero). Their basketball team made $4,080,845 with a profit of $0 (zero). Considering there are no accounting standards when it comes to reporting revenue to the DOE every school reports their revenues differently. To put these lax accounting into perspective, of the institutions that played I-A football during the 2011-2012 season; 28% reported a profit of $0 (zero), 66% reported a profit ranging from $17,339 to $79.9 million, and 6% reported a loss.

Back to Temple hedging their bets on football and basketball; no matter how much you like or dislike big time college sports, it is here to stay and ESPN and the conference specific networks prove it. How often do you see highlights of Temple’s golf, soccer, or volleyball teams on ESPN? Once a season? How often do you see highlights of the football or basketball team? Once a week from September to March even if they field mediocre teams and because of the revenue sharing structure of conferences, Temple will profit off University of Central Florida and Louisville’s stellar 2012-2013 football season even though they went 2-10.

Temple is also in a unique situation to profit off a good football program. They are the only I-A football team in the Philadelphia area and currently play their home games at Lincoln Financial Field (home of the Philadelphia Eagles) by paying a $1 million a year rental fee. Although $1 million a year seems high it is cheaper than building a new stadium somewhere in the Philadelphia metro area for around $55 to $155 million (or more).

The only problem with this is that Temple has to transform their football program into a truly competitive program. They will need to match the University of Louisville’s spending to at least $23 million a year and start competing for recruits with non-AAC programs like Penn State, Duke, Pittsburgh, Maryland, and Boston College. To do this they will need the financial backing of the institution, the support of the president and board of directors, and hire a coach that will take them to the next level (and cost a pretty penny).

It will be interesting to see if Temple can bolster their football program over the next few years while finding ‘efficiencies’ in other parts of the university to help with the year to year budget. But the reality is that the PR that football and basketball generates for a university is huge and unfortunately solid academics, good research facilities, or a champion field hockey team rarely makes-up the difference. Moving forward, colleges and universities have to make hard decisions and cut specific degrees, programs, initiatives, outreach activities, and sports programs while also at the same time allocating more money for other higher profile programs such as STEM fields, business, and football and basketball.