WRITING FOR CORPORATIONS
with
Sarah James, Bob Batchelor, Kevin Walzer, and Wendy Waters
Hosted by Paula Foster
Edited by: Colleen Terrell
September 2002
The following Guest Speaker Discussion originally took place on WRK4US in September of the year 2002. Because WRK4US has a confidentiality policy, all names and email addresses have been altered or removed, except for the moderator's and some of the Guest Speakers'.
The discussion can be read in two ways- by simply scrolling down and reading the whole thing, or by clicking on the topical links below, which take you to specific places within the discussion. The discussion can also be printed out in its entirety for your reading convenience.
Special thanks to Colleen Terrell who volunteered her time to edit this discussion and prepare it for posting on the web. If you are interested in editing a future discussion, your help will be much appreciated; email Paula Foster, WRK4US List Manager, at pfchambers@sbcglobal.net
INTRODUCTION TO GUEST SPEAKERS
KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT
THE VALUE OF AN MA
RELOCATION, HOURS, GENDER, AND SALARY ISSUES
THE PH.D. AS AN ASSET OR A POTENTIAL LIABILITY
MAKING THE TRANSITION FROM ACADEMIC TO CORPORATE CULTURE
POTENTIAL FOR CREATIVITY AND INTELLECTUAL CHALLENGE
HUMANIST vs. CORPORATE ETHICS
BUILDING PORTFOLIOS AND GAINING EXPERIENCE
TYPES OF CORPORATE WRITING
PARTING REMARKS
Introduction of Guest Speakers
Sarah James
Clinical Lead
Hi. My name is Sarah James and I'm a PhD with a nonacademic professional job. It's called "Clinical Lead" which doesn't mean much of anything even in this industry, actually, but I'm the scientific content expert of my group. The role of the overall group is to determine the format and organization of documents submitted to government agencies which grant marketing permission for drug products, vaccines and medical devices. I had originally entered graduate school sure I wanted to be a professor of Victorian Literature (or possibly film), and wound up doing a multidisciplinary project on representations of domestic violence which incorporated film and Victorian studies, among other things.
I didn't intend to leave the academy, but had bungled the comprehensive exams (and funding for the upcoming semester), so a temporary secretarial job was the only reasonable option while studying to retake the exams. Then, a consultant offered to double my salary. It was too late for student loans, so I started doing filing for this consultant. He was short handed, and in a few weeks, I was doing professional work. His group did clinical research, and I reviewed documents for accuracy and completeness. It was boring, but I met the head of the writing department at a luncheon; she got started medical writing because someone gave her a chance. My brother works at Schiff-Norton, so I asked if he knew any writers. Then I got lucky; his bowling team captain knew about an opening. My resume arrived exactly when they needed to fill a position, and they were desperate to get someone who understood the workings of the English language.
I found myself in a job I knew little about, but started writing documents about arthritis during the day and a dissertation at night. In a few months, I was mentoring coworkers, and gradually learned to do various types of scientific writing. I worked on all the basic documents that could be sent to government agencies and started writing publications as well. The team was a high-pressure, high-profile group, with lots of MDs from top-10 places. The hours were long, which delayed my defense by about 18 months. What with attending academic conferences, it was a bit crazy. After my defense, I was promoted and asked to write publications full-time. However, expertise in writing was scarce and I was asked to sit on all the major committees that regulate writing practice for the company. I lucked out again, because one of my committee friends created a new position advising people on how to fit their scientific arguments into required formats. I'm still publishing science and now run professional training courses. I'm working fewer hours now, which gives me more time for academic publishing while I decide what I really want to do.
My current job involves a lot of meetings and advice-giving. Since I'm transitioning between publications writing, which involves "interfacing" with marketing, and my new position, I have to "wear a few different hats." This involves knowing which people expect you to "be on the same page" and which ones cringe when they hear words like "share" in professional contexts. I'm also the only person in my new department with an advanced degree, which means plenty of technical and scientific questions. This is ironic because I'm one of the few people here who doesn't have a science degree. I spend a lot of time on the phone and helping people one-on-one with specific questions about their documents.
I generally like my job. The people I work with are pleasant and interesting, and the work itself can be rewarding. Since Schiff-Norton is such a large company, I've been able to join sports leagues, and I'm taking a conversational Japanese class with some folks I know from the laboratory area. I've also been treated well with regard to bonuses, promotions, and authoring credit on publications.
The thing I miss the most about academic life is being able to talk without censoring my vocabulary. I find that I spend a lot of time either suppressing or explaining "big" words, literature, biblical, and/or film references. On a recent business trip to Chicago, I brought a (college educated and quite intelligent) colleague to see some of the public art and found that she hadn't heard of Picasso, Calder, or Miro. I still have trouble remembering that everyone doesn't troll art museums and read canonical fiction. The thing I miss least about academic life is the lack of stability, and the constant nagging worry that there won't be a job, or tenure, or a publication.
I've probably glossed over some of the technical details in this short description, so if you have specific questions, please let me know.
Bob Batchelor
Vice President/Writer
Hello Listmates,
Before we begin, I would like to thank Paula Foster for organizing this session. I have had a pretty successful career (so far...) playing the professional devil's advocate and will be as candid and open as possible in answering questions about "Writing for Corporations" as part of the larger "Careers in Writing" topic.
I did my undergraduate work at the University of Pittsburgh with majors in History, Philosophy, and Political Science. I then went on to work with Lawrence S. Kaplan in diplomatic history at Kent State where I received a Master's. Next came Temple University, working with Richard Immerman.
I basically finished up coursework and then bounced around while studying for exams and beginning preliminary research for a dissertation. I ended up in the Washington DC area (Annapolis) and did some archival work, but later landed a full-time job at The History Factory (www.historyfactory.com), a specialized communications firm that uses company heritage to leverage an organization's current messaging. While there I did things like write corporate history manuscripts, script multimedia exhibits, conduct oral histories with business leaders, and worked with a variety of Fortune 500 companies.
While at The History Factory, I started seeing many of my friends from Ivy League schools wind up with no tenure-track jobs and little prospects. More importantly, I realized that what I loved best about history was the writing aspect. I started writing a variety of articles and essays and landed a book contract, which made me think twice about pursuing the Ph.D. After a heart-to-heart with Dr. Immerman, he simply asked me if I was happy outside academe and finding out that I was, kind of gave me his blessing to pursue a writing career (which scared the heck out of me at the time, since I was so focused on the doctorate and teaching).
From working with some really topnotch companies at THF, such as Andersen Consulting, (when being associated with Big Five consulting firms still had some cachet) I knew I had to build my career with an eye to the future, just as if I had been building my portfolio of publishing and teaching credentials in the doctoral program. For about three years at THF, I used every opportunity to network and learn business basics. I began realizing that the business world had its own language, sense of accomplishment, like the importance of titles, and that the gulf between "real-world" businesspeople and academics was huge - but not insurmountable.
My wife and I moved to Cleveland, Ohio, to be closer to our families and escape the cost of living in DC for a while and I moved on to Ernst & Young, working in its Center for Business Knowledge (CBK) research arm. This was another big eye-opener and gave me first hand experience in a large bureaucracy, then about 85,000 employees worldwide. It was also a chance to hone in on corporate communications and I wrote everything from intranet newsletters (a big innovation at the time) to helping manage the content for the CBK Web site.
By the time I left E&Y, it was the middle of the dot-com boom and I bounced around a bit, first joining a national law firm based in Cleveland as a Communications Writer focusing on traditional newsletters and editing a quarterly law journal, then being lured to a dot-com called LocalBusiness.com that covered emerging technology companies and venture capital around the nation - basically an online newspaper - writing four or five journalism stories a day. From there, I went to UpStart Communications, a high tech subsidiary of Fleishman-Hillard, the largest public relations firm in the world. While there, I was a Senior Writer and helped develop PR strategy for a number of high tech clients. I also ghost-authored some articles for high tech bigwigs and various other assignments. Our work for one client led to a 2001 Silver Anvil for Business-to-Business Marketing from the Public Relations Society of America.
In July 2001, I was looking for something more stable than the high tech world and wanted to jump back into a large corporation, so I took a position as vice president/writer at Bank of America in San Francisco.
My typical day consists of a conference call or two with my "virtual team," since the company is headquartered in Charlotte, NC, and many of the people I work with are there. Since joining the bank, I've helped develop communications strategy, advise teammates and executives on these issues, and crafted a great deal of the messaging, usually after interviewing subject matter experts and working with a bunch of different people to develop a final product, which can range from a press release or an intranet article to talking points or briefing documents. My primary focus is on internal communications. Most of the things I produce are methods for better communicating with all or segments of the bank's 153,000 employees.
What I like most about the job is that it requires me to use all the business acumen that I've developed over the years. The work can be extremely challenging, but I work with good people, which makes it rewarding. The primary challenge of working with any large corporation is finding one's path through the bureaucracy. Diplomacy and tact are necessary job traits and ones that I use on a daily basis - even though I'm often playing the role of devil's advocate.
What I miss about academe is the freedoms it presents and the pure learning experience/atmosphere. I miss the joy of teaching and the sense that I'm truly giving something back to the community. In the business world, there isn't enough time in the day to study and explore issues in great depth. Acting fast (while being right) is highly valued. For example, I never had to turn a document around on a dime in academe, so I think the urgency of the job is vastly different.
One important note that needs mentioned is that what often has separated me from the pack in interviewing and versus my peers is that I have maintained an extremely active freelance writing career while having a full-time day job. At present, this has equated into about 300 articles and essays and my first book, The 1900s (Greenwood Press, 2002), published a couple months ago. I have two more books coming out next year as well. Obviously, everyone isn't going to have the inclination to do this, but it does point to a way "academics" can separate themselves from typical job candidates.
Let me add as well that I've never taken a single communications, public relations, or advanced writing course. I simply planned out ways to succeed in my new career when I left the academy and used opportunities to network and meet people who could give me a little advice or encouragement. Much of the networking I do is an extension of things I learned in grad school, like organizing and chairing a panel at the PRSA national conference coming up in November. So, you don't have to be like a used-car salesman to make some connections, you can use the same skills that you did in academe.
I'd really love to answer questions and invite you to submit them at your convenience. For those of you too shy to ask the larger group, I will gladly take private questions, though I'm sure the group could benefit from all our queries. Also, for more information about me, you can check out my Web site: www.bobbatchelor.com. I'd like to thank you in advance for participating. I really think this is going to be fun.
Fire away!
Bob Batchelor
Kevin Walzer
Marketing Communications
Hi! I'd like to thank Paula Foster for inviting me to participate in this discussion. I hope that I'll be able to provide some useful information this week, and I'm looking forward to answering your questions.
In 1997, I found myself at the end of my academic job search. I had earned my doctorate in English the previous year and had won several conference interviews in my field--but no campus visits. Coming from a family of successful academics, I wanted a career as an English professor and had worked very hard to achieve that career--earning the doctorate, gaining teaching experience, and beginning to publish my work. However, the crowded job market yielded no suitable offer. Eventually, tired of the uncertainty of academic job searching and unwilling to live on retail employment and adjunct teaching, I decided to get a job in business.
The field I entered--marketing communications--has turned into my career. Marketing communications is a vital part of "Writing for Corporations," which is the topic of this forum. Because it involves helping corporations develop the message that will help it connect to its audience--or, in business terms, its customers--marketing communications as a field draws on many of the skills that Ph.D. students develop. In fact, for Ph.D.s in the humanities, where writing, research, and a holistic perspective are the common denominator between disciplines, marketing communications is almost an ideal profession.
Marketing itself is a broad field. A large corner of it involves heavy numbers crunching, such as market research and analysis. I work in the other subfield of marketing, the qualitative area, which involves developing specific messages to target particular markets or audiences about a particular product. It frequently draws on the analysis developed by the quantitative side of the field. Jobs in this field require strong communication skills, especially in writing; the ability to understand an audience and find the most appropriate message for that audience; and strong creativity. Jobs in this area include public relations, advertising, copywriting, and design, and integrated marketing communications.
The last category, "integrated marketing communications," is a catchall phrase that includes all of the qualitative elements I just mentioned. This phrase applies to a corporation's in-house marketing department, which is used by a company to handle a variety of marketing assignments instead of hiring an external agency.
Since earning my Ph.D., I have worked in several industries--human resources, transportation, software, engineering, and publishing--doing some type of marketing communications. While I have had to learn something about each industry, the basic tasks I perform have been consistent. Here's a sample of the types of projects I handle: Sales proposals, marketing collateral, public relations, advertising, and graphic design.
Marketing communications is challenging, varied, and exciting--in short, it's fun. It calls on a wide range of skills, and offers many opportunities to learn new things. I have found it to be the perfect complement for my humanities background.
Apart from variety and interesting challenges, marketing communications offers other advantages. If you work for a larger company, your salary will surpass tenure-track salaries within a few years. You may not start at this level immediately; I started with a small company where my Ph.D. and writing skills impressed the president enough to overcome my lack of business experience. Within a couple of years, after gaining experience, I had moved on to a much larger company and better salary.
Although I am proud of my Ph.D. and put it on my business cards and resume, I am now a marketing communications professional, not an academic. And I'm quite happy to stay that way. The professional, personal and financial rewards make my career choice a good one for me, and one that is available to any academic--especially a humanities Ph.D.--who is frustrated by the poor opportunities in higher education.
Do I miss anything about academe?
The chance to teach work I'm passionate about is something I miss. But, the reality is, most of my teaching was in freshman composition--a necessary but unexciting part of English studies. And, I've stayed involved with my scholarly and creative work in academe through writing and publishing, so that part of my academic life is still with me. I also miss the freedom, the autonomy, the summers off--in short, the independence. Working 40-50 per week in business doesn't afford the time to write and do research the way academia does.
Still, the trade-offs are worth it. I enjoy earning a living, and I enjoy the way I do it. I'd be glad to answer any questions anyone may have, about the types of projects I do, about how to get into marketing communications, or similar issues.
Wendy Waters
Research Director
Hello wrk4us subscribers!
It's a pleasure to be serving as a guest speaker on Wrk4us -- a list that has proven to be a very important resource for myself, and so many others.
Since March, 2002, I've been the Research Director in the Vancouver office of a moderate-sized Canadian commercial real estate advisory company. Despite the title, I'd consider my role more a "Corporate Communications" and "Knowledge Management" position, than what most academics would consider "research."
Before describing what exactly I do, and how my graduate school experience helped, I'll first describe -- briefly -- how I got here.
My Ph.D is in Modern Latin American and Comparative World History (Arizona, 1999). I had always had a fascination with modern world politics, economics and cultures (especially that of Latin America) and found in studying history, a way to understand the foundations of the world around me. Graduate school was a way to pursue my passion and I loved almost everything about graduate school from travelling to choosing what I wanted to study, and living abroad. What typically came next -- being a professor -- sounded increasingly less appealing the closer it became. Teaching the same information to largely uninterested students and a smaller school in a town or region where I really wouldn't enjoy living was not for me. I did decide to finish my Ph.D first, before moving on. During and after cranking out my dissertation, I did some part-time teaching as well as consulting. For various reasons I concluded that I had had enough of academia and wanted a full-time, completely non-academic job as a way to break free.
Winter-Spring 2000: With the Internet economy raging, I applied for and was offered a position as Supervisor of the Content Editing Department at an Internet "startup" business directory (an electronic yellow pages like superpages.com). In many ways this was a dream job. I'd had a keen interest in computers since age ten. Plus, being an academic specialist in revolutions -- albeit more political and cultural -- it was great being on the inside of the Internet economic and cultural revolution, even when it crashed and burned. I was at the Internet company for about 18 months before being laid off in July 2001.
The process of finding a new job in the recessed economy of 2001 was tough. Before getting my current job I was out of work for nearly 9 months. Eventually, I concluded that I needed to broaden the skills and experience that I could put on my resume to include two of the items most positions that interested me seemed to want: proven abilities to write web content or demonstrated experience providing financial and economic analysis -- to explain the latter, it seemed that many corporate writing jobs revolved around investor relations, or other aspects that required understanding financial issues. I knew I could do both of these things, but had to prove it.
Through some serendipity, in January I managed to find an unpaid internship as a financial writer for a stock market news web site. I enjoyed the work, and quickly had web writing and financial analysis experience and examples. At the interview for my current job concerns about my ability to analyze both a company's economic health, and the overall economy of the city and province, came up quite quickly. When I said I was currently doing an internship as a financial writer the tone of the interview changed -- everyone warmed up and relaxed. After a second interview, in which I had to provide them with a sales pitch selling myself, I was offered the job.
While I enthusiastically said yes to the offer, I did have a few misgivings or perhaps misconceptions about the industry. Real Estate? Could I find that interesting and challenging enough? I didn't know. As someone advised me, "a job is what you make of it; no point in judging this one before trying it."
The learning curve on real estate terms and issues--as well as what this company does -- was very steep for the first couple months. I went home exhausted feeling like my brain was "full." Over time, this passed, and I began enjoy the work and understand what was going on. It has turned into a remarkably good fit for me -- a mix of writing, researching, and computer database work -- in part because it was left to me to fill in the details of what my job would entail.
Here is some of what I do, and I'd be happy to elaborate on anything....
There is no typical day, which I like. I am usually working on a mixture of short-term projects (5 minutes to 1 hour); medium term projects (8 to 40 hours) and long term projects (anything beyond 40 hours) -- often simultaneously, jumping around between them as the day and company needs requires. Since this is a discussion about writing for corporations, I will try to stay focused on that side of my job, which I would say is about 50%, some weeks more, some weeks less.
Some short-term projects:
Researching and writing demographic analyses of a particular community.
Proof reading, offering advice or assistance, etc. on various letters, proposals, or packages heading out the door.
Most days I begin by scanning the news wires and newspapers on the Internet, looking for real estate news, important general economic news or news about a company that might be of interest to one of the brokers. Often I'm called upon during our regular morning meetings to verbally summarize these news stories.
Medium term projects:
Work with teams of with broker-consultants to write business proposals to market a building or "detail packages" about the building. Depending upon who I'm working with, I might do much of the writing, or only for the sections I research.
Producing -- writing, researching, project managing -- regular market updates. We publish twice yearly: The Office Market Report; The Investment Review; and The Industrial Overview. These involve some market news stories, lots of charts and graphs, and some photos. I taught myself Quark Xpress to do the layout in house. In all cases selected teams of broker-consultants help out a lot with gathering the data and helping me analyze it since they are on the front lines.
Working on marketing materials: typically, I may write a section, provide input on the layout, find key information.
Writing pieces for various publications produced by national office. This is usually quasi-journalist style writing about an aspect of the real estate market or the regional economy.
Long-term projects:
Keeping up-to-date economic overviews for the province of British Columbia and the Vancouver Metro Area. These are regularly inserted into proposals and detail packages. The overviews are about 1-2 pages long, and cover employment, construction, trade, politics, and anything affecting the business climate (so can include social and cultural issues).
Bigger research-writing projects. My pet project right now is looking at how the information technology revolution is affecting how companies use office space -- many are getting by with much less. (To be academic for a moment, this is a look at computers, business organization, and post modernity, or how collapsed space-time is changing the way companies operate, and structure their facilities -- but I don't think I'll use those terms when I write it up). I will likely write this up for our Year End Office Market Report.
What do I like best: Defining my own job; no one micro-manages me although I do regularly discuss in broad terms what I'm up to with the managing partner. I'm generally trusted to prioritize my time and get work done. I am enjoying becoming an expert on British Columbia's leading businesses and who runs them, as well as on the economy. Many aspects of my dissertation were about post-modernity and "reconstructed space", so I'm able to use some of that theory in thinking about the ways businesses and institutions are changing the types of offices or facilities they use.
What do I like least: this is a very mono-cultural industry: white men negotiating deals with other white men. Most grew up in the same neighborhoods, went to the same high schools, and graduated with commerce degrees specializing in finance or urban land economics. I miss the multi-culturalism of universities and of the Internet industry.
Do I miss academia? Not really. While I loved the intellectual challenges involved in academic teaching and research, the hours and the pace was not something I wanted to sustain forever. I have more free time now, and feel free -- I can live anywhere I like, read and learn what I want, and travel anywhere in the world, and for fun again, not just research! My life is no longer pre planned by the academic promotion and tenure system.
I'm enjoying life right now. Please feel free to ask me anything -- and I hope that I can provide useful responses. If you are concerned about privacy and don't want to post on the list, please feel free to e-mail me off list: waters@global-horizons.com .
Looking forward to a great week.....
Wendy Waters
Question from A.N.:
Hi All,
I've noticed that a couple of you have used the terms "Business Knowledge"/"Knowledge Management." Are these the same? What is involved?
Thanks
A.N.
Response from Bob Batchelor:
In my experience, Knowledge Management (KM) has been basically two related things. First, (and this is purposefully making it simplistic, because at a higher level, it's pretty complex) it is a software that takes all a company's collective experience and puts it in one big repository. There are companies, like Documentum (Nasdaq: DCTM) who develop software to set up these kinds of programs.
The other is the theory of doing this -- setting the system up, getting people to contribute, teaching people how to benefit from it, etc. So, the consulting firm Ernst & Young, where I used to work, would go into a large company and manage the whole KM process.
Imagine if a company with 100,000 employees had a way to collect all the work its employees do and make it available for others to use, whether it's product descriptions, Web content, etc., this would be a huge benefit when trying to do business. The company would be enacting a KM system/process and probably using some kind of software technology to help the process along.
Over the last 10 years, there have been journals devoted to KM and the rise of the title "Chief Knowledge Officer" as well.
In an overall sense, KM is a broad and purposefully vague term used to umbrella many different ideas. "Business Knowledge" is not necessarily synonymous, but closely related.
Thanks,
Bob
Response from Sarah James:
I think it basically means familiarity with the particular corner of the working world in which you find yourself, as opposed to business acumen, which would imply a certain amount of strategic savvy.
Question from N.U.:
Hello, all:
I guess I'm a bit concerned b/c I'm going on the job market with "just" an MA in Comparative Lit. Any input or opinion as to my odds? I DO have a journalism/writing background, including work as a Capitol Hill reporter.
But you all are describing your experiences with a PhD, which is not in my immediate future. Just wondered if you thought I'm at a disadvantage.
Thanks,
N.U.
Response from Kevin Walzer:
To N.U.:
I don't think you need to worry about having "only" an MA entering the regular work world. I think most employers are impressed by it, but it's not so unusual that it requires explaining the way a Ph.D. does. A master's degree plus solid professional experience usually equals high employability in the business world.
Kevin
Response from Sarah James
Hi N.U.--
I didn't have the PhD when I started working here (it took almost 3 more years to get it), and I didn't even have the MA when I started my first job. It's really a matter of getting yourself into the right place, but being open to something that doesn't look ideal at first. My first job was dreadful from a day-to-day work perspective, but it opened doors because I got to meet people who helped me out.
If you worked in journalism, you might have an ok shot at doing marketing copy or technical writing, and you probably have some contacts already. That's really the hardest thing to get, IMHO.
Sarah
Response from Bob Batchelor:
Dear N.U.,
Hello. I'm in CA, so I just logged in, but let me tell you that I don't have a Ph.D. so perhaps that will give you some relief.
Having a Ph.D. in the business world is really a mixed bag in my experience. I've talked to some managers who won't hire a person with a doctorate because they feel the person is overqualified. Conversely, some business people equate a doctorate with flakiness -- kind of the stereotype of the absent-minded professor. Actually, it's really sad that people have so many preconceived notions going into a job search/selection and judge the person for reasons that they may or may not fully understand.
Your journalism background should help you tremendously. And, being able to navigate your way around Capitol Hill should show your people skills. I guess I'd need to know more about what kind of job you're after, but with published clips and reporting/interviewing skills, I'd say you're on the right path.
Writing for a corporation or business is often a great deal of listening to executives and other "business partners" both inside and outside the organization, so your interviewing/research skills will be quite valuable.
I hope this helps, let me know if you have any follow-up questions.
Thanks,
Bob
Response from Wendy Waters:
Hi N.U. and everyone,
I'd have to agree with my fellow panelists. While the experience I gained in graduate school and the skills I honed have been quite valuable for me in the non-academic workplace, having a Ph.D. under education on my resume has not necessarily been an asset. The stereotypes can be hard to overcome. Many (not all) people in the business world do not understand why someone might spend so much time pursuing something that doesn't make you wealthy -- they cannot relate.
Having an M.A. along with professional experience, may in fact make it easier to get in the door at many companies. Since so many people these days have MBA's, a master's degree is no longer that exotic. And, if they want a writer, what better MA than one in English?
Wendy
RELOCATION, HOURS, GENDER, and SALARY ISSUES
Question from P.E.:
> Having a Ph.D. in the business world is really a mixed bag in my experience.
> I've talked to some managers who won't hire a person with a doctorate because
> they feel the person is overqualified. Conversely, some business people
> equate a doctorate with flakiness -- kind of the stereotype of the absent-
> minded professor. Actually, it's really sad that people have so many
> preconceived notions going into a job search/selection and judge the person
> for reasons that they may or may not fully understand.
And for those of us "flaky doctorates" what's the advice? I've been told exactly this a number of times as I've started to network. I've also been told that experience is far more important than education and that I should've started the job hunt with a bachelor's degree, then gone back for
the graduate degree only if necessary for promotion.
"Overeducated romantic" is another term used for those of us with humanities and social sci backgrounds.
Moving on to other topics, it seems as though some of the guest experts have had to relocate with job growth. How essential is this? Is it like academia, wherein if you can't or won't relocate, it's a death sentence?
How many hours a week do you/have you worked? How flexible are employers? Are such jobs "burnout" mills or are they supportive of employees, families, etc.? Are there flextime, telecommuting, job sharing opportunities? Do those who use them find themselves off the promotion ladder?
Are women and men paid and treated equally?
P.E.
Response from Sarah James:
I think we should acknowledge that in normative terms, getting a PhD in a humanistic field is just a slight bit off the beaten track. And to people whose top values are having the right house and car and getting junior into the right school, intellectual interests might very well appear flaky, if not subversive and dangerous.
In my job, experience is more important than education--as long as you have the right education. For me, being able to write "PhD" behind my name opens a lot of doors. I can also tell people they have to call me "doctor" if they're nasty-- this is a big benefit when tensions are running high at meetings.
However, if you're smart and concentrate on learning the new job, your critical reasoning skills will allow you to advance more quickly. I can even carp about the Foucauldian aspects of business as long as I do what is needful.
People also tend to view humanists as overeducated romantics because we aren't educated to face the rough-and-tumble of everyday life. And it's hard to learn. The belief that most people can actually engage in critical reasoning, for example, can be a key factor in being considered a
romantic.
Relocation:
In pharmaceuticals, as long as you don't mind (read "tolerate") dwelling in the urban hub of NJ, you don't have to move.
Hours:
In my last position, I relatively regularly (at least twice a year) had periods of 6-15 weeks where I was in 10-12 hours a day, including weekends. My new job is more 9-5, and I'm encouraged to use some of that time for intellectual pursuits.
Flexibility:
This varies. You'd have to ask a lot of questions up-front (after they offer you the job).
Promotion ladder:
Here, unless you exhibit "fire in the belly" you're relegated to the normal or slow promotion tracks. Women who take leaves to have children, and anyone who takes assignments abroad have big delays in promotion.
Gender issues:
If a woman works the same hours and maintains a presence on the job, she'll be treated similarly to men who do the same things. Both men and women who take a lot of time for family (including leaves--they give men family leave here for illnesses and births) and other committments suffer in terms of raises and promotions, but these are generally conscious choices.
Response from Kevin Walzer:
P.E.,
See my answers to your questions below.
>And for those of us "flaky doctorates" what's the advice? I've been told
>exactly this a number of times as I've started to network. I've also been
>told that experience is far more important than education and that I
>should've started the job hunt with a bachelor's degree, then gone back for
>the graduate degree only if necessary for promotion.
The advice is, don't apologize for having a doctorate--but also understand how it fits in with your experience (or lack thereof). You may need to start at the bottom, just like someone with a bachelor's degree. I did when I entered the business world. However, I found that my doctorate allowed me to progress much more quickly than an entry-level person did. I needed to learn the job's technical skills, but I already had maturity, the ability to manage people and resources, the ability to complete large projects and meet deadlines, and other attributes that a 21-year-old wouldn't have had. I picked up these skills writing a dissertation, giving conference presentations, and teaching freshman comp. As a Ph.D., you already have the essential skills of a middle manager--you just need to learn the specifics of a particular business. Try presenting yourself this way to skeptical hiring managers.
>Moving on to other topics, it seems as though some of the guest experts have
>had to relocate with job growth. How essential is this? Is it like
>academia, wherein if you can't or won't relocate, it's a death sentence?
I haven't had to relocate, but I live in a large city (Cincinnati). Relocation isn't appealing to me for a variety of reasons, chief among them family. I've been fortunate enough to have enough opportunities to stay put. If you live in a college town, relocation to a larger city might be necessary, but probably only once.
>How many hours a week do you/have you worked? How flexible are employers?
40-50 hours a week, generally. Sometimes more, never less. I find I work harder in business than I did in academe. Yes, the academic term has its crazy days, but you also have summers off and many vacations. I have flexibility in terms of when I start (my usual office time is 9 a.m. - 6 p.m.), and if I have to take off for a doctor's appointment, it's seldom a problem--a laptop also allows me to work from home on occasion.
>Are women and men paid and treated equally?
I can't speak to anyone else's pay, but in my experience women and men are treated equally. What matters is your ability to do the job, nothing else.
Response from Wendy Waters:
>How many hours a week do you/have you worked? How flexible are employers?
>Are such jobs "burnout" mills or are they supportive of employees, families,
>etc.? Are there flextime, telecommuting, job sharing opportunities? Do those
>who use them find themselves off the promotion ladder?
Right now, I've been working 40-45 hours per week, rarely much more -- although we're just coming off of summer, which is a slower time in the industry. The first few months of this job, I occasionally worked 60 hours as I was moved from "critical path" to "critical path" doing emergency re-writes of proposals and detail packages. The extra time is noticed, and I'm encouraged to take a day off when things calm down -- although this can be difficult since when it's calm for one group, it's a storm for another and I'm needed.
In my particular job, some flex time is possible, but for the most time I'm needed during business hours.
Since I'm the only communications person here, neither job sharing nor telecommuting would likely work well, although a 3/4 time position or 1 day per week telecommuting would probably be negotiable. I prefer to leave my work at the office, and so would never really be interested in such an option. Unlike in academia where I mostly worked from home and felt like I always needed to be working when I was there, it's liberating to come home and not think about work.
>Are women and men paid and treated equally?
There are so few women working in commercial real estate generally, and in researcher-writer roles especially, so this is a tough question. Also, I haven't been around long enough to take a good look at salary metrics. My gut feeling is that I'm paid slightly above what some of my male counterparts at competing companies make. But I also am asked to do more writing and analysis, and less "numbers management" than they are so the jobs are not completely comparable.
Question from L.S.:
Subject: Salaries
What are the salary ranges for these types of corporate writing/communications positions? My apologies if this has already been addressed.
-Thanks,
L.S.
Response from Kevin Walzer:
I can speak for the Midwest (Cincinnati), where the cost of living is lower but salaries may be lower as well. When I began five years ago, I made in the mid-twenties, and felt I was underpaid. A couple of years later I made a big jump to the mid-thirties when I joined a larger company. That probably put me at a level that's "competitive" with the market, because since then my raises have been the normal, small, incremental type. Any dramatic raises in the future would probably be as the result of a promotion and/or change in responsibility. (In my recent positions I've managed projects but not people in the sense of having employees report to me.) Because I enjoy what I do, I'm not seeking that kind of change right now (though I'm intrigued by Bob's jump to a vice president job after holding positions pretty similar in level and tasks to mine).
Response from Bob Batchelor:
Hmmm...touchy subject, but one of great interest I'm sure. I live in the San Francisco Bay area, so the pay scale out here is in relation to the excessive cost of living.
In broad terms, I would guess that a corporate writer out here with experience and a great portfolio would make in the $60-$100K range, with few falling at either end of the scale. A caveat, however, I would say that this salary equates to $35-$70K in the rest of the country. [No joke, the average house out here costs $500K]
In Cleveland, where I lived before moving to the West Coast, I would estimate that business writers with experience, etc. made in the $35-$70K range, with most falling in the $40s.
As for my personal jump to vice president rank, I'd humbly say that the title was given for the experience I brought to the organization -- 100s of published articles, vast technology writing experience, major award from PRSA, books, etc. However, I do think that titles mean a lot more in other parts of the country. A vice president title in Cleveland, for example, would be a lot harder to come by and probably mean more in terms of career growth, etc.
I hope that gives some guidance.
--Bob
Response from Sarah James:
I'm in New Jersey, and medical writing, so the salaries are a bit higher, it seems. My personal financial situation is...comfortable. My base pay is healthy and I've gotten decent awards and bonuses.
Starting salaries with related experience for the type of job I started in here (and no PhD) are in the mid 50's to low 60's; people with less experience may start in the 40's. It also depends on what you're making when you interview. My contract job paid rather well, and they offered me a promotion and increase to start.
If you're willing to risk it with a start-up, you can get more $$ (I got 2 calls this week looking for people with 2 years experience, $75K to start), but the benefits aren't great and you'd have a lot of potential for losing your job when the company folds. If you consider that the benefits package you get at a big company could be worth $20K or more (401K matching, for example, could be 4-5% of your salary), the start ups don't look so great to me.
Contract writers with 2 years of experience make from about $35 per hour, 5 or more years from about $65, with a PhD higher. If you write publications on a contract basis, you can get from $2000 to $12000 per article depending on how good you are, your highest degree, and how fast you work.
Question from J.T.:
All,
This is a question relevant to the corporate writing thread only because I'm applying for writing jobs. (The question isn't relevant at all to the interesting business v. academia discussion. I think.)
The issue of whether or not to include a salary history/requirements with job application materials has been discussed on this list before, but has anyone talked about the format for these? Is it a simple line on a resume, or does it get a separate page? And can I consider my stated requirement to be an argumentative claim for which I have to provide any sort of evidence -- for instance, that in my previous positions I was paid near the salaried amount?
One more question. Is it possible to state the amount of money I was paid for individual contracts, either for consulting or freelance writing, and make a fair extrapolation to a salary requirement? What's the formula for that, if any, and how do I signal that that's what I've done?
Thanks.
J.T.
Response from Wendy Waters:
Hi J.T. and everyone,
Advice I've been given and have used is simply to restate the question to "salary expectations" and answer that one in general terms, perhaps as a range. Without knowing the hours, benefits, perks, etc. it's hard to give a precise figure. Ultimately, the company wants to know if their pay scale will mesh with your needs.
In writing work, I think the salary history is particularly irrelevant unless you've been in a corporate writing position for a while. There are so many different ways writers make a living and myriad ways to compensate writers. For me, having done freelance contract work, an unpaid internship, etc. a salary history would not make much sense. When asked I simply gave my expectations --in part based on my research into an industry standard salary; if you want the job and know you can do it, coming in too low on salary can undermine your chances (making you sound less professional) as much as coming in too high. And, do you really want to work for a company that pays 40% below the industry standard?
Wendy
THE Ph.D. AS AN ASSET OR A POTENTIAL LIABILITY
Question from Sarah James:
I'm looking at Wendy's post, and the others, and I find this a little bit confusing. What types of jobs people have applied for where the PhD was viewed as a not-so-good thing? Were you aiming a bit low, perhaps, or do you think it was more of a corporate cultural "fit" issue?
Sarah James
Response from Kevin Walzer:
I've only encountered this a few times, and only when I was first looking for work outside of academe. One recruiter looked at my resume and sneered, "So you've been in SCHOOL all this time?" Once I got my foot in the door and gained some experience, the Ph.D. has been an asset because it complements the experience I've gained. People are generally impressed by it. Of course, my own attitude helps--I am proud of the Ph.D., but I don't presume I'm better because of it. Having a "team-oriented" approach is really essential to surviving in the business world. People will pick up if you are arrogant, if you assume that your education means you have nothing else to learn, etc. I think that presumption accounts for a lot of the skepticism people have about hiring Ph.Ds; unfortunately, the burden is on the Ph.D. to prove that skepticism wrong.
Response from Bob Batchelor:
Hello all,
I agree with Kevin. When I first began looking for jobs, I encountered a lot of skepticism from potential employers because I had spent such a long time in graduate school or seeing a M.A. on my resume, thought I was overqualified for the particular position.
Let's be honest, and I hope not to offend anyone, but look at the "typical" businessperson. They thrive on PowerPoint presentations, usually don't like to write, did particularly well in school in math and statistics-based courses, and don't truly "get" why anyone would want to pursue a liberal arts graduate education. Read the latest best-selling business book and you'll see what I mean. It will be mostly bullet points and read more like a presentation than a serious analytical piece one would encounter in graduate program seminars.
I'm not saying that business people are any smarter or less intelligent than academics, because I've met truly brilliant people in both camps. However, for the most part, these two groups speak a different language. If you understand that at the beginning of your quest into the business world, you won't waste a lot of time and energy spinning your wheels.
So, what's the answer? I can't give you the golden path to a senior-level job at a Fortune 500 company, but there are some things you can do to even the playing field. For instance, read the magazines "they" read -- Fortune, Forbes, Fast Company, trade journals. Also, if you want to be a writer, keep trying to publish and build your clip file. Write a business article, and if you can't imagine doing that, write an biography piece on a business figure or something...anything to build that clip file.
One thing that you'll always have is your collection of clips and most people don't have one, so you're instantly separated. Emphasize your strengths at all times. Write some press releases for a non-profit you admire, do a newsletter for some organization, anything to show that you're not just a "flighty academic." Don't let anyone stereotype you, which might be one's first inclination, given that a resume is going to get about two minutes of attention (on the long side) before a decision is made.
Well, that's my thinking on that. I'll rest for a moment and see what others feel.
Thanks,
Bob
Response from Wendy Waters:
>I'm looking at Wendy's post, and the others, and I find this a little bit
>confusing. What types of jobs people have applied for where the PhD was
>viewed as a not-so-good thing? Were you aiming a bit low, perhaps, or do
>you think it was more of a corporate cultural "fit" issue?
Both Kevin and Bob offered excellent responses to this (good) question. I agree with everything they said.
I'll add that anyone hiring wants to know how you can help the corporation's bottom line (or that of the non-profit, or other institution). They look at your resume and ask what relevant experience you bring. It's your job to make sure your resume and cover letter show them, in their language, what you can offer. If the job is to write and edit, and you have a Ph.D. in English Composition, then putting the Ph.D. front and centre might make sense, as long as you also demonstrate that you understand their broader needs. Most companies want someone who can produce quality work on time, work well on a team or independently, etc. You need to show you can also do that.
Since my Ph.D is in Latin American History, few business people will immediately see a relevance to their needs. If, however, I focus an application on my project and time management skills, writing and research experience, publication record, and so forth, they can start to see how I might make a meaningful contribution. The Ph.D. then can become that little extra that sets me apart from the other qualified candidates, as I think it did for my current job -- it was icing, not the cake.
To add an anecdote: In my previous post-academic job, it was a liability to my boss (someone else whom he trusted strongly recommended hiring me) -- he'd worked with about 5 people with Ph.Ds previously and he said all felt they were above him, thought they knew everything, and that everyone should look up to them because they had a doctorate.
Wendy
Response from Sarah James:
Wendy writes:
To add an anecdote: In my previous post-academic job, it was a liability to my boss (someone else whom he trusted strongly recommended hiring me) -- he'd worked with about 5 people with Ph.Ds previously and he said all felt they were above him, thought they knew everything, and that everyone should look up to them because they had a doctorate.
I see; that wouldn't have been as much of an issue here. It's like advanced degree central at any major scientific research organization. There's a high tolerance of PhD attitude; it's actually sort of regarded as "cute" on newer hires.
Sarah
Comment from C.J.:
> I'm looking at Wendy's post, and the others, and I find this
> a little bit confusing. What types of jobs people have applied
> for where the PhD was viewed as a not-so-good thing? Were
> you aiming a bit low, perhaps, or do you think it was more of
> a corporate cultural "fit" issue?
>
> Sarah James
For myself, I was in a position where once it was found out I had a PhD, one of the corporate managers/supervisors was a jerk and let me know practically every day afterwards what I had missed out on by going to grad school---he was a guy that got his BA/BS and then joined the company and worked his way up to a fairly high position in the course of 6 years (the time it took me to get my doctorate). For him and a few other managers in the office, it was all a game of the car you drove, where you lived, the country club you belonged to, where your kids went
to school, etc.
I was very thankful to get laid off from that job. This job was with a Fortune 500 company, which when it comes to engineering and manufacturing is quite well respected.
Best, C.J.
Response from Sarah James:
C.J. writes:
...I was in a position where once it was found out I had a PhD, one of the corporate managers/supervisors was a jerk and let me know practically every day afterwards what I had missed out on by going to grad school...it was all a game of the car you drove, where you lived, the country club you belonged to, where your kids went to school, etc.
This is more of what I was wondering. I caught a bit of that in my first job, but the culture I am in now is very understanding of the PhD as an asset. I hope your situation is better now.
Sarah
MAKING THE TRANSITION FROM ACADEMIC TO CORPORATE CULTURE
Question from P.E.:
[Kevin Walzer] writes:
> I have not encountered any problems with having a Ph.D. except at the very
> beginning of my search for a job in business, about five years ago. One
> recruiter looked at my resume and sneered, "So you've been in SCHOOL the
> whole time?"
So what's a good reply to the "sneer"?
I'd really appreciate help from those who were sneered at and somehow got the job. I've tried to explain how fieldwork involves being able to think on my feet in an ambiguous situation, etc., that I'm a good problem solver and enjoy people of diverse backgrounds. Fieldwork is essentially a team effort, but the team is all-volunteer, save for the fieldworker. Not defensive, but enthusiastic.
It's demoralizing. And these aren't job interviews, just networking interviews.
One MBA engineer asked how long I had taught kindergarden. So, I don't think I'm coming across arrogant or defensive. I do dress professionally and don't speak in a child-like or maternal manner.
Ah, well. I am sorry if this brings us off-track, but how do you deal with the "sneer" at the ph.d, time in school, nature of the degree, etc.? Would love a wonderful and effective response beyond the smile and an enthusiastic, but brief, affirmation.
P.E.
Response from Kevin Walzer:
I'd say: "I planned to be a professor but there is a severe shortage of jobs in my field. I've decided to pursue a field where there are more opportunities for me to use my talents."
You can say this, believably, if you've researched the field you're looking at and are clear about why it's a good fit for you. It's about selling. If you're unsure of yourself, you won't overcome their skepticism.
One more thing: don't waste time with people who sneer. I later wrote the guy who sneered at me and said I decided to pursue other opportunities. He was an idiot.
Response from Bob Batchelor:
Hi P.E. and all,
To be quite honest, I'm not sure there is a way to deal with the "sneer." I wish there were some easy answer, but I've never seen it. People make snap judgments and decisions based on some bias that you have absolutely no control over. For example, you could pick up the latest copy of some magazine and think the main feature article is total garbage, while your neighbor could thinks it's Hemingwayesque.
Or, more to the point, a person you're interviewing with (say the MBA engineer), could have really, really hated his Freshman Comp instructor, or his Art History prof (a course he was forced to take as an undergrad to fill a requirement) could have given him a C+ and tarnished his GPA in relation to his engineering peers. Who knows?
The point is that there are jerks out there -- in every walk of life. Some will never change their minds and never give someone who hasn't had their similar background a chance. There isn't much to do in this situation.
However, I'm optimistic enough to believe (and my career backs up the idea) that writers can play a role in corporate America. You have to keep searching until you find that good match and in the meantime, try to build your writing portfolio and gain some business experience or knowledge until you find the match.
A good manager/boss hires people smarter than himself or herself. If the person is outright rude, simply thank them for their time and move on. But, if you think the person is merely challenging you to see how you'll react (a silly interview game, in my opinion), then direct the question back to the skills you developed over the years in academe. If you've published, point to that, or given a lot of papers, or worked on a research team that made some real strides toward solving a particular problem.
Why do this...because these are the same things you'll be asked to do within a corporation. Most of my time is spent interviewing people hirer up the foodchain than me and who have limited time for me, so if I hadn't brought this skill with me, I wouldn't have been given the chance (necessarily) to develop it onsite.
Also, much of my time is spent developing communications strategy. This isn't rocket science, it's usually common sense and experience that guides me, plus research I do on my own to stay up on what's the benchmark in the industry. As a classroom teacher, I had to develop communication strategies to impart knowledge to students. I did research to stay current in my field. I worked on presentation skills. You can steer conversations with interviewers to these points. Hopefully, they will see the connection.
I would advise you to think about the skills you have and rehearse in preparation for interviews. Some people think that they do better when they are under pressure, but why take the chance? Think about questions you'll be asked and think up a couple points to answer them. Also, break down the job ad or any other information you have about the position and then draw some examples from your own life that meet the requirements of the position.
One last example and I'll stop. In the interview for the first "real" job I got at The History Factory, there were four people interviewing me at once. I knew I had one person on my side, since he said as much during a phone interview. I thought I won one guy over pretty quickly. One person was on the fence (and I later found out leaning toward "no"). The last person (and most important) was the CEO. He asked me a direct question: "Give me an example of your teamwork skills?" At the time, I didn't have much, so I drew one example from high school, one from college, and one from a recent temporary job I'd had. I nailed it, but what he didn't know is that I figured someone would ask that, given my relative newness to the job market. That is a weakness that stuck out. So, I thought about some answers beforehand and it worked. I've never gone into an interview "cold" again -- and this was before all the information you could possibly want was online.
I hope this helps. Let me know if you want further comment. I'd be happy to answer more on this topic.
Thanks,
Bob
Comment from E.L.
I'm surprised at the tone here!
I had many years of corporate experience, working with some of the most prominent, intelligent people in the Marketing industry, prior to returning to school for my doctorate. I've met and worked with successful and unsuccessful people in both academe and corporate, and I dare say that the latter category consists of those that either have something to "prove" or those who believe they are above having to contribute to the good of the team. You certainly will not get far in the job-search process if you are pegged as being either defensive or arrogant!
> Let's be honest, and I hope not to offend anyone, but look at the
"typical" businessperson. They thrive on PowerPoint presentations, usually
don't like to write, did particularly well in school in math and
statistics-based courses, and don't truly "get" why anyone would want to
pursue a liberal arts graduate education. Read the latest best-selling
business book and you'll see what I mean. It will be mostly bullet points
and read more like a presentation than a serious analytical piece one would
encounter in graduate program seminars.
Perhaps the first thing I would suggest is an attitude adjustment/realignment! I seriously doubt you will find a "typical" business person any more than you can find a "typical" PhD! Many successful business people have become so the same way you and I became successful PhDs--daring to have a great idea, the courage to pursue/develop/defend it, and the ability to communicate it (orally & in writing) to others so as to excite them.
>So, what's the answer? I can't give you the golden path to a senior-level
job at a Fortune 500 company, but there are some things you can do to even
the playing field. For instance, read the magazines "they" read -- Fortune,
Forbes, Fast Company, trade journals.
I like your analogy of "speak[ing] a different language," although I would take it one step further - we live in different worlds. Each has its own relevant credentials, success criteria and winning patterns, processes and behaviors. Neither is inherently better, they're just different.
If you want to enter the world of business, it's incumbent on *you* to learn what is important to those with whom you want to work. Reading business-oriented magazines and trade journals is an excellent first step. How about conducting some informational interviews to learn what makes someone succeed in the industry you've chosen? Why not talk to some head hunters who specialize in the industry you want to enter?
The more information you can gather - just like you probably did for your dissertation - the greater the probability that you will be successful.
> .Don't let anyone stereotype you, which might be one's first inclination,
given that a resume is going to get about two minutes of attention (on the
long side) before a decision is made.
This cuts both ways! If you want someone to spend more than two minutes on your resume, then focus on your "value added." What do you bring to the table that uniquely qualifies you for the position you seek?
The people you want to hire you are not a "them" to be conquered or a hypothesis to be disproved. Remember: *they already have a job!* Show them that you respect that and can bring the entire team to the next tier of performance by adding your special talents and skills to the mix.
Good luck!
E.L.
Response from Kevin Walzer:
E.L.,
Amen!
Kevin
Response from Bob Batchelor:
Dear E.L., et al,
Great perspective on the discussion! I really appreciate you adding your views. Like I said before, sorry if I offend anyone, but I'm giving my opinions based on my experiences. The tone I'm trying to represent is the one of reality. None of this stuff is easy -- transitioning from academe to business, dealing with resumes and cover letters, jumping from interview to interview, surviving skepticism, etc. What I want to do is give readers hope and let them know that it can be done.
Becoming a writer for a company, regardless of the size, can be a tremendous career. But the path is full of both challenges and high points. Some companies hold writers in the highest esteem, others don't. Some hiring managers will respect the fact that you have a doctorate or an M.A., others won't. Some people want to hire the best people they can find, others are concerned about nothing more than self-preservation. An "A player" hired today may take the manager's job tomorrow.
Seeing this firsthand and talking about it with many, many people, I just feel that a realistic tone is necessary. One of the beefs I had with academe is that rarely did anyone really question whether getting a M.A. or Ph.D. was the right thing to do. When I was in grad school in the early 1990s, the profs knew that few of us would get tenure-track jobs, but few departments turned away candidates. Once in, many students were pushed along, as long as they persevered. The mantra was always, "Oh yeah, the job market is going to open up by the time you finish." But, a decade later, it still hasn't opened up and the departments and schools themselves are partially to blame for not helping students find careers outside the academy.
For example, look at the state of public K-12 education. In most areas, particularly cities, it's in complete shambles, but a person with an M.A. or doctorate isn't qualified to teach in most states. This would be a great outlet for many people, if the states would develop programs in conjunction with the universities that put advanced degree individuals on an accelerated course to prepare them for public school teaching.
And, speaking about stereotypes, the fact of the matter is that there are typical business people and typical academics. Going through this transition myself, I have taken a keen interest in why there is a breakdown between the two camps. It seems intuitive that businesses would want to hire the best and the brightest, from whichever area that person comes from, but reality is that degrees, grades, etc. are only part of the battle. So, trying to understand this issue, I've studied it by talking with Human Resources staff, headhunters, other job seekers, managers, and executives. What I've learned is that a ton of psychology is involved in the process and most people will never know why they didn't get a certain job, even if they seem completely perfect for it. A person's biases can play a large part in the hiring process, whether it is overt or in the subconscious. Being aware of this can help. In a perfect world this wouldn't be the case, but in ours it is.
I completely agree with what E.L. says about learning the business of the people you hope to work for. Research is another avenue that can separate a job-seeker from the pack. However, I think that showing them what you can add to the team is similar to disproving a hypothesis or conquering a topic. If a person attacks the job market the same way he or she tackled the M.A. or Ph.D., then success would follow for most. There's no guarantee, obviously, particularly in this economy, but the more you can do to distance yourself from the pack the better.
Basically, I see my tone as objective/realistic. Why pull any punches? There are smart (really smart) people in academe and business. What we need is to get more mingling between the two so that each side can see the value of the other and then we'll all win.
Thanks,
Bob
Response from Wendy Waters:
>Dear E.L., et al,
>
>Great perspective on the discussion! I really appreciate you adding your
>views. Like I said before, sorry if I offend anyone, but I'm giving my
>opinions based on my experiences. The tone I'm trying to represent is the
>one of reality. None of this stuff is easy -- transitioning from academe
>to business, dealing with resumes and cover letters, jumping from
>interview to interview, surviving skepticism, etc. What I want to do is
>give readers hope and let them know that it can be done.
Yes, I'd echo Bob's comments. Please don't take my advice as being defensive about the Ph.D -- just be realistic about the varied perceptions of others and know that you have to present yourself to the business (or non profit, or government) community on their terms. In most cases, they don't know what it takes to get a Ph.D and what valuable skills and experience you gained as a result. Be prepared to tell them in their language: we all have a wealth of experience with meeting deadlines, project management, multi-tasking, budget management (living on $10K a year is quite a skill), proposal writing, giving public presentations, event organizing, etc. Believe it or not, these skills are not so common and highly valued. Most of us have them, or we would never have made it through grad school.
I like to think of my Ph.D as a package of experiences and accomplishments that I can draw upon, anywhere, anytime.
Also, in terms of today's topic, I'm reminded of an inspiring comment I read back in about 1998 on Mark Johnson's "Sellout" website about his switch into post-academic employment. He stated that getting the first post-academic job after your Ph.D is the toughest, and after you have valuable experience and have proven yourself, it becomes easier and the Ph.D becomes more of an asset.
Wendy
Response from Sarah James:
I think Bob and Wendy are each making important points. The transition isn't easy and perceptions and discourses are different out in the corporate/professional world.
Frankly, I think it's important for people with advanced degrees in the humanities to have some forum in which to discuss the stereotypical business guy and his habits in a pseudo-ethnographic way. It's a valuable means of getting at the inherent distinctions between a worldview that is governed solely by pragmatism or epistemologically naive beliefs in objective knowledge as opposed to views that are informed by an awareness of power/knowledge relations, the functions of discourse, or even specific bodies of specialized knowledge.
It's very hard to find yourself in groups where people don't like to think too much or too deeply, when you've devoted a huge chunk of your life to concentrating on complex problems.
Comment from P.E.:
> It's very hard to find yourself in groups where people don't like to think
> too much or too deeply, when you've devoted a huge chunk of your life to
> concentrating on complex problems.
But running a business is full of complex problems. They just don't sit still and wait for a long analysis. They often need immediate answers. I worked as a "carton stapler" in a glass manufacturing plant for a summer in college. The machines would break down, the budweiser line running like wildfire, temperatures in the plant over a hundred degrees so that workers needed frequent breaks to avoid being overcome by heat, and folks calling in sick to go to the beach so that absentee rates were through the roof. One small day in the life of a plant manager.
Businesses are not easy to run. They need a great deal of complex thought and one small item not anticipated can trip someone up faster than you can imagine. If managers are disposed to like summaries (keep it nor more than a page long) and are disposed to act, it makes sense.
I'd like to find out how to make that breakthrough job in writing. The does and don'ts of landing that first job. And I'd like to learn more about the career to see if it will fit.
As for unemployment, well, the most I've ever earned in a time period was as a union member staple stitching carts for budweiser beer and soda. So, I don't care so much about where I start, just that I start.
P.E.
Response from Sarah James:
P.E. writes:
But running a business is full of complex problems. They just don't sit still and wait for a long analysis.
I *meant* intellectually complex problems as opposed to technical/operational glitches. the critical thinking modes are quite different.
P.E. continues:
I'd like to find out how to make that breakthrough job in writing. The does and don'ts of landing that first job. And I'd like to learn more about the career to see if it will fit.
The head of the writing department at the last company I worked for told me that she was in a completely different type of job when she got her chance to write, and I had a similar experience. In technical and scientific fields, we looking for people who can understand the technical aspects of the work and explain them clearly, which would mean you'd have to build up an expertise.
So, I'd say
DO apply for things you see in the paper. It's a good way of finding out about companies.
DO go to writing job fairs.
DO post a resume on the internet. And don't be that selective about where. If you have any interest in science writing, post one on hirehealth as well as on the general writing webs.
DON'T get shirty with people because they use language in a way you don't like. This includes flinching when people say "obtuse" instead of "abstruse" or pointedly using the correct word in the next sentence. I've seen writers lose their contracts over this type of behavior.
DO consider peripherally related work.
DO understand that the job is not about you, but about the job.
DON'T ever let on that you think certain things are beneath you.
DO develop happy people skills. The Vice President I worked under for three years (who has an MD PHD from an Ivy League School) makes his own coffee and copies, holds the door for people, and remembers the names of the people he talks to on the elevator.
DO realize that a humanities PhD is not a practical thing to have in global terms, and acknowledge that you will have a "learning curve."
POTENTIAL FOR CREATIVITY AND INTELLECTUAL CHALLENGE
Comment from Kevin Walzer:
>Frankly, I think it's important for people with advanced degrees in the
>humanities to have some forum in which to discuss the stereotypical business
>guy and his habits in a pseudo-ethnographic way. It's a valuable means of
>getting at the inherent distinctions between a worldview that is governed
>solely by pragmatism or epistemologically naive beliefs in objective
>knowledge as opposed to views that are informed by an awareness of
>power/knowledge relations, the functions of discourse, or even specific
>bodies of specialized knowledge.
>
>It's very hard to find yourself in groups where people don't like to think
>too much or too deeply, when you've devoted a huge chunk of your life to
>concentrating on complex problems.
I must admit, I find this viewpoint incredibly condescending. It's a perfect example of why some business people don't like to hire Ph.D.s. To assume that you're the only one who devotes "a huge chunk of your time concentrating on complex problems"!
Business is a broad "discourse community" with its own distinct processes, knowledges, etc. Personally, I find its challenges to be very stimulating, and one of the most fundamental challenges is to become fluent in the discourse, so to speak. For instance: to understand the relationship between price, brand differentiation, and profit margins. I have learned a great deal from business mentors about such subjects, and they devote considerable--and deep--thought to working through them.
If you're going to make a career transition, doesn't it make more sense to embrace the new community you've joined? I've done this, and it's done wonders for my happiness and sanity. Every day is a chance to learn something different from a new "discourse community." Standing apart from my new community and "critiquing" it seems pointless to me.
Comment from T.G.:
>I must admit, I find this viewpoint incredibly condescending. It's a
>perfect example of why some business people don't like to hire Ph.D.s. To
>assume that you're the only one who devotes "a huge chunk of your time
>concentrating on complex problems"!
The other day a friend of mine and I were discussing the TV show "Big Brother" and it occurred to us in the course of our conversation that the thought that went into casting the show was, from an ethnographic and cultural standpoint, quite complex and subtle. There are the approachable and beautiful "every girls," one rather flamboyant and a bit out there, Chiara, the other a bit more subtle Lisa; there are the two "hunks," Eric and Roddy; the upscale gay man, Marcellas, who also happens to be African-American thereby at once breaking some stereotypes while still appealing to a segment of the buying public; Danielle, an educated African-American woman; Jerry, a little boorish, relentlessly mainstream, a teacher; Amy, the Southern Belle who, as it so happens, drinks just a bit too much, and also reflects a sense of moral indignation towards the "sophisticated" every girls, Chiara and Lisa and their "Northern" ways. And so on and so forth.
No, the thinking that went into the casting of this show was indeed complex. True, it may also be grotesque, but it also most assuredly real. And therein is the retort to those who condescend to the business and corproate world(s). It is grotesque, and it is also very real. And in this it is not entirely remote from the world of academe, a world both grotesque and real -- in a way ...
>For instance: to understand the relationship between price, brand
>differentiation, and profit margins. I have learned a great deal from
>business mentors about such subjects, and they devote considerable--and
>deep--thought to working through them.
Sad .... but again, real, all-too-real.
Question from M.R.:
Hi all,
Thanks to the panelists for taking this time -- I have a question and a comment...
A clarification about 'clip file' -- the clips should all have been published/featured/used in some way?
Also, since I am at this very moment enmeshed in reading rough drafts of English Composition papers, I'm realizing there is a useful parallel between entering the business world and (especially for English/Art/History PhDs) relating to our students. I know several colleagues who dismiss their students as 'stupid', 'boring', 'lazy', or, in other words, unable to penetrate the chain-link barbed-wire fence of Foucauldian discourse. But when we stand up in front of the classroom or read their essays, in fact we find that we are the 'stupid' and 'boring' ones, because we don't understand the truths they present to us. Many of us push so hard for our students to "problematize", "unpack", or "explore" their ideas that we ignore the realistic wisdom behind them, which relies on the business culture that has now become the dominant American culture. Sometimes a cigar *is* just a cigar; or, more accurately, a cigar is never just a cigar, but sometimes it's more important just to light up.
Anyone who has tried to teach analysis to 18-year-old business, law, and psychology majors knows that communication between discourses is impossible unless you first drop the illusion that your discourse is the right one. Every discourse is functional, and as I tell my students, the important thing is to be able to master as many of them as possible. In this way, pitching yourself in a business setting, or re-casting your research experience for a resume, is simply another opportunity to learn and teach at the same time.
Thanks for the lively discussion!
M.R.
Response from Sarah James:
M.R.,
You're getting at exactly what I meant. It's making the adjustment from one mode of thinking to another that can be difficult. I found it really hard when confronted by a person with impeccable credentials who didn't recognize that primitive people were not de facto stupid. The exchange didn't go badly, but it left me reeling. These encounters don't end with one or two. The day-in day-out confrontation with these sorts of ideas can be a little wearing, but it's part of getting along with people.
Sarah
Question from G.R.:
Hello all,
Compelling series of observations on this topic.
Rather than flaming I saw some of these responses as indicative of a really fascinating and complex translation problem. Forgive the somewhat lengthy 'set-up' below; I do have a question that follows.
Beyond skill adaptation, there is the conceptualization of "professionalism." In many ways the academy is very similar to the corporate world in that it grooms its participants for work within a highly structured environment. One could argue that despite specialization most graduate training shares the unspoken broader objective of creating professionals. According to a fairly recent and controversial book by Jeff Schmidt, such "professionalism" is designed to promote abstraction and homogeneity, and amongst a highly skilled population that is incapable of critiquing its own political/social/economic investments. The "congeniality" factor at all levels of academic promotion is indicative of this. People who aren't "professional" enough earn reputations and are subtly marginalized in the interest of less contentious individuals, regardless of relative contributions.
And, interestingly for me, some of these posts have really pointed to a gap in how "skill' and "smarts" are envisioned around these very issues. However, if we were to play devil's advocate with Jeff Schmidt for a moment, it seems to me that the fascinating exchanges taking place on this list point to a productive opening around the question of critique/politics/ethics. This might indicate a new space outside the academy where academic critical perspectives and economic effectiveness are blending, however dissonantly, with new vocabularies and interventions possibly emerging.
My question:
How many of you who have made the transition from the academy to the corporate world find that this has allowed you new creative formulations of your academic work. In other words, beyond the practical skills of rhetoric, writing, and project management, how many view their experiences in business as actually broadening your more specific academic interests; for ex., Does being a Foucauldian writing copy for a Fortune 500 company make you a "different" kind of citizen in that environment? And outside the corporate environment? I realize this is a somewhat abstract question, but I am really interested in what some of you have to say if you care to take it on.
According to Jeffrey J. Williams (U of Misso.) these very questions will form the next big area of inquiry in the humanities ("The Chronicle Review_ 9/20/2002).
Thanks, G.R.
Response from Sarah James:
G.R. Writes:
How many of you who have made the transition from the academy to the
corporate world find that this has allowed you new creative formulations of
your academic work. In other words, beyond the practical skills of
rhetoric, writing, and project management, how many view their experiences
in business as actually broadening your more specific academic interests;
for ex., Does being a Foucauldian writing copy for a Fortune 500 company
make you a "different" kind of citizen in that environment? And outside the
corporate environment? I realize this is a somewhat abstract question, but I
am really interested in what some of you have to say if you care to take it
on.
I happen to still regularly present papers in literary studies as well as in science. I've actually found that the paid work I do informs the intellectual (literary) work I do and vice versa.
However, I still have to be careful not to use words like "Foucauldian" around some of the people I work with. <aside> Speaking of which, many newer office buildings have this type of bizarre reverse panopticism action, with all the offices on the outside of the building and the workers in the center, so it's in effect easier to survey the actions of the office people(manager) than for the managers to observe the people who are subject to their authority. It's kind of odd, because, of course, having a window is considered to be the perk, but it's kind of a chuckle nevertheless. <end
of aside>
I also like your interpretation of the communication on this list being impeded by essentially hermeneutic issues. I think you're absolutely right. My interpretation of certain messages as "flame" has more to do with the impulse to immediately judge and dismiss particular statements rather than to ask why someone (with demonstrated success in the business world) would say such a thing about business people.
Response from Wendy Waters:
>My question:
>
>How many of you who have made the transition from the academy to the
>corporate world find that this has allowed you new creative formulations of
>your academic work. In other words, beyond the practical skills of
>rhetoric, writing, and project management, how many view their experiences
>in business as actually broadening your more specific academic interests;
>for ex., Does being a Foucauldian writing copy for a Fortune 500 company
>make you a "different" kind of citizen in that environment? And outside the
>corporate environment? I realize this is a somewhat abstract question, but I
>am really interested in what some of you have to say if you care to take it
>on.
Interesting question, and not one I've really thought about since I've chosen to work outside of the academic environment. That is, I've been looking forward, rather than backward in my life. Thus, for me, I've enjoyed looking at how my academic experience has helped me in the business world.
My experience is probably different from many on the list since I was in a field where there were plenty of academic jobs -- I had a choice. Now, when faced with academic "problems" and "discourse" it feels like a foreign language (about every six months or so I have had to drop back in to edit, or comment on editors edits, a chapter I wrote for publication in an anthology in 1997 which still isn't out yet.)
The one way it might inform my academic work if I were still doing it, would be in having a better understanding of what it's like to live in a "revolutionary" environment. One of my specialties was Revolutions in Latin America and around the world and how people "lived and experienced" the great changes. Being inside the Internet boom and bust (reign of terror and thermidor stages?) and now the "build out" stage when the real meaning of the information technology era is being formed, gave me new insights into how people get carried away, and then disgruntled--a revolutionary dialectic. I also specialized in the 1930s, so the whole stock market boom and bust that formed a backdrop of almost everything I studied and taught, also gained some new meaning to me. If I were still doing work in this area, it might have led me to ask different questions about peoples' experiences and reactions to tumultuous events in other times, or perhaps driven me to analyze information differently from before.
Comment from D.S.:
Several message-posters must have a different kind of PhD from another time and place than mine, my friends', and those I have read about. Dealing with complex problems! Hmphf. Perhaps dealing with them in ways, and with theories, with which a department deliberately and unknowingly indoctrinates its students. Undergraduate education broadens the mind (or should); graduate education narrows or, if you prefer, focuses it. Especially in the infinitely complex fields of the humanities and social sciences, it provides instruction in how to simplify (and thereby "explain") a very small bit of reality, while ignoring the rest.
D.S.
Response from Sarah James:
> From: D.S.
>
> Several message-posters must have a different kind of PhD from another time
> and place than mine, my friends', and those I have read about. Dealing with
> complex problems! Hmphf.
>
Are you suggesting that the PhD process doesn't encourage students to develop the critical reasoning capacity to deal with philosophical or technical subtleties in a distinct way than other types of training?
Further Comment from Sarah James:
Apparently, few people on this list regularly deal with the problems that arise with a person who wants a cookie-cutter solution, now, to a question like "how do you best describe an illness?" These problems can be somewhat worse when the person doesn't have the time or inclination to answer such questions as "which illness?" or "in what context?"
Those of you interested in working in business might want to consider the role of hierarchy and standardization in producing people who cannot or refuse to think. What could the possible disadvantages be for thinking on the job? If you don't know the answer to that question, and you want a job in business, it might possibly be something to slip into the mix.
Response from Wendy Waters:
>Those of you interested in working in business might want to consider the
>role of hierarchy and standardization in producing people who cannot or
>refuse to think. What could the possible disadvantages be for thinking on
>the job? If you don't know the answer to that question, and you want a job
>in business, it might possibly be something to slip into the mix.
That's an interesting statement. Personally, I found that academia stifled my thought and ideas far more than the business world has. One reason I left was because I could not pursue the topics that interested me within the academic framework. That is, I couldn't switch from my dissertation topic to a more contemporary one and still hope to make tenure since I needed the book and 2 articles in 4 years and the only way to do that was to work my dissertation into these publications. I also found it very hard to make certain conclusions no matter how strong my evidence, like my case study that showed how that female gender stereotypes are enforced by women on each other and not as the oppression of men.
Academia to me is an interesting paradox of supporting the concept of free-thinking through such institutions as tenure, but in fact not being open to it when a new idea comes from a student, graduate or undergraduate.
I have also found academia to be far more hierarchical and authoritarian than the business world. I've never heard anyone in the business world address someone as "Dr. so-and-so" or "Mr. So-and-so" the way they do in academia, which reinforces the "I'm in charge and know it all" mentality. Maybe the West Coast is more casual than the East, but first names are the norm everywhere I've worked and all presidents or managing partners have had an "open door" policy where they invited any ideas good or bad about the company.
Many companies today have rather flat management structures to encourage collaboration and interaction -- the fostering of ideas, rather than the opposite. Speaking as a commercial real estate research director, I can say that companies like Sun Microsystems are re-designing their office space to make sure people move around, that accountants interact with programmers and marketing professionals. If you didn't want people to think, I don't think you'd encourage them to talk to each other. This is the trend in office space design because it is in demand.
While some companies may still be behind the times, in the information age the edge is using that information to create "knowledge" and this requires thought and the cross-fertilization of ideas.
My company hired me because I was an "outsider" not trained in business or real estate so could bring fresh ideas. The other finalist had an MA in Public Administration.
That's my perspective.
Wendy
Response from Sarah James:
Wendy, I think your points are really interesting. But I don't think you're taking my drift.
I personally don't feel stifled, but there are scores of people with whom I interact regularly who don't like to think critically or who like to be told exactly what to do and exactly when. I'm not trying to claim that every single company is like this (because I don't know), but I am trying to lay out this situation so that people who are on this list because they're on the fence about leaving the academy can get a better understanding of the real conceptual adjustments that might have to be made depending on circumstances. This could be a material consideration in finding,
accepting, and keeping a job.
If people don't like what I'm saying, then they should use this information to make the best decisions for them.
Sarah
Response from Kevin Walzer:
Those of you interested in business may also want to consider the intellectual challenges that do, in fact, exist in business. For instance, in marketing, my field, the question of how best to present the "value proposition" of my company's services is endlessly challenging. It is NOT solved by a standard, cookie-cutter approach. In some situations, especially when my company is underbid by a competitor for a contract, the rhetorical challenge is to show how my company's services offer greater value to the client even though they cost more--for instance, because of the additional breadth, depth, and quality of our services. That type of challenge is chiefly tactical, addressed in a direct competition with another firm. Other challenges are more strategic in nature, i.e., how will we present our value proposition to the marketplace via advertising, public relations, direct mail, trade shows, etc. What types of slogans will we use? What types of graphics? What will our budget be? I relish these challenges.
One can find analogues between literary and rhetorical theory and marketing strategy, if such an approach will help you navigate the chasm between business and academe more easily, but it is simpler to work to learn the language of business--marketing communications, in my case. I feel more a part of the team I'm working with, less alienated from my colleagues, because I am fluent in their language. I don't worry about using words such as "Foucaldian" in a business context (although I was not a Foucaldian in the academy either--my specialty was New Formalist American poetry, a field I still work in as time permits). My interest is in learning the language of business to enrich my new professional life.
My transition to business has been helped greatly by reading the work of leading "business intellectuals"--yes, they do exist and they write real paragraphs, not in Powerpoint-ese. I'm thinking of Tom Peters, Peter Drucker, and others. Peters and Drucker have taught me the basics of management theory; Peters especially has been useful in understanding how the corporation have moved from a vertically integrated, hierarchical organization to a flat, horizontal organization that focuses on core functions only. Another writer especially close to my heart is Geoffrey Moore--once an English professor, and now a Silicon Valley marketing consultant. One of his most influential books is called Crossing the Chasm, which describes what he terms "the Technology Adoption Life Cycle"--the book is an indispensable guide to marketing technology products. It was required reading for me when I worked at a software company.
I can't say enough about the positive experience I've had in the business world. It has its difficulties--I've lost jobs in the business world as well as the academic world--but the upside is so much greater than academe, and not just in terms of economic opportunity. The challenges are also intellectually engaging and rewarding. When I solve a marketing problem, it can have a real, measurable impact on the bottom line of my company. (And on my wallet--I get a bonus when my firm wins new business.) That is very satisfying to me. I have, in essence, discovered a whole other side of myself that I didn't know existed. I feel no compunction to discuss the merits of iambic poetry versus free verse with my colleagues at work, or how I integrate autobiography and personae into my own poetry; I have a network of colleagues from graduate school whom I can talk with about these subjects. Instead, I can discuss intellectually engaging business problems with bright, dedicated co-workers; and I can attend to the advice of senior executives about marketing and operational strategy.
I stand by my conviction that business people (at least the ones I work with) are just as bright and sophisticated as academics; the question is how they engage their intelligence. To have a different attitude, to feel that I'm somehow limiting myself because I don't have the opportunity to discuss my academic interests in the workplace, just seems to me like a recipe for frustration. Why not just pursue one's academic work outside of the business workday? I do that. In fact, I am finding ways to combine my academic work and my business work by operating a small press that will publish about eight books of poetry this year. The press is made possible by my academic background, but it operates successfully because of what I've learned from business.
Sorry for the length of this response--I just feel the need to speak positively about business and business people in light of what some posts have said about them this week. It's a positive move to leave the academy for the business world. You don't need to be afraid of it. And, if you engage it fully, you shouldn't feel that you're stifling your intelligence or your creativity.
Response from Bob Batchelor:
Good morning listmates,
I agree wholeheartedly with Kevin. I've worked with brilliant people on both sides. There are just different "skill-sets" being put to use. While most of my business colleagues couldn't write a book about some sweeping (or very narrow) historical topic, my professors probably couldn't make major decisions that affected stock prices and had an impact on a global marketplace, like the executives I've worked with. There isn't a right or wrong (or smart vs. dumb) issue here. It's just two different ways of thinking.
What I wish would happen is that the two sides could figure out a way to get more academic-minded people interested in business. I think many people would have a much more satisfying career in business that struggling through successive adjunct positions or scraping by on low salaries after the monumental achievement of earning a Ph.D.
Kevin is right on. There are daily "intellectual challenges" that confront me and multiple times when I have to make a decision or offer an opinion that could have a big impact. On a bigger scale, thinkers like Drucker, Jim Collins, etc. influence thousands of executives and the way business operates, just like big-league academics have the same influence over the field.
To tell you the truth, I'll let my fellow panelists discuss the "scheme of argumentation" and "Foucaldian" lines of thought. I didn't deal with the postmodern stuff when I was in grad school. I feel the academic skills I developed have influenced the way I work today. I know how to lay out an argument, conduct top-notch, professional research, edit by myself and within a team environment, etc.
So, academe prepared me for the business world in terms of establishing a baseline of critical thinking, writing, research. The rest I had to learn on my own: how to read a quarterly earning report, an annual report, how public relations works, marketing, etc.
Okay, I've rambled on enough.
Have a great day!
Thanks,
Bob
Response from Sarah James:
Bob is making the important point that his academic training allowed him to learn how to lay out an argument. Not everyone can (or even has to) do this on a regular or semi-regular basis. So, if you're the person who's supposed to be spurring them on to these unaccustomed mental exercises, you probably have to do a little bit of strategic thinking.
It's also not particularly surprising anyone who didn't read Foucault (who I think of as a poststructuralist, btw) would not think of the working world in terms of its panoptic characteristics.
I happen to work in a very hierarchical, structured environment, which has many, many Foucauldian aspects. I also work in the company of many impeccably trained and brilliant people who are epistemologically naive (in the commonly accepted academic definition of this term circa 1995) because of the type of impeccable training they have (e.g., hard science degree from Harvard). This circumstance required an adjustment for me, because I was used to being around people who shared my training and philosophical bent, and I was in a job which required the conceptualization of medical concepts in particular technical contexts.
As far as Kevin's post:
There is a difference between being able to take on a new language in the workplace and feeling that that language is your own. Some days being in the workplace is like "passing" (qua Nella Larsen); but if you speak to scientists and physicians, they feel that way also (although they couch this feeling in different terms).
And as far as discussing iambic pentameter on the job, I think that Kevin's situation is truly pitiable. I know senior scientists who spontaneously critique scientific writing in Shakespearean and Faulknerian terms (One person referred to a lengthy document as "the new Snopes family saga", for example), which sure beats dickering about Chicago Manual of Style and AMA stylesheet conventions. Some of my better work friends are really amused at being able to learn new terms (such as heuristic and depoliticize) because they're a fun way to spice up the office hallway banter. There's also the potential to discuss the differences between say Gramscian hegemony and the type of hegemony you see on Star Trek (this is mostly on the company softball team). [NB: "Foucaldian" sounds sort of curse-word-y to some people and we have pretty strict policies about appropriate office speak.]
Kevin writes:
I feel more a part of the team I'm working with, less alienated from my colleagues, because I am fluent in their language. I don't worry about using words such as "Foucaldian" in a business context (although I was not a Foucaldian in the academy either--my specialty was New Formalist American poetry, a field I still work in as time permits). My interest is in learning the language of business to enrich my new professional life.
I can't say enough about the positive experience I've had in the business world. It has its difficulties--I've lost jobs in the business world as well as the academic world--but the upside is so much greater than academe, and not just in terms of economic opportunity.
...
I feel no compunction to discuss the merits of iambic poetry versus free verse with my colleagues at work, or how I integrate autobiography and personae into my own poetry; I have a network of colleagues from graduate school whom I can talk with about these subjects. Instead, I can discuss intellectually engaging business problems with bright, dedicated co-workers; and I can attend to the advice of senior executives about marketing and operational strategy.
and Bob writes:
To tell you the truth, I'll let my fellow panelists discuss the "scheme of argumentation" and "Foucaldian" lines of thought. I didn't deal with the postmodern stuff when I was in grad school. I feel the academic skills I developed have influenced the way I work today. I know how to lay out an argument, conduct top-notch, professional research, edit by myself and within a team environment, etc.
So, academe prepared me for the business world in terms of establishing a baseline of critical thinking, writing, research. The rest I had to learn on my own: how to read a quarterly earning report, an annual report, how public relations works, marketing, etc.
Comment from Kevin Walzer:
This may be a bit off topic, or at least the reverse of the topic: How to maintain one's identity as a scholar once you are working outside of academe. More than one discussant has alluded to staying active in one form or another with scholarly work; doing so is important to me, not because I hope to re-enter academe (I don't) but because the work itself is important to me.
The links below reference articles I've published online about the job situation in higher education, and how to stay true to one's scholarly calling even if one has to earn a living in business. I hope they are useful reading.
http://home.fuse.net/walzer/downsize.htm
http://chronicle.com/jobs/2001/05/2001052503c.htm
http://chronicle.com/jobs/2002/02/2002021801c.htm
Response from Bob Batchelor:
Interesting reversal of topic, Kevin. What I've done is basically switch my academic interests to more popular culture concerns, rather than a specific genre of history. So, I don't belong to the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations (SHAFR) anymore, but did join the Popular Culture and American Culture Associations.
I found that I just can't keep up with all the recent literature, which is a requirement for an academic historian. Also, I don't have the time to do as much archival research as I'd like.
In business terms, I have to measure my "return on investment" for any time I spend doing anything in my free time. [This drives my wife crazy, because I'm always trying to justify getting out of housework for this reason...ha, ha] The point is that if I give myself the arbitrary worth of $50 an hour, can I justify working on a scholarly article with no payoff in the end (like pay or tenure concerns), when I could write an article for a magazine, get quicker feedback and publication, and receive a paycheck when it's all said and done?
On a related note, it is difficult not to be affiliated with an institution, like academic historians. I support the Independent Scholar movement, particularly the stance of the National Coalition of Independent Scholars, but on a practical note, it's difficult, if not impossible, to do hardcore historical research without easy access to an academic library and the time to do archival research.
Because of all this and my own shifting interests, my goals are now in mainstream publishing. For instance, I'd rather write a really good popular history than an academic tome of some sort (although I have to admit that the Kimberly-Clark book I've co-authored is academic and coming out from an academic press, but this will probably be my last hurrah in academic publishing).
That's my $.02 on maintaining a scholarly identity. For me, it would be nice, but getting more and more unrealistic, given my own interests drifting toward popular culture and the time commitment of my day job.
Thanks,
Bob
Question from T.G.:
>Sorry for the length of this response--I just feel the need to speak
>positively about business and business people in light of what some posts
>have said about them this week. It's a positive move to leave the academy
>for the business world. You don't need to be afraid of it. And, if you
>engage it fully, you shouldn't feel that you're stifling your intelligence
>or your creativity.
Yes, but what about the ethical dimensions? Under the rubric of "value proposition" mentioned earlier in your post is a scheme of argumentation not radically different in form and structure, not to mention strategy, from Bush arguing to the American public that there *is* a link, albeit
indirect, and largely based upon speculation rather than hard evidence, between Iraq and Hussein and Bib Laden.
(I suppose in business I couldn't write a sentence like that, could I?)
Response from Kevin Walzer:
>Yes, but what about the ethical dimensions? Under the rubric of "value
>proposition" mentioned earlier in your post is a scheme of argumentation
>not radically different in form and structure, not to mention strategy,
>from Bush arguing to the American public that there *is* a link, albeit
>indirect, and largely based upon speculation rather than hard evidence,
>between Iraq and Hussein and Bib Laden. (I suppose in business I couldn't
> write a sentence like that, could I?)
I have no idea of what you mean by "ethical dimensions," although you appear to be implying that none exist in business. I disagree. I certainly conduct myself in business with a high degree of ethics and honesty. The academic left has no monopoly on ethics, nor on the elevation of the oppressed. Business is what drives the economy and creates jobs; business has given me far more opportunities than the academy, which overproduces Ph.D.s as a source of cheap labor and false prestige, ever did. If the "corporatization" of the university helps move the university away from its Dickensian, nineteenth-century model of capitalism, in which most workers subsist at near-slave wages with no security or benefits, all the better.
Obviously, no one can defend the accounting scandals at Enron, WorldCom, et. al; ethics are seriously lacking in these cases. But that does not indict the business enterprise per se. Indeed, changes and corrections--ranging from indictments to new accounting regulations and laws--are coming swiftly to address these problems. By contrast, the academy changes at a glacial pace, if at all. I see little evidence that the unionization movements among teaching assistants are making much of a difference; most of them will be unemployed after they graduate, just as I was. English departments are not cutting back on the number of Ph.D.s they produce, even as tenure lines continue to disappear. Instead, I suggest that the business world is doing more to transform the academy than any other factor; Ph.D.s are discovering that they have a wealth of opportunities available to them that simply do not exist in academe. How is providing talented, highly educated individuals with the opportunity to actually support themselves "unethical"?
In terms of "value proposition," this simply means what a customer gets for their money. At times, my company is outbid by our competitors, but we are often able to show the customer that they will get more for their money by working with us, even though it costs more. Our value proposition is better. This principle is no different from a newly minted Ph.D. receiving a tenure-track job offer from a hiring committee; in spite of (hundreds) of competitors, you persuaded the committee that you offered the best value proposition. How is this unethical?
Response from Wendy Waters:
>Yes, but what about the ethical dimensions?
As a writer for a corporation, you are asked to make the best case for the corporation. It is up to your clients, prospective clients or potential customers to decide if they want your product. This is no different from lawyers being asked to make the best case for their clients, and the judge and jury decide if they "buy" the argument. Our freedoms are based upon these concepts of democracy and free speech and that everyone has a right to state their case and to make their own decision. If you don't want Walmart in your community, don't shop there -- that people do shop there is a form of democracy (you may think Walmart shoppers are misguided and ill informed in doing so, just as you may think someone who voted for Bush or for Nader or for Gore [depending on your stripes] was misguided and ill informed).
Your own ethics do matter. The beauty of the private sector is that if a company asks you to promote something through a marketing piece that you cannot support, you can decline to do so. If they fire you over it, you can get another job. You are not barred from the corporate writer
profession (as you can get black balled out of academia quite easily).
Wendy
Response from Sarah James:
> Yes, but what about the ethical dimensions? Under the rubric of "value
> proposition" mentioned earlier in your post is a scheme of argumentation
> not radically different in form and structure, not to mention strategy,
> from Bush arguing to the American public that there *is* a link, albeit
> indirect, and largely based upon speculation rather than hard evidence,
> between Iraq and Hussein and Bib Laden.
>
> (I suppose in business I couldn't write a sentence like that, could I?)
Well, you *could* but it would get edited. ; )
The ethical dimensions of the subject matter I deal with have to do with the humane treatment of study subjects and laboratory animals and the ethics of medical information disclosure. These could potentially be bad problems in a business context, but I am fortunate enough to work at a company where everyone is expected to behave with the highest adherence to accepted medical and professional ethics, regardless of the impact on the bottom line. The only difficulty I've really seen in terms of a potential problem is in trying to translate these specific ethical considerations to our marketing colleagues, (many of whom have a poor understanding of science) which is to say that they have a different set of ethical constraints than do, say, physicians. So, this is a matter of translation, not real differences in ethical stance.
Response from T.G.:
>I have no idea of what you mean by "ethical dimensions,"
That's scarry ...
>although you appear to be implying that none exist in business. I
>disagree. I certainly conduct myself in business with a high degree of
>ethics and honesty. The academic left has no monopoly on ethics, nor on
>the elevation of the oppressed.
I didn't say they did.
>Business is what drives the economy and creates jobs; business has given
>me far more opportunities than the academy, which overproduces Ph.D.s as a
>source of cheap labor and false prestige, ever did. If the
>"corporatization" of the university helps move the university away from
>its Dickensian, nineteeth-century model of capitalism, in which most
>workers subsist at near-slave wages with no security or benefits, all the
>better.
You seem to have assumed I was claiming a certain ethico-moral superiority for Academe. I wasn't. I didn't.
>In terms of "value proposition," this simply means what a customer gets
>for their money. At times, my company is outbid by our competitors, but we
>are often able to show the customer that they will get more for their
>money by working with us, even though it costs more.
And/or is a matter of spin, sophistic argumentation, or just out and out deception.
>Our value proposition is better. This principle is no different from a
>newly minted Ph.D. receiving a tenure-track job offer from a hiring
>committee; in spite of (hundreds) of competitors, you persuaded the
>committee that you offered the best value proposition. How is this unethical?
How? Are you kidding?
Nevermind. This is a tedious "go-nowhere" discussion.
BUILDING PORTFOLIOS AND GAINING EXPERIENCE
Question from Sarah James:
Bob-- what's a "clip file" and why would you use one? Is this like a publications list?
Sarah
Response from Bob Batchelor:
Hi all,
Sorry for the unclear lingo. Basically, a clip file is just a list or set of your best publications that you would present to an employer.
For example, although I had many years of experience writing for corporations, I decided to bring a set of clips with me when I had my first face-to-face interview with the Writing Director at Bank of America. I included pieces that spoke to my knowledge of finance and financial institutions. So, I put in an article I wrote on the CEO of National City Bank, a press release announcing quarterly earnings for a public company, and an editorial I ghostwrote for a big-wig venture capitalist.
I would advise all writers to have a hardcopy and electronic clip file. Many businesses will want these at one time or another.
Thanks,
Bob
Response from Kevin Walzer:
I'd like to amplify some points Bob made about portfolios/clip files. It is probably optimal to have samples of business writing--a news release, ad copy, brochure copy, speech, etc. However, it may be difficult to get these types of writing outside of an internship, which may or may not be available to you. If you have published other types of writing, such as your research in an academic journal, by all means bring it. One of the things that helped me land my first job was this kind of portfolio. I didn't have tons of "business writing," but on my resume I listed a bunch of journals where my articles had appeared (I called this "freelance writing," which it was, even though refereed journals don't pay). I also had an edited anthology out, and it made a great prop at the interview. I handed the president the book (a collection of essays about a contemporary poet) and he was visibly impressed, even though he said he hated poetry.&n! bsp;(He was a former engineer for a Fortune 500 company who had formed his own multi-million dollar company.) I explained, "I can complete this kind of project on time--I can probably handle the writing demands of this job as well." In business parlance, that closed the sale.
My key point is--use what you have. It's not irrelevant. It's all about showing how you handled challenges in one field and how you can handle similar challenges (writing, time management, teamwork, communication, whatever) in the business field you're trying to enter.
Question from S.C.:
Dear Bob and other participants,
This has been a very interesting discussion so far and I'd like to thank everyone for their frank analysis of attitudes towards Ph.D.'s in the world of business.
Some questions about writing have come up, and, if I understand correctly, short pieces that aren't too specialized can be used as good examples of one's strengths. Would book reviews or film reviews be assets in this respect?
Bob, you mentioned some other strategies earlier: "Write some press releases for a non-profit you admire, do a newsletter for some organization, anything to show that you're not just a "flighty academic."
I'm wondering how one would go about accomplishing this kind of work: do you mean simply writing these things up on your own? Or contacting a non-profit or organization and volunteering to write something for them that they would publish?
I have one last question that I hope won't seem off-topic. I deal with a lot of very grade-conscious students, and I've often wondered (in my attempts to encourage them think of the grade as a stimulus for learning and not as a something symbolic to obsess about) how much employers care about the grades of the recent B.A.'s whom they hire. Is it right, first of all, to assume that employers are not interested in seeing the undergraduate and graduate transcripts of someone who has gone all the way to the Ph.D. level? And, assuming that they do at least look at the grades of recent B.A.'s whom they hire, what would they hope to see? I suppose there is not one blanket answer to this, but I wondered if those of you in the non-academic world might have thoughts on the matter.
Thanks,
S.C.
Response from Kevin Walzer:
S.C.,
Re: Writing samples:
I'd contact organizations to see if they need help. "Cold-calling" may not be the most efficient way; if you have networking contacts, utilize those first. As I said in another post, freelance writing for a local or community newspaper is a way to get clips as well.
Re: Grades:
It's my experience that employers aren't terribly interested in them. They may want to see transcripts to verify your degree, but that's about it. I've never been hired because of my g.p.a. Of course, having a doctorate itself indicates a high level of achievement. Also, if you claim a 3.8 g.p.a. but your transcript shows a 2.5, that's an honesty issue that would probably lose you a job.
Kevin
Comment from Richard Weibl:
Greetings all,
I would like to offer another opportunity for those interested in developing a writing portfolio. It is a bit self-promotional so I apologize in advance...
Science's Next Wave is an on-line career development resources targeted primarily to young scientists - graduate students, postdocs, and junior faculty. Most major doctoral universities have an institutional subscription that will give you access. You can learn more about us at www.nextwave.org
As an editor, I am constantly looking for writers to do stories about the doctoral experience, interesting programs, and occasionally special feature themes.
I have limited money for freelancers, the pitch I make to volunteer writers is the opportunity to write for an international publication, to have your work professionally edited, and to build a portfolio that you can use in the pursuit of other, more lucrative opportunities.
It is uncommon for me to turn away a good idea presented by someone willing to write under those circumstances. Our stories can look like profiles of individual scientists doing interesting work, discussions of current events and their implications for science careers ... well lot's of things.
The catch, for folks on this discussion group, is that focus is on "science" careers. I'll not engage in the debate that such a resource should exist for others - I agree.
Following on the ideals expressed by the WWNFF Humanities at Work folks, I firmly believe that folks in the humanities have skills that are widely transferable and highly marketable.
If you want to write, I am willing to work with you to help you get published in Science's Next Wave. Contact me directly ... don't reply to the whole list.
Richard A. Weibl
U.S. Editor, Science's Next Wave
American Association for the Advancement of Science
1200 New York Avenue NW
Washington DC 20005 USA
(202) 312-6342
(202) 408-9319 fax
rweibl@aaas.org
www.nextwave.org
Question from R.R.:
I am interested in getting involved in professional writing, as an aside to my current position. I write regularly and often in a number of fields (librarianship, medieval historical research, etc.), type 70 words a minute, have two masters and a Ph.D., and have no problem with cranking out material. Can anyone provide me with any leads, contacts, to do this type of work? As I said, I'm not looking for full-time, but something that can be done 10-30 hours a week from my home. Already have a full-time faculty position. Thanks for any help.
R.R.
Response from Sarah James:
Look on the internet. There are a number of writer web sites where they advertise part-time and temporary positions, you can post a resume, etc.
I'm not sure how marketable medieval studies is, but anything technical about it (say if you know about the mechanics of cross bows or chain mail) could be parleyed into a technical qualification.
Question from B.D.:
Hi,
A few of our guest speakers have mentioned that a good way to build a portfolio is to find internships for business writing. Can anybody suggest how we find these internships? I have a few ideas, like doing an internet search or contacting acquaintances that do professional writing, but can you suggest any other ways?
Does it matter what type of corporation or field you want to look for a job in? For example, marketing vs. financial?
Thanks,
B.D.
Response from Kevin Walzer:
Does your campus have a co-op program, or firms that advertise for internships? That's one way to look. Networking with colleagues is another good way to go. Also, are there any community newspapers that use work from contributors/freelance writers? That's often a good source of writing opportunities. At this stage of your job search, there's not much difference between "freelancing" and "interning"--the point is to get experience and something that you can put in a portfolio.
Response from Wendy Waters:
>A few of our guest speakers have mentioned that a good way to build a
>portfolio is to find internships for business writing. Can anybody suggest
>how we find these internships? I have a few ideas, like doing an internet
>search or contacting acquaintances that do professional writing, but can you
>suggest any other ways?
B.D., those are excellent places to start. Another place to look is in a local professional association of communications specialists. Many cities have them (I'm told). At a corporate careers seminar I went to here they recommend people join the society, go to meetings, listen, and talk to people.
I found my financial writing internship at this seminar on "careers in corporate communications" put on by the downtown, continuing education campus of Simon Fraser University. One of the panelists was managing editor at the financial website; he mentioned his workday had become swamped because he had recently lost his intern and they couldn't afford to hire anyone to do her work. I introduced myself, said I was interested in filling the role, and was quickly and gratefully taken on as an intern.
I don't know how many educational institutions around North America put on career seminars like the one I attended, but I'd highly recommend looking for one in your area. This one was in conjunction with a formal "writing and publishing" program or series of professional development courses the university puts on downtown.
Since most web-publishing based companies still around today are struggling to pay the bills, many managers will be keen for writing help that doesn't cost them cash. Never hurts to send an e-mail or make a phone call.
Wendy
Comment from Bob Batchelor:
Hello all,
Just received the new Business Week (9/30/02). There are two articles that readers may find useful. The first "The Educated Unemployed" examines the thought that the unemployment rate for managers and professionals is likely to rise in the near future. The cause, according to the author, will be the combination of "low profits, weak demand, and falling prices, with no relief in sight." One of the quickest cost savings moves is to cut workforces, basically using technology that has increased productivity to meet flat demand with less workers.
If that's not sobering enough, the article "Going Sideways on the Corporate Ladder," examines the fact that most workers are not receiving raises and facing increased health-care premiums.
Wonderful...
--Bob
Question from Wendy Waters:
Hi,
As a more junior member of the Corporate Writers field, I'm wondering if my fellow panelists can recommend some reading or reference materials for corporate writing. I'm particularly looking for some guidance on marketing communications, but I think our audience might benefit from suggestions on any genre of business writing.
Wendy
Question from H.F.:
I'm writing this question in an exploratory way, so I apologize in advance for the apparent lack of focus:
Many of you have mentioned that you have "fallen into" your work or have bounced from industry to industry, many of which have very distinct cultures, as different from each other as the academy is different from any of them or that you have moved from department to department -- while in most large companies HR writing is perceived as being as different from Marketing writing as different from Corporate Communications --
I would like some more information about clip files / portfolios for different industries or departments, I guess. Can one write samples on spec / that have not been used? Can you recommend types of writing that marketing, hr, or cc might prefer to see? Different industries (especially those that aren't currently in recession)? Are their steps to executive presentation and speech writing careers I don't know about / where can I look? For advertising / marketing writing, is it necessary to come up through copy editing?
Have you marketed yourselves as writing generalists, or -- ?
What should I do when I encounter this barrier (which I have): since my degree is not in Marketing or Communications or Education or Business, I can't possibly do the job or be interested in doing the job?
Or perhaps this: I write and publish extensively on my own time. Sometimes I find myself in competition with workers who pursue more directly work-related hobbies. Should I reserve a certain amount of time a week for doing work-related unpaid work?
Thanks,
H.F.
Response from Kevin Walzer:
>many of you have mentioned that you have "fallen into" your work or have
>bounced from industry to industry, many of which have very distinct
>cultures, as different from each other as the academy is different from
>any of them
>
>or that you have moved from department to department -- while in most
>large companies HR writing is perceived as being as different from
>Marketing writing as different from Corporate Communications --
I disagree with this. In the companies I have worked for--one of which is a $3 billion organization--I've been considered a writer, not an HR writer or a marketing writer or a corporate communications writer. I handle a variety of projects. Getting experience at a variety of writing tasks, perhaps through interning and freelancing, is a good way to begin, but I wouldn't worry about specializing too much. If you can write and you understand the "language" of business, you should be able to find a position somewhere.
Response from Wendy Waters:
>I would like some more information about clip files / portfolios for
>different industries or departments, I guess. Can one write samples on
>spec / that have not been used? Can you recommend types of writing that
>marketing, hr, or cc might prefer to see? Different industries
>(especially those that aren't currently in recession)?
>
>Have you marketed yourselves as writing generalists, or -- ?
H.F. and everyone,
Your second question first: I marketed myself as an flexible generalist with enough different writing experiences that I could adapt to their needs.
On writing samples: Two key things I keep in mind that I have found from experience: First, whoever asked for the writing samples will probably spend less than 5 minutes, maybe even less than 2, looking at them. Therefore, the best examples are ones in which someone could read any paragraph in the piece, understand it, and get a sense for how you write. More often than not, someone has skimmed my samples in front of me at the interview -- and in some cases they decided within those 30 seconds if my writing was appropriate for their needs. (Think back to grading undergraduate papers, couldn't you tell within about 30 seconds of reading whether the paper was likely going to be an A, B or C or Failure? It really doesn't take that long to know if someone writes well or the style you want.)
The second key is that your sample is accessible to your audience. In most cases, you'll want something written in ordinary English for a general audience -- not the introduction to your dissertation (unless, like Kevin suggested, you can present it as a case study for how you will succeed in the job) . If you have a clip appropriate to the industry, great, use it. I therefore don't think you need to vary your writing samples that much from industry to industry, unless you've done specialized writing for one or more of those industries.
I used a writing sample from an engineering publication about comparative seatbelt use in Canada and the USA to get a job writing about international crime prevention projects.
Wendy
Response from Bob Batchelor:
Dear H.F., et al,
Good morning. At my company (Bank of America) the writing team consists of about 20 writers who are each farmed out to a specific division of the company. So, one person's area may be Technology, while another's Personnel. We all do virtually the same thing, with some minor variances, but for the most part we write and provide strategy for the group we work with.
As far as clips go, anything you can provide to show that you have business expertise and interviewing skills is probably best to have on file. I don't think you must show experience within a certain segment, such as HR, to get the job, but do consider that someone applying for the same position will have specific HR experience. Then, you must convince the hiring manager that you are the best candidate because of your soft skills, such as learning quickly, teamwork abilities, diplomatic skills, interviewing, etc.
For speechwriting, I don't know of any specialized career path, but most speechwriters I know get into the field by being communications generalists or business writers who were asked to write a speech, did it well, and wrote more, until they built up enough speech clips to get jobs as speechwriters.
I don't know much about the career path for advertising/marketing writers. Most of the people I know who specialize in this area were either journalists, freelancers, or communications people who enjoy the field.
Basically, I think that a good writer can do any kind of business writing. However, this isn't necessarily a viewpoint held across industry. I know speechwriters who are very protective of their "craft" and would think my statement is ludicrous. Same with some marketing/advertising writers.
I've always marketed myself as a writer or business writer. I purposefully wrote freelance article across a broad number of industries so that I could show that I had experience in many fields. So, if it was manufacturing, I could pull out a cover story I did on Goodyear, if it was technology, I could pull out a dozen clips I had that were e-commerce related. Same with healthcare, insurance, legal, consulting, etc.
If you already publish extensively in your free time, then I'd say that you're ahead of the curve. I'm not sure what a "work-related" hobby would be that would put someone ahead of you for a job opportunity, but writer's write and keeping up your publishing, one would think, would have to pay off in the end.
The Barrier Question: I would be honest about this and say, "I majored in XX for this reason (insert reason) when I was an undergraduate. It was after doing XX that I later understood that I actually wanted to be a business writer. As you can see from my publishing experience and writing, I'm fully committed to a career as a business writer and have worked hard to learn about XX (whatever specific field) and the business environment as a whole."
Thanks,
Bob
Comment from Kevin Walzer:
I wanted to add a little bit of information to my earlier posts about the types of writing I do. The categories below will give you a broad overview of what types of writing are involved in marketing communications:
Sales proposals. Many service or consulting companies, such as the ones I've worked for, use sales proposals as their key tool for winning new business. The types of proposals I work on are long, complex documents, outlining in great detail the specific services my company will deliver, my company's qualifications, and the price. Many proposals run more than 100 pages. Proposal writing (which has one foot in marketing and one foot in technical writing) is a high-stress activity, because the documents often have short turnaround times. Long hours and mad dashes to the airport's Fed Ex office after collating a dozen copies of a 100-page document are common.
Marketing collateral. This phrase refers to a broad range of marketing literature. I've written copy for direct mail, brochures, and web sites. While sales proposals are somewhat technical, marketing collateral has to be short and memorable to quickly convey the marketing message. Marketing collateral calls on a writer's creative skills and, while fun, can be a major challenge. Disagreements over a creative approach are sometimes hard to resolve because they boil down to differences in taste, instead of something that is objectively right or wrong.
Public relations. Public relations includes news releases sent to newspapers, industry magazines, and wire services, but it's broader than that. It involves increasing your company's public visibility through media coverage on an ongoing basis. For instance, through regular contacts with newspaper and trade magazine editors, I've helped the companies I've worked for obtain product reviews and feature stories outside the framework of a simple news release. This type of coverage is lower in cost than an advertisement and is arguably more effective because it comes from an objective third party--the publication's editor or writer.
Advertising. Advertising involves not just developing copy and graphics for an ad, it also involves managing an advertising budget to ensure that you're reaching your target audience. Advertising is a very powerful way to reach your audience because you have complete control of the content; often the largest challenge is to make sure you spend your ad dollars wisely (that is, if you have an ad budget to work with). At one of my jobs, I managed the ad budget and was bombarded by solicitations from magazines to advertise with them. At another job, I had no budget at all to work with, so I had to turn away all requests for advertising from publications.
Brand identity. This is a little different than "brand management," which entails managing all aspects of a product including its development, marketing, and sales performance. Brand identity is more focused. It looks at the overall image of the product or service, including graphics, taglines, and sales message; different combinations of elements can evoke a very different response. (Wal-Mart and Saks Fifth Avenue are both department stores, but each has a vastly different brand identity.) At one company I worked for, I helped to revise the company's brand identity away from the single product it sold into a broader image about what the company did for its customers; this message would accommodate changes in the product lineup.
Graphic design. While I'm not a trained graphic designer, I've developed facility with illustration, page layout, photo editing, and presentation programs to create handouts, flyers, and sales presentations.
I'd be glad to answer any questions about particular categories, if anyone has any.
Question from Paula Foster:
Dear Speakers,
I would like to get a better handle, myself, on the range of writing that is typically done in corporations. Here's how I currently understand it. Would you please throw your two cents into this admittedly flawed overview?
- Marketing Communications--writing for external audiences to raise their awareness of the company or of specific products and services. May include web content, brochures, direct mail, [what else]?
- Employee Communications--writing for internal audiences to inform them of important changes, raise their awareness of programs and stuff available to them, and (re)articulate the company's stated values. May include emails, brochures, booklets, general-distribution memos, company newsletters, and content for the company intranet.
- Public Relations or Corporate Communications--writing for the media in order to create, adjust or maintain the company's public image. For example, those TV ads that show Phillip Morris doing all those nice socially helpful things would be (hideous) examples of corporate image adjustment; they're not trying to sell you cigarettes, they just want you to stop hating Phillip Morris. That's an unfortunate example, because "good" organizations, too, engage in this type of activity all the time. Even nonprofits have images to maintain.
- Internal communication--writing for internal audiences about work-related stuff. This includes all the everyday stuff such as memos, emails, and technical and progress reports, as well as more important and less frequently written documents like performance reviews, policies, procedures, etc.
- According to this categorization, Bob and Kevin fall into category 1, Sarah is in category 4, and I don't know where Wendy is (Wendy, can you help me?).
Anyway, what have I missed here? Would the speakers agree with my categorization, or would they (please) change my categories?
Paula Foster
WRK4US list manager
Response from Kevin Walzer
I have another post in the queue that talks about some of this stuff in more depth, but I'd say I do all four types; I'm asked to help prepare presentations, newsletters, and memos for employees (internal customers) as well as for external customers. I suspect the same is true for most companies. Some small firms specialize in employee communications and benefit communications (I have worked for a company that used such an outside firm for its benefits information) because of the highly regulated nature of employee law, but I think a company would have to be pretty huge to have a separate department for employee/internal communications.
Response from Bob Batchelor:
In response to Paula's query. I do and have done all four types of writing as well. I'd say that the majority of items I write fall into the internal communications and employee communications.
Like most other large corporations, Bank of America has a main intranet site that is run similar to an online newspaper. There are several new stories posted each day, as well as links to important work resources, like retirement sites, etc.
Also, since I focus on particular divisions within the organization, I write for their individual intranet sites as well.
In the past, I'd say that I did more public relations-type pieces, such as news releases, media pitches, etc. Often, I would help a media specialist craft the pitch and then they would take it directly to a reporter or group of reporters.
Thanks,
Bob
Response from Sarah James:
Actually, I do quite a lot of different types writing, but my current job is to guide and support large interdisciplinary teams who write marketing applications. I'm basically a scientific and technical writing coach.
My last job within the organization was writing publications, so I still have a lot of that work as well.
What I basically write right now includes:
- How-to manuals for assembling large complex documents on interdisciplinary teams. The manuals themselves can be highly technical, but I did write one on effective employee mentoring as well.
- Authoring support information, or materials designed to help senior scientific staff develop their arguments for presentation in documents to be presented outside the company (primarily to government agencies like the FDA). I use these when I go in and prep authoring teams on how to start and develop their documents.
- Guidances for following the requirements established by different international agencies for specific document types (either smaller reports or larger summary documents). These are related to 1 and 2, but outline the specific requirements established elsewhere. The authors are supposed to refer to these when they write their documents.
- Scientific abstracts and papers.
- Flow diagrams and process improvements for document development and assembly. A large part of writing in the pharmaceutical industry has to do with creating systems that are compatible with various electronic interfaces. I'm on a number of subteams that deal with these issues.
I have also written:
- Technical guidances for the use of electronic authoring tools.
- Documents submitted to international agencies for marketing.
- Documents designed to explain characteristics of different drug products to prescribing physicians.
Response from Wendy Waters:
Hi everyone,
Back to Paula's question earlier about the types of corporate writing. My work doesn't fit neatly into any one of Paula's four categories. I don't do employee or internal communications. My writing work is a blend of "Corporate Communications" and "Marketing Communications". Here are some examples:
I write copy for brochures; these are typically technical pieces talking about the square footage and amenities of a building for sale or lease with perhaps a few details about the economic potential of the area, neighboring businesses, demographic information, etc. Right now I"m working with our Tenant Advisory Group and an outside marketing firm on a promotional piece. My role is to help get the wording just right, and to help manage the process (which is a lot like herding cats).
I write or assist with business proposals. These have characteristics of marketing pieces, but are also technical, and usually quite long, although large sections might be tables of information, photos of comparable buildings, and other materials that are not "written."
I'll work on detail packages about a particular product or project, which involves similar writing and research work as a proposal.
Producing regular reports on particular markets: Overviews of the Industrial space market place, office market vacancy reports and the investment review. These involve written analysis with lots of charts and graphs. In hiring me, the intention is to increase the amount of different, original analysis.
Writing press releases will probably start next month (the company is sending me to a media relations and press-release writing course).
I should add that almost all of this writing also involves layout and design work. And, because my title is, officially, Research Director, I'm often finding and assembling and designing large complex charts of information from interest rate trends and unemployment figures to information about the age, income and spending habits of residents in a particular community.
My role is to "communicate" information in the best way possible. This might be as text, or it might be a chart.
I hope this helps
My apologies for not answering too many questions today. I'm swamped.
Wendy
Question from F.B.:
Sorry if this has already been covered...but could someone talk about what qualifies as...or what is really meant...by "technical" writing?
Thanks very much,
F.B.
Response from Wendy Waters:
Hi F.B. and everyone!
From my experience "technical writing" can mean one of two things. In the computer and software world, it usually means writing product documentation and user manuals. When I mentioned interviewing for technical writing positions, that was what I meant. In the non-computer world, it refers to writing reports or other pieces about technical subject matter (maybe someone else here can fill it in a little more). I've even heard business and industry journalism-style writing referred to as "technical writing."
On the subject of different meanings, I'll add that the term "project manager" or the task "project management" also has an IT meaning -- managing computer programers or software development -- and a non-IT one, managing the tasks needed to complete a particular job.
Knowledge Management, as someone discussed earlier, also tends to have two different meanings.
Be aware of these when you're applying for jobs in different industries. When I first started applying for post-academic jobs, I had no idea that project manager had different meanings and probably looked foolish applying for some positions. More recently, I switched the wording in my resume and cover letter from "Project Management Skills" to "Time and Task Management Skills" if I was applying to a software company.
Wendy
Comment from Paula Foster:
FYI, regarding technical writing, I plan to re-address that particular type of writing in another panel next year, and it was addressed in the first Guest Speaker Discussion ever, back in May of 2000. Those interested in technical writing can get additional information by reading that discussion on the WRK4US website: www.woodrow.org/phd/wrk4us/.
That doesn't mean we can't talk about it now as well. I just wanted to point out that previous discussion as a resource, and say that more info is coming within the next year or so.
Paula Foster
WRK4US list manager
Thanks from F.B.:
Thanks so much, Wendy and all other contributors...especially our 'experts'...this is all very helpful discussion...even the little tensions...help clarify...if we can bear with...
F.B.
From Paula Foster:
I have to second what Kevin said about there being genuine intellectual complexity in business. It's been a year now since I have started creating my consulting practice, and let me tell you, my mind has never been so challenged as it has been in doing just the type of thinking that Kevin described: figuring out how to define my mission and what core service I offer, how that mission should translate into specific services, what perceptions my potential clients already have about the types of problems I can solve for them, what problems I CAN solve for them, how best to represent my business visually and textually, etc. A business mentor of mine calls this "nichecraft" (great word!).
To me, as a Rhetoric and Composition person, the process of nichecraft is almost exactly the same as crafting a piece of expository prose. What is my thesis? How can I support it? How will my audience react? I experience just the same anxieties and burdens of representation as I did when I was doing qualitative research on workplace literacies. Also, nichecraft is, like writing, a highly recursive process. You make one set of decisions, then you have some new experiences and new insights, and suddenly you have to rewrite half of your website. Change one thing, and you have to change ten others, to bring it all into a state of harmony once again. It was exactly like this when I was writing my qualitative dissertation: making one thing consistent with another, making sure that the thesis accurately reflects the evidence, weeding out personal bias, etc. Exactly the same.
The only difference between crafting a business and crafting a big complicated research text are, (a) a business is more than just a text, and (b) the stakes are much higher for me now than they were for my academic writings (like, will I have an income this year or not?). In those senses, nichecraft is actually *harder* than academic writing. I have reflected many times in the past year that I am just as intellectually challenged now, if not more so, than I was in the halls of academe.
My .02 on the complexity issue. I think complexity is everywhere--and is readily apparent to people who are predisposed to think that way.
Your Loving List Manager,
Paula Foster
From Sarah James:
At least to those who are so educated.
I have to sign off now. If anyone on the list has specific questions about scientific or medical writing, please contact me off-list.
From Kevin Walzer:
I've enjoyed the discussion this week and hope it's been informative to those of you considering careers in business writing, or Writing for Corporations. What's important to remember is that as a humanities Ph.D., you already have the writing, research and project management skills to be successful in this career. It's a matter of convincing business employers of this fact, and then learning the specifics of the business you've entered as you begin to apply your formidable communications skills. It isn't an easy process--it involves both opening yourself up to the idea of working in business and opening the minds of some skeptical business executives--but it's definitely something that can be done. I have too many friends who now work in business communications to believe otherwise. Good luck to everyone and feel free to contact me off-list if you have additional questions.
From Wendy Waters:
Thanks to my fellow panelists and the members of Wrk4us for a thought provoking week.
I'd like to echo Kevin's parting remarks. If you have a humanities or social science Ph.D you have proven experience in many skills highly valued in the corporate environment. Not only do you have writing, research and project management skills, but also the ability to make public presentations; to read and quickly summarize information; to find the key points in a large document, and think creatively about all sorts of problems. Have confidence in these abilities along with your ability to learn and adapt.
Getting a Ph.D. is tough. It requires tenacity, hard work, intelligence and creativity and the development of brain cells you never knew existed. With that experience behind you, you can do anything.
If you have any additional questions or comments, feel free to e-mail me off list
( waters@global-horizons.com ).
Have a nice weekend everyone!
Wendy
From Bob Batchelor:
Thank you all for participating in the online panel this week. I'd particularly like to thank my fellow speakers: Kevin, Wendy, and Sarah. I've learned a great deal from their thoughtful answers and opinions.
It's been fun reflecting on my career and attempting to dole out a bit of useful advice. I appreciate the forum and the time everyone has taken out of busy schedules to participate.
Good luck in your pursuits and please feel free to drop me a line if you'd like to talk more or share your experiences. Several members already have and I'm glad they did. I also look forward to joining in future WRK4US (or WRK$US, as I always mis-key it) discussions.
Thanks,
Bob
Final Thanks from P.E.:
Thanks to all the panelists for a week filled with information and perspective!! It's been very, very helpful.
P.E.