Hosted by Paula Foster Chambers
Edited by: Nicole Asaro
February 2005
Page 1 of 3
The following Guest Speaker Discussion originally took place on WRK4US in February, 2005. Because WRK4US has a confidentiality policy, all names and email addresses have been altered or removed, except for the moderator's and 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 Nicole Asaro 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 Chambers, WRK4US List Manager, at pfchambers@sbcglobal.net
A. Overview of the Process
B. Where to Start?
C. Job Search Mistakes
D. Financial Support While Searching?
A. Academia: Distanced from the �Real World�?
B. Feeling Comfortable with Leaving Academia
C. Is it a One-way Street Out of Academia?
D. On Not Finishing the Degree Program
E. Mentors
F. Is Academic Experience Transferable?
G. Coherent Career Paths
H. Open-minded Corporations
I. Corporate Advancement
A. Appropriateness of Academic Titles
B. Cover Letters
C. Resumes
D. Starting from Scratch
E. Counting Experience
F. "3 to 5 Years Experience Required"
G. Irrelevant Experience
H. Self-employment Resumes
I. Overqualified
J. Salary Histories
K. Job Placement Companies
L. Networking
A. Chemistry or Qualifications?
B. Informational Interviews
C. Fake Interviews
D. Attire Advice
A. Academic Administration
B. Cognitive Neuroscience / Cognitive Psychology
C. International Government Organizations
D. Social Work and Policy
E. Volunteering for Nonprofits
F. Nonprofit Administration
I. Introductions
Greetings Everyone,
It's very good to see the depth of experience and all the solid advice posted recently. And, the recent discussion of non-academic jobs fits so very well into this week's focused topic! I hope that at least some of my experiences are useful to at least some of you. Here's what may be an overly-long introduction, but it may supply that grain of salt to take, should I lose control and start giving advice.
Looking over my chronological resume in preparation for writing this intro to myself, I can see at least 20 different jobs, and more, if I were to count each contract as a different job, even with the same employer. Most of the early jobs were contracts, grant-dependent or fixed-term agreements, like teaching for Continuing Education while I was still in grad school, but having different courses each term on one or two of three different campuses. So, some of you might say that it took me a while to find my right work. And I used to agree with that, but in my dotage (at nearly 59), I've come to have a different perspective, and it has made all the difference.
My name is Kate Duttro (long u and accent on the o) and my current title is Career Services Coordinator in the School of Marine Affairs at the University of Washington Seattle. I've been in this position about a year, and I work exclusively with S.M.A. grad students and the alumni. I chose half-time work so I can write my book on career portfolios, do the projects that feed my soul, and have a life in a land beyond work. (If I have a chance for deathbed regrets, I don't want it to be that I was too busy to do what I really wanted to.)
My background starts on a little farm in Pennsylvania, where there was not a lot of emphasis on academic learning. I did manage to get to college at Penn State, where I discovered a kind of Paradise, with so many kinds of learning to taste. After about 2 years of some financial help from my folks, I was on my own and, scratching and scraping, managed to finish Latin American Studies and Anthropology degrees on schedule, even with a year's adventure away, inventing my own study-abroad experience that included a bus trip around the US, summer school in Mexico and then a job in San Francisco in the late 60s. (As I re-read this, it sounds a bit boastful, as a recital of how hard it was, but I don't remember it as taking any effort. I was so in my element that I remember it as a dream-like adventure, a bit like what we all secretly want the perfect job to be.)
When I graduated, grad school in anthropology (still at Penn State) was simply an extension of that view of Paradise, and I started as a grad assistant in their local archaeological field school. Thence to teaching for Continuing Ed to support my addiction to classes, more field work in PA, then Guatemala, Peru and Bolivia, and eventually I was told to pack my bags and go finish the dissertation when my first husband, also anthropologist, got The Job, at James Madison U. in Virginia (After a combined 20 years, we counted ourselves the oldest living grad students at Penn State.)
At JMU, I did short-term work again, mostly contract archaeology and summer field schools, started a sheep farm, finished the degree, and was able to step into my husband's job when he went off for a 1-year post-doc in Peru - a tough year with 60 ewes to lamb out, three courses in physical anthropology that I hadn't taught before, and the usual committees and politics - you know the drill.
When husband didn't return to JMU, or me (post-doc continuation and then job in Alabama), I applied for what had become my own position - and didn't get it, despite doing a good job. (They hired a new Ph.D. from an Ivy League school, who probably fit the department better than I, but I wasn't ready to admit it at the time.) After more than 40 applications (plenty for 1979) and getting a zilch return, I realized that something was wrong with the picture but I had no idea what to do about it - other than selling the sheep (and the goats, the horse, the cow, the geese....) and later, the farm.
Eventually, after a few months on unemployment (and I still remember the mixture of horror, guilt and relief when I cashed that first check - but I forced myself to get used to it), I found jobs back at Penn State to keep my newly independent self going - a 6-month contract, a 13-month contract, a semi-reliable renewable contract for a couple of years. Then my new husband, who lived 140 miles away, was in an accident and I had to give up that job, move in with him and start over. Another tough year (but no sheep that time). We survived and I learned enough about freelancing that I could support myself. Also, husband went back to work at his original company (something to be said for small, paternalistic companies who can value employees with a successful history and continuing potential). I continued freelancing and when we decided to move to Washington state, I continued writing/editing until I realized that I unintentionally had become a social hermit (having done most of my interviewing by telephone) and needed to do something different again.
I assumed (as I see so many students assuming still) that I'd need another degree to do anything else, but I discovered certificate programs, took several, and here I am. Obviously, the full story is more complex, but you' re probably tired of this by now and the recent past is not easy to describe briefly, as it's harder to separate the details from the main course of events, as above. That's also where the details will come out naturally in reply to questions, because it wasn't until one of those certificate programs that I discovered my own answers, and some of them might be useful to you. I hope so (and I promise not to say too much more about the sheep).
cheers, Kate
Greetings all! My name is Cathy Wasserman and I'm very pleased to be a speaker this week in the discussion on the Non-Academic Job Search Process! I am a career coach, organizational development consultant and artist. I also write the monthly "Ask Cathy" career coaching column for the Idealist website.
It's been a long and winding path for me professionally. Although I now coach lots of folks in writing their resumes and cover letters, when I graduated from college almost 15 years ago, I didn't even have a resume! Indeed, I left school without a clue as to what I wanted to do. However, I quickly found myself immersed in the worlds of activism and writing. I worked as a professional community organizer for the National Organization for Women and wrote for the feminist magazine, Sojourner . The early 90's were a particularly exciting time to be an idealistic feminist looking to contribute to major social shifts and my work for both organizations gave me a real first-hand view of how grassroots nonprofits work, and--don't work. After a few years, I decided to shift to youth development and became a youth worker, and then a program office for the Massachusetts National and Community Service Commission. In these capacities, I got additional experience in seeing how a federally funded organization functions well--and doesn't always function so well! A last note on all of my early professional experiences, I became connected to all three jobs first as a volunteer and can't recommend highly enough volunteering even a few hours a week for an organization that really excites you. By volunteering you build relationships, knowledge and gain the opportunity to contribute to something that matters to you- a winning combination!
After working to make sweeping social changes for 6 years, I decide to shift gears and go back to graduate school in clinical social work so that I could increase my skills in assisting individuals to make shifts in their own lives. I've never regretted my decision to get an MSW, however, I will tell you that I realized on my second day of graduate school that I did not want to be a social worker! Luckily for me, social work is an incredibly broad degree that is applicable to many fields. Having said that, it took me a good year to figure out exactly where I wanted to apply my degree. I tried my hand at a couple of businesses, including a therapy practice, which never fully came to life. I didn't realize at the time that my business "failures," along with the deep process of discerning where my talents would be best put to use would end up serving me and others very well! By the end of my first year out of school, I had a eureka: I wanted to apply the breadth of my experience before and during graduate school to working with organizations, both as systems and in coaching staff.
I dabbled in independent consulting until I was hired by the Support Center for Nonprofit Management. The incredible part of getting this job was that I never actually applied for it! In fact, I had just called to see if they offered a certificate in organizational development because I had thought my social work degree might not be sufficient to get a job in the field. (It turned out, I was quite wrong!) I spoke with someone who asked me to send her my resume so she could make some recommendations on where I might send an application. About a month later, I got a call from the Executive Director who had seen my resume and thought I might be the perfect fit for a new position there. Long story short, I ended up working at the Support Center for three years, running their customized and on-site training program and doing a good deal of training, consulting and coaching.
Through the Support Center, I got connected to Action Without Borders (which runs www.idealist.org) and began to do career coaching, drawing heavily on my own job search experience. I left the Support Center about a year ago to focus even more on transformational career and life coaching with individuals and organizations. So, it's really true that I have lived the job search process that I teach my clients! I think that's part of what makes me so passionate about assisting people in finding work that's meaningful for them: I know first-hand the power that doing truly meaningful work can have on someone's life. While there are lots of concrete steps about how to enter the nonprofit job market I am happy to share with you over the next week, I believe that the most important part of the search is identifying work that will make you feel alive and really excited about what you're doing and about the contribution you're trying to make. If something you're thinking about doing ! doesn't make you feel that way, then it's probably not the best work for you.
Okay, now that you know a little bit about my background and work experience, please feel free to ask me any questions about the job search process and transitioning from academia into the nonprofit sector as you would like!
Best wishes! Cathy
Dear Subscribers:
This is an interesting and highly effective way to talk with a large number of people about important topics, and I'm pleased and excited to be part of it for the first time.
Our topic this week is "The Non-Academic Job Search Process," and as we start, I'd like to give you some background on myself. My name is Riall Nolan (the 'Riall' is Gaelic, rhymes with 'smile' and is unusual even in Ireland). I'm 61, I'm a social anthropologist, and although I'm American, I have a Ph.D. (D.Phil., actually) from Sussex University in England. How that happened is a story in itself.
Today, I'm the Dean of International Programs at Purdue University. But for years, after getting my doctorate in 1975, I lived and worked overseas, not as an academic, but as a development project designer and project manager. I worked for large development agencies, consulting firms, NGOs, and a couple of national governments. I lived for years in Papua New Guinea, Senegal, Tunisia and Sri Lanka, before coming back to the US in 1984 and taking a university job.
I had always been much more interested in applying my anthropology in the field, rather than teaching it to graduate students. And when I entered academic life, I found that many students (and not just in anthropology) were very interested in non-academic careers, but unsure of how to proceed, or even unsure as to whether this was the right path for them.
I give workshops several times a year on non-academic careers, and wrote a book in 2003 called Anthropology in Practice: Building a Career Outside the Academy, which was intended for graduate students, to help them make sense of their career possibilities.
A lot of what I had to say in the book would be directly relevant to any graduate student, not just anthropologists. And so I look forward to hearing your questions and concerns, and to responding as best I can on the basis of my own experience.
Here's a thought or two at the outset: in my experience, people with graduate degrees (M.A.s and Ph.D.s) who start considering non-academic employment suffer from two handicaps, both easily overcome. One is an uncertainty about what they really know how to do. The other is a lack of confidence in approaching the world outside the academy. In both respects, as Doctor Spock reminded us so many years ago, you know more than you think you do.
I'm looking forward to our discussion.
Riall Nolan
Hello Fellow Strugglers,
When Paula asked me to be on the panel this week, I had to think about it. After all, my job which you will hear about in a second is in an academic environment, but is not actually what I would call an academic job. Likewise, I had a ten year career as an honest-to-goodness academic. Yes indeed, I was a college professor. After thinking about it for a while, I decided that since my job largely consists of helping Ph.D.s at my institution find non-academic employment, it made sense that I share this with as many folks as possible. So here I am.
The roots of my career are actually in the humanities. I hold two undergraduate degrees...one in English and one in Philosophy from the University of Mississippi. I did a short stint in the insurance industry between the two degrees. After completing the second BA, I accepted a fellowship to study theology at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley. I had at least a mild interest in the Episcopal priesthood, but really thought that I wanted to teach in a seminary or graduate school. At the urging of classmates who had taken a year long internship, I spent a year in a parish in Southern California. It became increasingly apparent to me that I enjoyed the pastoral end of parish work (i.e. Counseling) so I took a leave of absence. After working in a residential counseling program for two years, I returned to school to get a degree in counseling. While there, I found I had more than a mere facility for both counseling and teaching. Two of my professors gave me research opportunities and encouraged me to go on to get a Ph.D.
I had gotten married shortly before I started grad school, so this became a matter of discussion. My wife and I decided that if I was going to do it, the best way to do it was to pursue a traditional Ph.D. in a research institution as opposed to a non-traditional "professional program." I enrolled in the Ph.D. program in Counseling Psychology at USC and the race was on. Counseling psychology is an odd discipline in that many students come from practitioner backgrounds and hope to be in practitioner positions after school. While the faculty are very aware of this, it is clear that students seeking teaching positions are favored above the others. It was very clear that the faculty hoped that everyone would seek and be accepted in academic positions.
My career as a student included numerous assistantships, research groups, presentation, and a decent publication. I was on college and divisional committees and had the ear of one of the deans (who was on my committee). I was even given an instructorship before I graduated...the only one in the college at the time. Still, I sought a position in student affairs. My internship (required in counseling psychology) had been in counseling centers in both a university and a community college. I had worked in learning centers, disabled students offices, and...of course, the career center. Still, I when I hit the job market, I was perceived of as an academic. On the advice of one of my mentors (the training director of the counseling center), I applied for teaching positions as well. I got virtually no interviews for counseling, but got multiple offers to teach. Thus, ten years of teaching counseling and career counseling in masters programs in California and Alabama.
Three years ago, I was teaching in a private university in Orange County, when we got a new provost. He decided that four graduate programs were not in keeping with the mission of the university. At the top of the list was my M.A. in Career Counseling. I was given two and half years to finish a "teach out" of the program. While I was offered two other assignments, I decided that it was time to finally pursue that student services position that I had looked for ten years earlier. I will spare further details and just say that I remained patient, made friends, built my network, schmoozed, and VOILA! My current job is as the Coordinator of Graduate Student Professional Services at the University of California Riverside. At some places, I am know as "the Ph.D. Counselor." Although I do a bit more than that, I also manage the administrative staff who run the Letters of Reference File Service and I coordinate programming for students enrolled in the teaching credential program.
I have a pretty broad portfolio. My director gives me the freedom to engage on and off campus in ways that provide creative challenges and professional growth. I provide training for human resources and other units on campus. I have provided workshops for local schools, an NSF conference, community colleges, etc. But, what I do most often...and what I really like the best....is working with Ph.D. students who are seeking careers outside of the Academy. To date, I have been a part of students journeys that have included jobs in large pharmaceutical companies, several federal agencies, a historical commission in NY, and an arts foundation in Southern California to mention a few.
In order to give you a chance to ask questions, I am going to close with what I think is my sagest advice. Cast a wide net when thinking about a career. By this, I do not mean apply for everything that you see. Rather, I mean think broadly about your skills. Teaching skills are used by corporate trainers, human resources specialist, public service officers at parks, museums, and foundations. Research skills are used by policy staff members in government, grants writers, and reporters. Writing skills, communication skills, organizational skills, and budget skills are used in a variety of venues. But, to make it all work, you have to see yourself as the accumulation of all of these skill sets...not as a failed academic. Life is far too short to spend it in regret.
Happy hunting...I hope that I can be of assistance. Darryl Stevens
A. Overview of the Process
Paula Foster Chambers:
Since some people on this list have never applied for a nonacademic job before, and also since I would like to refine my own understanding, let me go over how I see the basic steps of a nonacademic job search and see if the speakers agree that this is basically the process.
Step 1: Write a basic resume. I say "basic" because you will want to customize this document for each application, but still, having a baseline resume will give you the building blocks to do that.
Step 2: Find the openings. Most often, when you have no personal contacts, you find job postings online by cruising certain websites. Monster.com is one of the best-known and has thousands of job postings in all industries nationwide, but other website also exist, some of which focus on specific fields, industries or professions. For example, those seeking jobs in the nonprofit sector would go to Idealist.com (nationally), Craig's List (locally), and others for that purpose. Most of these sites are keyword-driven, meaning you enter information about what you want and run a search. You will want to do multiple searches with multiple search terms to get closer and closer to what you want. If you don't know what you want, do multiple searches just to see what's out there.
Step 3: Select the Ones to Apply to. Maybe there's only one that seems remotely interesting, in which case you can skip this step, or maybe there are seventeen. If there are a lot, select the three or four most interesting ones and proceed from there. You can't do them all at once.
Step 4: Research the Organizations. Any application is MUCH more effective if you show that you actually know something about the organization. Visit their website, learn their mission or their product/service, and learn everything you can about how their organization is structured (what are the departments? who is in charge? etc.). Figure out to whom your position would report--sometimes it says this in the job posting, sometimes not. Get the name of that person either from the website or by simply placing a call to the main number and saying, "Hello. What is the name of your Director of [Whatever]?" Then Google that person to find out everything you can.
Step 5: Customize Your Resume for the Position. Write a specific objective statement at the top stating that your objective is to have THAT position in THAT organization. Edit your resume so that the right things for that particular position are emphasized. Resume writing is highly rhetorical--facts are not just facts, they are given meaning by the words and numbers we choose to describe them.
Step 6: Write a Customized Cover Letter. Do not use the same cover letter for every position. Write a highly customized letter for each one. Address it to the person to whom you will report--not to the HR drone you are supposed to address it to. Copy that person, of course, but target the letter and resume directly to the supervisor. Be sure to show your knowledge about the company and how your skills would benefit them.
Step 7: Send in the Application. Most submissions are done by email these days, but it doesn't hurt to send a paper copy as well.
Step 8: Forget about it! Some organizations won't respond at all. Others will say "Thanks but no thanks." A very few will call you in for an interview. This is why you should apply for more than one position at a time--to ratchet down the tension and suspense about any one position, in case they blow you off. Many of them will. You might want to start on the next application right away as a way of forgetting about the last one.
Step 9: Interview. When you are called, obviously be as flexible and accommodating as possible in your willingness to interview. Even if you don't want the job, go for the interview anyway, because you will meet new people, learn new things, and build your interviewing skills. Dress nicely, be polite to everyone, and never say anything negative about yourself. Even when they ask you what are your flaws, say something that's really a positive trait, like "Sometimes my standards are too high" or "sometimes I work too hard."
Step 10: Negotiate. If you receive an offer, remember, everything is negotiable! The moment when they have made you an offer and are waiting for your response is the moment when you have the most power. Ask for what you want and see how much of that you can get. Many things are negotiable other than just salary: flexible work hours, vacation time, personal days, overtime, bonuses, benefits, et cetera. Don't let this moment pass without sweetening your deal in some way.
Step 11: Decide and Jump! I can't tell you how to decide whether or not to accept an offer because that depends on so many things that only you will know. However, there is no shame whatsoever in turning down an offer that isn't right for you. You have not "tricked" them into anything and they have no reason to be angry with you. They will simply move on to their second choice candidate and that will be that.
Folks, is that about right?
Paula
Riall Nolan:
Yes, that's a pretty good description of the basic process. I'd add only one or two things.
It helps to know as much as possible about what kind of a career you might like to have, before you even start putting the resume together, even on a preliminary basis. There are plenty of guides out there to career planning, and in a later email, if anyone wants, I can get into it a bit more, but making some framing decisions in advance is very helpful.
It's also helpful to understand your skills and experience. Often, they're not adequately expressed in course descriptions or labels. Again, I can talk more later about how to analyze what you already know.
Finally, it is indeed a good idea to tailor-make your resume. Not necessarily for every job, but for the general category of jobs you're aiming for (back to framing decisions, see?). Because your resume is not really about you: it is about you in relation to someone else -- i.e., in an organization. The more you know about your target, the better your resume will be.
Riall
Paula Foster Chambers:
Yes indeed, Riall--very good point and I should have stated that I deliberately avoided that issue because it is so big and by the same token can be so daunting. I didn't want to say "figure out your mission in life" as Step One because then it sounds like one cannot begin the job search process before one knows. For many of us, saying "yes" to jobs and working through them is the way we discover what we want. That has certainly been true for me.
Paula
Cathy Wasserman:
I generally concur with your outline of the process, but have a few delineations I'd like to make. Although I very much agree that someone should not hold up their job search until they know exactly what they want to do, I think having as a good an idea as you can at any given time is, in fact, the place to start.
Begin by really thinking about what you like to do in a given day, rather than initially trying to package those activities into a particular title and job is a good place to start. I even recommend that people develop an ideal job description where they get very specific about what responsibilities they'd like to have, how much of the time they would like to do each part of the job, and even what kind of organization they would like to work in (Not just mission wise, but also culture wise. For example, do they want to work in an org. with a pretty informal culture, open door policy, with irregular meeting schedule, or do they need more structure?).
Write a basic resume and cover letter. It's good just to get started on the process early on by diving in and writing a basic resume and cover letter. The resume should have a balance between providing enough detail to give folks a real sense of you without being pedantic. If you can show impact, it's great to do so, without blowing things out of proportion. It should be easy to read and follow. The cover letter is really your chance to shine. You don't want it to be too wordy either, but you do want to let the organization know what excited you about them and as VG says, how you might be able to be a benefit (without coming across as pushy). It's great to let your authenticity shine through and not to be generic or formulaic. It's an art, but a great one to master!
Networking, informational interviews, researching organizations, browsing job sites, and sending in customized applications. Next, I think it's important to start building your network, which in my experience is the secret ingredient to success in the job search. I often recommend sending out a brief e-mail to your close contacts letting them know that you're interested in chatting with folks in a particular area and asking them if they know of anyone with whom you could speak. Additionally, attending association meetings and conferences in your area of interest can be really helpful. At the same time you can be applying to jobs and refining your cover letter and resume while you research orgs. through the web as well as through your network. Just a quick note, Idealist's website is Idealist.org not Idealist.com. I work there, so I'm clearly biased (!), but they have lots of great openings all across the sector all the time.
A second note, I'm not a fan of sending in applications to organizations where you have absolutely no contacts, although I think it's fine to do that at times. I think it's a better use of your time to build your network and "heat up" your contacts so that people you know connect you to open jobs or you connect yourself to the job directly through:
Volunteer. As I said in my intro, this is totally key in the nonprofit world. Even just spending a couple of hours a week at an organization that really jazzes you is well worth your time. Let them know what your skills are, but be open to do whatever they need.
Keep networking, researching organizations, sending in applications, and getting support. Finding a good job can take some time, so just keep at it!
Interview and send thank you notes. It's really important to do LOTS of prep for interviews. You don't want to come across as canned in any way, but you do want to know what your skills are and where you would like to grow. I know what VG is saying in not recommending that you fill your interviewer in on all of your challenges, but I've done hundreds of interviews and just presenting a strength as a challenge can come across as insincere if you don't really, really mean it. At the same time, you certainly don't want to give a laundry list of challenges. It's best to take an honest inventory of your challenges and then pick one that you've made great strides in and focus on how you develop yourself no matter where you are.
There are a lot of standard questions that you can anticipate and you should prepare answers for them, such as what specifically attracts you to the position, what are examples of how you've seen a project through from beginning to completion, how do you deal with conflict, stress, time management etc...
It's great to send an authentic thank you after an interview if you're still interested in the job. Other than that, it's not usually a great idea to call and check in, but there are always exceptions to that rule.
One last note, I'm totally with Paula on the negotiating piece. It is indeed when you have your greatest power and it really sets the tone (and salary range!) that you'll be working with. I really recommend that you have a clear number in your head and benefits that you're shooting for and just keep thinking about it- it's amazing how we often can get when we want without saying anything! At the same time, if you're offered a salary that feels too low, be very clear with yourself ahead of time of how low you'll go and still feel good about the job.
There are many, many more details to what I wrote to the above, but hope this helps!
Cathy
Kate Duttro:
This is a great start, but I do differ on a couple of items. I agree with Riall that it REALLY helps to know what you want to do before you start. But it does make a difference what age you are when you start. The younger you are, the more time you have (statistically speaking) to experiment and do that try this, try that approach that I've seen several of you on the list espouse. When you get a few years on, that experimenting gets old faster, and for some, it seems to be even more confusing because you have more skills and you know what a wide range of things you CAN do.
I still suggest that folks find out what they WANT to do, based on the patterns that they probably can discern in their past lives. (More on that if anyone wants to hear it.)
I agree with Riall also on the resume written for categories of work. Although I do suggest a "kitchen sink" resume, with everything you've ever done in it - that's the basic file where you start. It contains everything so you can draw from it whenever you are preparing a resume for one of the categories of work you want to do. When I say category, I mean something like Editorial Assistant at a publishing house. It sounds specific, but there are probably a hundred publishers who need editorial assistants and a resume prepared for one can probably be modified easily to send another.
I agree wholeheartedly with Riall's statement, "Because your resumeis not really about you: it is about you in relation to someone else -- ie, in an organization. The more you know about your target, the better your resume will be."
It fits in nicely with Paula's # 4, too.
I vary with Paula on # 8 also, in that forgetting about it may help your psyche, but it won't get you any more information. If you don't hear from in a few weeks, you can try to get feedback. is there anyone who might be able to tell me how I could improve my resume if another position comes up? Yes, it's risky, and we might be refused, but if that's the worst that can happen, why not risk it ? (If you do and fail, THEN forget it. You tried.) You also might win and get very important information on what you're doing/not doing that is keeping you from getting in the door.
cheers, Kate
Kate Duttro:
I have seen a number of references to deciding what you want to do before you go barging out into the non-academic work world. I fully support the statement, but how to do it remains a bit vague around the edges, despite some very good suggestions on the list. I recently completed my Master Training level in a process called "Dependable Strengths," and although I don't want to come off sounding as someone who thinks she has THE answer, I do think some of that process has an approach that can be helpful to many. (It was VERY useful to me as a serially-recycled anthropologist, and I have seen it produce very useful results for others.)
It is actually related to behavior-based interviewing techniques, which are widely used by professional recruiters in the business world (and we've not said much about interviewing in this discussion). I'll digress and mention that very small companies don't always use the same techniques as companies large enough to employ specialist recruiters.
In behavioral interviewing, the questions often start with, "Can you tell me about a time when...?" and you are expected to come up with an example from your life that gives clues as to how you would deal with certain situations in the future. It is assumed that it would give them information on your skills, abilities, knowledge and personal qualities. The questions are designed to give information on leadership, planning and organization, teamwork, integrity - and so on. It's based on the idea that our patterns of behavior are pretty stable, and our behavior in the future will be similar to our behavior in the past.
Likewise, the Dependable Strengths Articulation process, begins with a series of exercises designed to elicit relatively stable patterns of behavior that can be discerned over long periods of time, which often can be traced back to childhood. We begin with a collection of as many Good Experiences each individual can remember, going back as far as possible, and specifically including at least one Good Experience before the age of 10 (before 4th or 5th grade).
A Good Experience has three distinguishing features, all of which must be present for it to count as a Good Experience.
1) You enjoyed doing it.
2) You did it well.
3) You have a sense of pride or satisfaction in having done it or being involved in it.
There are some caveats. The enjoyment has to come from having DONE something or BEING involved in making or helping something to happen. You have to be part of the action. (For example, being invited and going to a party or game may have been very enjoyable, but it breaks down when you ask the next questions. What did you do well, in going to the party or game, and where is the pride of involvement? On the other hand, if you thoroughly enjoyed being part of a group that raised funding to send 5 disadvantaged youths to the game, and took an active role in making it happen, then you might count that experience as a Good Experience.)
The opposite caveat is in doing something that was excruciatingly hard (liking earning a Ph.D.?), but you are rightly proud of what you've accomplished. (However, if you didn't enjoy it, that wouldn't count as a Good Experience, either.) Another problem with major accomplishments like degrees and such is that they involve so many discrete activities spread over a long period of time, that it's hard to get down to the individual strengths involved. It is actually better to look at the parts of the degree-getting process. Look for shining points of pride - did you organize a particularly successful conference for grad students? did you write a (or several) really good paper (or several)? did you lose track of time when you were engrossed in library research? or spend weeks on getting a database just right? what was it that you were DOING?
While not exactly a caveat, we are most interested in the DOING as we look for strengths. Most of us are culturally programmed (Darryl might say socialized) to assume that careers have to do with interests - to the extent of neglecting activity. I think that we MUST incorporate the idea of DOING when we look at career satisfaction.
Two people with the same "interests" - even the same job title, may do vastly different work within the same interest area. I notice it especially with the grad students I work with at the School of Marine Affairs. Most come with science backgrounds, but our classes tend to be based on policy analysis and management of marine resources. (The range in jobs and the kind of work varies from managing major urban port facilities and transportation, to managing endangered species on a remote island, to developing policy that leads that management of said resources - and the range of activity within each of those work areas can be very different.) Even if we were to take two people who were happy at jobs with the same title and made them change places, they might not like the change. Also, many of us "grow" the jobs we get into, and we tend to grow them out into the areas we most enjoy doing, because we tend to take on activities that we see as enjoyable to us, and we tend to avoid volunteering for projects that sound tedious and boring to us - but which another person may find delightful to do.
Some of our students want to stay with the science side of things and are using the SM.A. degree to get a view of how legislation works, so they can be better-rounded scientists. Others love the political part of it and want to go influence legislation, including international law. Others want to do outreach and education at the direct-to-people level and others want to do international economic development in coastal areas. Still others want to manage port facilities and deal with security, environmental regulations and keeping the large-scale economics of the country running. And, all of these kinds of work come from the same degree - but the activities are wildly different, they occur in different contexts and they are based on different personal values and perceptions of how each individual wants to fit in.
I digress here because I see so many who assume that an advanced degree in one area means that you are tied to that area for life because the content of what you have learned is the main determinant of your career. I think that is not so, but it does make it necessary for each individual to find out what their own past activity patterns can tell them about their probable future satisfaction.
What makes the Dependable Strengths Articulation process different from most "assessments" is that the individual in question has to do the thinking and analysis nearly by himself or herself. It is not a question of putting some thoughts or information in to a machine and getting back a nice explanation of what one should do. (Although many of the better assessments don't do this either, they are often assumed to do that - Myers Briggs and the Strong in particular). I think we are too easily influenced by the mechanistic approach, that the results will "tell you what you should do for a career," or that they will tell you "what you are suited for." Horsefeathers.
After you have a list of at least a dozen Good Experiences, you need to write a paragraph or two on each, focusing on the activity, the question of what you DID to make that Good Experience happen, or to contribute actively to it. Be careful of covering too much with an innocent verb, like research, for example. What kind of research? Library research and face-to-face interviews are not only very different activities, they draw on very different skill bases, and different personality factors. And, those two are just examples of the variety of kinds of research - so try to get to the bottom of the activities with the verbs you use.
This is often the most difficult part of the process because, again, cultural learnings are ever ready to channel our thoughts. In the workshops, we have groups of four take turns telling each other about four of their Good Experiences (about 5 minutes per story), and the three listening are to write down the possible strengths they see in the speaker as they hear the Good Experience stories.
The STAR mnemonic is often helpful here, so the individual speaker explains the Situation of the Good Experience, the Task(s) they needed to do, the Actions they took and the Results they got. Listeners are allowed to ask "What" questions (What happened next...etc) but not "Why" questions. In these stories, the emphasis is on the Actions, and the speakers are encouraged to NOT try to analyze their experiences as they are speaking. (This is REALLY difficult for grad students, who have been trained, maybe even brainwashed, to analyze everything in sight - although I suspect that they were naturally analyzers before they started grad school, or maybe we could say that they were inclined to do that in the first place, because it may already BE one of their Dependable Strengths. - But, I'm getting ahead of myself - each individual has to prove their strengths as part of the process.)
This part (just described) of the process is very useful and can be done individually, although the group works much, much, much better. Why? I constantly see people who say, "Oh, that, I just do that" (coordinating registration details of a conference) or "Anyone could do that"(explaining the intricacies of transfer credits for community college students entering the University) or "Who would pay me to do that?" (caring for injured animals). The group works well because three strangers usually end up telling this individual that they have a strength, a gift, a natural inclination, or a skill to DO something, and that they themselves might pay someone to do it, rather than having to do it themselves. Sometimes (and I see this in grad students often, too), there is the feeling that if it's too easy, it isn't worth anything. Many are willing to give themselves accomplishment credit ONLY if whatever it was they did was DIFFICULT. We are programmed to look at our faults and our weaknesses and try to strengthen them, but we are seldom encouraged to find the positive inclinations we already possess and strengthen them - and yet that is usually the gift.
In our workshops, another exercise we use here is to go back and analyze the Good Experiences, using a list of 50-some commonly used work skills and personal qualities employers look for. Our participants have to go through every word on this list for at least ten of the Good Experiences they have described and prioritized. It is fairly demanding, but it means that every experience is mined for potential strengths. And, it is not a magic number of terms; the individuals can add any terms they think might apply to themselves, that are not on the list, and include the terms in the analysis. It is assumed that each individual knows him or herself best and has the final decision in their own assessment (unlike some of the categorizing assessment "tests").
Also, these items are not automatically part of that person's description; the idea of the list of terms is to bring up possibilities, so that if "persuasive" were to come up in eight of the ten Good Experiences, that person might want to examine the role of that term in their life. Perhaps, if they agreed that they have that quality, that they might want to look at careers that depended on that quality for success, or requires a great deal of it in the course of daily work. (Whereas, another person might find the need to be persuasive incredibly stressful if the need for that quality came up more than once a month!)
Another technique we use in the Dependable Strengths Articulation process involves "testing out" these potential strengths that individuals have found in the course of their self-analysis. In order to articulate their own strengths, they must have at least three good examples of times when they used or relied upon that potential strength, before it can be considered a Dependable Strength. Interestingly enough, those Good Experiences often show the way to more examples that can be used in job interviews, using the STAR mnemonic.
This is not usually a direct route, and it is hard for many to go to this depth of self-analysis (it's so much easier to take a test), but it often points the way to finding the kind of work one wants to do. From there, one can network to find the people who do that - not to ask for a job, but to get information on what it is, because it may be far removed from the content of one's academic training (but there probably is a relationship between activity and content). From there, one can be far more pro-active in pursuing the job market, because there is a general target. You are not waiting for a job to fall out of the sky (Internet job boards and newspapers), you are more efficiently able to do networking because it becomes a natural part of the search process - you know what you are searching for.
One more caveat. Dependable Strengths are not the same thing as skills. As a trained academic, I'm not willing to say that we are born with our Dependable Strengths, but they have been shown to be remarkably consistent over lifetimes, and most us can point to very early manifestations of them in our lives. We can learn skills, but Dependable Strengths are not quite so easy to enumerate.
I find that I have learned many skills that I use in service to some of my Dependable Strengths, but I don't want to make a career of some of the skills I have picked up. Just because I have a many skills from my agricultural background, doesn't mean that I put them on a resume, because someone might offer me money to do them - and that way leads no where I want to go.
(But I have seen many students tempted by the money they'd make in, programming, for example, when they don't actually like doing it - but someone told them that they should learn it, because they could always get job (ironic, isn't it), they do and put it on their resume, and some company snaps them up and by the time they realize they can't stand it, they have mortgages and car payments and twins on the way.) --Sorry, sometimes I get carried away.
So, I'm sorry to have gone on at such length, but this is REALLY important, to discover and be able to articulate your strengths. When you can articulate your value to those who can hire you, your job search is over.
Kate
Riall Nolan:
For what it's worth, I find this very interesting and potentially useful. When I recommended a day or two ago that people try to identify work experiences in the past that they'd really enjoyed, this is the kind of thing I had in mind.
Although Kate's description is much more detailed, interesting and useful than what I wrote.
Riall
Darryl Stevens:
I like what Riall and Kate have said about process and I would like to add a tidbit or two.
First, about "Objective Statements." I find it curious that so many resume books or examples of resumes include them. I have lunch regularly with the recruiters who come to our campus and have found that they pretty much ignore these statements. As one recruiter said, "I get so tired of reading 'Seeking challenging opportunity with top-notch company.' Just once I want to meet the person whose objective is 'Seeking low-key job with company that demands little and pays well'." I recommend that Objective be replaced by Qualifications and that this be a brief two or three line capsule summary of experience and skills, such as:
"Graduate-level art history major with significant research and administrative background. Well-versed in social science and humanities research and bibliographic methods. Attentive to details with experience in client service and instructional settings."
Or
"Former middle school teacher with master¹s degree in history with significant educational and organizational experience. Detail-oriented with good interpersonal skills and a variety of service experiences in educational and non-profit settings."
Or
"Graduate level applicant with extensive background in writing and significant experience in office settings. Strong organizational and communications skills with interviewing, job placement, filing, front office work, and text editing and production experience."
What each of these share is that they were written by folks who were leaving Ph.D. programs. I think that they focus the reader for the trip they are about to take through these resumes.
Second, as to skill identification. Several years ago, I was teaching a class and one very impertinent student asked, "What do you mean by skills?" I was actually at a loss for a definition that was meaningful. I really hate this kind of thing...you know, looking pompous and foolish. I don't mind BEING pompous and foolish...I just don't want it to be so danged apparent. In the ensuing fracas to salvage my ego, we came up with a model that I have used ever since. JOB>Tasks>Skills.
Every job is composed of a set of tasks which, in turn, are completed by the application of skills or sets of skills. When I use this model with undergraduates, they catch on directly. Because graduate students typically look blankly at me. I have always credited this to the fact that they have had the tar beaten out them long before they arrive in my office. The best model is that of Teaching Assistant.
Job = Teaching assistant
Task = Lecture
Skills =
1. Preparing concise explanations of complex, technical material for a novice audience.
2. Prioritizing and editing materials for relevance to learning objectives.
3. Public speaking
4. Creation of appropriate technological media to supplement and amplify lecture content in the form of computers, video, or audio
5. Handling emerging issues and questions raised by lecture or lesson content.
6. Managing time to assure that essential elements are appropriately covered.
7. Monitoring affective domain of class to encourage participation by students.
You see, this is only one task associated with the job of teaching assistant and it requires a minimum of 7 skills to complete. The rest of the task list probably includes: Maintaining office hours, grading papers and exams, meeting with faculty advisor, collaborating with other TA's, maintaining class records and posting grades, development of outside projects. While many skills with duplicate across tasks, I suggest that each task will have at least two unique skills. That means that as a TA, you have developed a minimum of 21 skills.
Do not sell yourself short. Your time in graduate school...whether you finish or not...has incubated dozens of fabulous skills.
Darryl
Cathy Wasserman:
Thanks Kate for bringing up the issue of process again! The Dependable Strengths process sounds very fruitful! I use a less formal approach with clients, which might be called a funneled inquiry process in that we start with more generally what they like and don't like to do and then methodically hone in on the specifics through a series of questions and activities, some of which I have already outlined, but below is a summary.
I begin by asking a rather obvious question, which often yields quite a bit of information: "What activities give you energy and what exactly is it about these activities that gives you energy?" Note, I'm not just asking about what jobs or even skills on the job give someone energy. Instead, I want to really uncover the vast array of the person's interests and skills, not just what they typically think of as professional skills. For example, although it may not be realistic (or even desired) for a variety of reasons for someone who is a sculptor to make their living from their art, it is possible to tease out elements from what they love about sculpting that can be applied to their larger professional skill set, and look for jobs that engage those skills and interests in some way. Along these lines, someone might respond to the above question by saying:
Cooking- particularly assembling rare ingredients from all over the world and hearing guests remark that the meal seems like it was made with great care and love
Then I would say: "Do you think you're good at this? Or do you have some objective evidence that you are? Have your efforts made some impact?"
It's very unlikely that someone says they have no skill in the activity because so often being good at something is part of what makes it fun. It's also very uncommon for folks to say that they've not observed any impact from what they've done. However, even if they answer no to all questions, we continue the inquiry process because much information can still be yielded in clarifying their skills and interests.
Next, I usually ask, "what elements need to be in place in order for you to feel energized by the activity?"
For example, someone might say: "I need to have people to cook for-I don't get very energized by cooking for myself and I need to have access to international ingredients."
We go through this process for every activity that gives them energy and then repeat it asking the opposite question: What activities drain you of energy? What about the activity specifically drains you? Are you good at these activities, even though they are draining? Do you make a positive impact even though they are draining? What elements are present when you feel drained? This is often very useful for people-sometimes they discover that activities that they're quite good at actually aren't enjoyable to them. Additionally, they may uncover that it's not the activity itself which is draining, but the context in which it occurs. For example one client I have is an events planner and it turned out she still really loved many aspects of event planning, but just couldn't stand working with vendors anymore. She had thought that it was event planning itself that she'd lost interest in. (And while working with vendors is a large part of event planning, we were able to find jobs ! where it's not necessary and she has remained in the field)
We then go through both lists-the list of activities that are energizing and why and the list of activities that are draining and why- and group activities. Next, we go through the groupings and note any patterns that we see. This can be quite telling because sometimes something quite close to an actual job emerges from the elements or sometimes what emerges is actually quite close to what someone is doing right now so the activity reconfirms a good fit with their work. Other times, we have to do more detective work. Lastly, we rank all the activities according to most and least energizing AND most and least good at and we compare the lists and develop a new ranking of activities where the individual is both most energized AND good at the activity. We then begin to start making the link between this list and their actual previous professional experience and the kinds of job titles that actually exist out there in jobsville, USA and see what we come up with. I've had exposure to many different kinds of jobs and so I'm often able to tease out the link between the list and actual existing jobs. Very often, we use what they've come up with to create a couple of ideal job descriptions that include:
The duties and responsibilities that they would like to have (possibly grouped into a couple or a few different areas)
A break down of what percentage of time they would like to spend on each responsibility
Their minimal and preferred salary (not pie in the sky, but the high end of what they can shoot for given the kind of field they're going for as well as their level of expertise)
A description of the kind of organization they would like to work for, including everything from the range of missions that they'd like to work on behalf of, the approximate staff size, what elements they would like to be present in the organization's culture and what elements don't work for them (I talked a lot about this in other posts, but to emphasize one last time, I am speaking about how people are connected to each other and the organization as a whole- everything from whether there is a casual or formal dress code, to the leadership style of the orgs.'s Executive Director, to the professional development policies of the organization. It may seem silly to think about these things, but I've found over many years that it's incredibly fruitful to do so. A person isn't likely to find an organization that has every single element they are looking for, but it is possible to find organizations with many of the elements and this contributes enormously to satisfaction, energy! , and sustainability on the job.)
We then go through all of the elements of the ideal job descriptions and note which pieces are deal breakers and where they have more flexibility.
After we complete this next step, we actually go through job descriptions and use the ideal job descriptions as a kind of litmus test. Again, it's not likely that a job exists out there that's a 100% fit with what they're looking for, but it is likely that there are jobs that are good, very good, or even great fits! The whole process from start to finish usually takes a few weeks, but I've seen folks do it in an abbreviated form in a few days and others take a few months as they really deeply explore each element.
I tailor each process to each client's needs, so we might spend more or less time on each part or even skip a particular part if they have a lot of clarity, and I might ask slightly different questions or change the order of what I'm asking, but given Kate's question, I wanted to give you a general sense.
Best! Cathy
Subscriber OS:
What if I can say "this is what I am good at, this is what I'm not good at, this is what energizes me, this is what makes me want to run in terror, here's how I see myself," but don't know what career field to look at that these aspects, combined with my skills, might be suitable for? My knowledge of the actual duties of various professions, beyond those I've done, are somewhat limited, and certain possibilities are constrained for other reasons (e.g., it can't involve traveling a lot, because I have family, and it can't involve leaving the country because I have extremely high-need corneas--there are, based on what I've been told, about seven people in California qualified to treat them, one at UCI, two at UCLA, one at USC, you get the idea). So then, how do I go about finding a career field that would use what I have and can do, if I don't know about it already? I could spend countless hours wandering through, say Craig's List (that took long enough each day when I was looking for a position in the field I've been in for years), but that doesn't seem like a practical option.
OS
Cathy Wasserman:
First, I wanted to say that it's great you have some initial clarity. I don't think it will be as hard as you might think to build on what you're already sure about!
I feel like the key for you now is to get exposure to a number of different fields so you can get a sense of what really jazzes you and also fits within your skill set. There are a number of different ways you can do this. To use an example, close to (my) home, Idealist.org hold career fair days all across the country. I'm going to one in Boston tomorrow in fact! They're a great opportunity to get exposed to tons of different nonprofits all at one time. You might also want to think about doing some short term volunteer opportunities where you commit to offering a month or so of your service so you can just get your feet wet and check out an org. and a field. Many nonprofits are open to help in any form and so would be open to having you! Once, you get a better sense of where you'd like you be, then it would be a good idea to make more of a substantial volunteer commitment to one or two orgs. It might also be ! helpful for you to work with a career coach (and I'm not saying that because I am one!). They could assist you in assessing, given your experience and background, what fields might be more or less suitable for you. Lastly, I would encourage you to continue to browse listings on craigslist or idealist, even though it is tedious- it is, indeed, a good way to get a sense of what orgs. are looking for.
I don't think the fact that you can't travel much will hamper you too much. It's not necessary for many jobs. You need not mention it until the second interview, when you have one.
Much luck to you! Cathy
Riall Nolan:
Offhand, I'd say you are well along in the process of defining a career. My bias -- as an anthropologist, we're probably all biased this way -- is to learn from people, not from lists, so I'd say the more networking and talking you can do, the more you'll learn.
I don't mean that internet lists are useless, they're not. But at the end of the day, people hire people. And people, not lists, inspire people. So if you're clear about what your skills, likes, and values are -- and you seem to be -- then network out, and let people know you are looking for meaningful employment.
The other thing you might do is take a battery of career aptitude tests. Other folks have indeed thought about what skills and aptitudes fit well with what careers, and for a price, they will help you. I did this many, many years ago, at the Stevens Institute in New Jersey. I was in high school, and for two days I filled in forms, took tests, and talked to people. I didn't do this because I wanted to, or needed to -- my mom was a psychologist, and set it up for me to see what would happen. I saw it as a weekend on my own in New York, glanced at the results, and didn't give them a second thought for nearly thirty years. I dug out the two-page report the psychologists did for me a few years ago, and my hair stood on end (what's left of it), because in an eerie way, they actually predicted very accurately what I'd probably be good at. Who knows? Might work for you.
Riall
Subscriber OS:
Thanks, Riall, for the suggestion. There are probably better assessment instruments, but I remember vividly taking an assessment back in high school that showed us the groups or roles we most thought like (a measure of thinking or values, I guess, as opposed to skills). The second highest was "science teacher." I could sort of figure that one out because at the time I planned on becoming a biochemist. I've never understood, however, the first highest, which said that I think most like a "Female P.E. teacher." I don't know what that might indicate, but obviously I can't be one of those. I know nothing about female PE teachers, but I'd never want to be like any male P.E. teacher I had. I've never believed in causing suffering for sufferings' sake!
OS
Darryl Stevens:
I assume that I am going to step on toes with this one, but that has seldom stopped me before. Let me also add the following...assessment and measurement were cognate areas in my Ph.D. and I taught assessment and CAREER assessment during my teaching career. I think, perhaps erroneously, that I am something of an expert in this area. My chief concern about assessment is that it is often used as a "fix" for people who are very confused about their career goals or (worse) for people who say "I don't know what I would be good at," or (worst) "I spent the last 7 years getting a Ph.D. in art history and I don't want to do that now." There is no assessment instrument or battery out there that will help in such cases. At best, career inventories can validate ideas that we have about ourselves. In some cases, they will point to the source of dissatisfaction when a person who enjoys concrete, outdoor activities has chained his/herself to a desk in a sociology Ph.D. program. (In which case, I might say, "Have you considered exploring the lives of migrant workers?")
This leads me to the MBTI. I personally feel that it is the most questionable assessment instrument on the market today. It has been used to the point of absurdity for everything from measuring "learning style" to "supervisory emphasis" to "psychological type." It was developed to measure psychological type, so if it has any use that would be it. However, one must actually believe that TYPE exists in order to want to measure it. I, for one, do not believe that Type is a valid construct. The fact is that if one consults the research in the area of assessment and personality, he or she will find that I am not alone in this area...in fact, I think that the discovery will be that most researchers debunk the notion of Type. True believers get very offended about this and the test publishers are horrified...but they need not be, for there seem to be hordes of proselytes willing to accept their designation as ENTP or ISFJ.
I have found most often that devices such as card sorts or simulation games or shadowing helps folks focus on where they will be most comfortable in the world of work. An empathic, reflective ear is likely to be the best assessment instrument that we can find.
Darryl
Subscriber BE:
Thanks for your time. A couple questions: First, what would you say are the most frequent mistakes people make when seeking post-academic work? (Or perhaps in Cathy's role, mistakes made in making a significant career direction change).
Second, does it get easier after the first non-academic job to find subsequent ones? When I was first seeking non-academic work in 1999, someone (maybe on this list) said that once you've done the transition, finding a subsequent job gets increasingly easier each time. Certainly in my case ,convincing potential employers that I am an effective research & communications specialist in the private sector was easier once I'd done it even at a more entry level than the positions for which I was applying.
BE
Darryl Stevens:
Personally, I believe that it is going too far a field from their academic discipline. By this I mean, with a background in comparative literature, it is probably a stretch to go straight to a marketing job in the high tech industry. A more logical route might be to think in terms of doing outreach for a literacy foundation (Del Norte County Public Library in Crescent City, CA currently has such a position open) to development work for a non-profit organization (The Center for Democracy and Technology in Washington, DC has such a position open) to a Community Affairs Manager job in a big tech company (Microsoft's NYC and Waltham, MA offices both currently have such positions open.) This leads to a second, but collateral mistake, which is not understanding career "arc." Having focused only on one type of job, teaching, they have never stopped to see that career is a series of jobs strung together by a coherent path or arc.
Second, does it get easier after the first non-academic job to find subsequent ones?
I am afraid that the world of work is fairly difficult. Finding a second job is not likely to be easier, but you are more likely to be better able to deal with the rigors of rejection and hopelessness.
Darryl
Cathy Wasserman:
I think one of the biggest mistake is in focusing on what you don't have to offer because you're background is in another sector rather than the bounty of what you do have to offer. I've done lots of coaching in particular of folks moving from the corporate sector into the nonprofit sector and most of the time my clients pour a lot of energy into what they are missing. The reality is that they and you bring a unique and valuable perspective and set of skills to the nonprofit world and savvy recruiters will understand that if YOU help them to. That means just what Riall was talking about- translating your skills clearly using the language of the nonprofits sector so that recruiters can see clearly what benefit you will bring. In order to master the art of translation you have to learn the language and culture of the np sector. There are lots of different ways to do that. For example, reading books and journals on the sector, networking with nonprofits groups, taking a short course or two at a management support organization (These are orgs. that provide training to folks in the np sector. You can take a three or six hour course on, say budgeting, and learn lots!), doing informational interviews, and volunteering. Volunteering, in particular, will give you the inside scoop on what goes on in the sector.
Yes, it does get easier after you've already applied for jobs within the sector- there is no doubt about that at all! You'll have more actual experience in the sector and a much easier time of translating your skills.
Best of luck! Cathy
Riall Nolan:
Mistakes? I see lots of people who don't fully inventory their skills before they go out there. This either leads them to think they're qualified for jobs that they really aren't equipped (yet) for, or it takes them in the opposite direction, of thinking they're not qualified to do something that they really can do.
Does it get easier? I don't think so, except in the sense that a lot of the mystery and anxiety wears off. But if you have a "career arc" with some development to it, then as you go after better and better jobs, you're competing with better and better people. So in that sense it never gets easier. On the other hand, you get smarter, more experienced, and more skilled with every job.
It just doesn't SEEM to get easier, does it?
Riall
Kate Duttro:
I'm not sure that ignorance of information that would help is a mistake, unless one does nothing to change it by neglecting to find said information and just complaining that it can't be done. I do see a great reliance on stereotypes - "they" being employers and relying on advice about "them" from friends or acting on what "everyone says" without bothering to check that statement for accuracy. Most of you are trained to analyze and research, and yet I have heard some of the most outrageous generalizations made about "them" (employers, as if they are all exactly the same). I see intelligent researchers slavishly following advice about resumes that would have been perfect for their parents' generation, as they totally ignore the college career services center. And, I have seen confident post-docs and researchers reduced to abject terror at the thought of calling a person in an organization for whom the researcher has sent an application, to get some simple information on what to expect in an interview. Most of these are mistakes of omission, or neglecting to get adequate, appropriate information.
I think there is another area of "mistake" in false assumptions. In assuming that a hiring manager of a non-academic organization can see an applicant's skills and abilities from a chronological resume that merely gives brief job descriptions, especially if the jobs have been academic and the terminology and skills are not "translated" for the hiring manager. This kind of wishful thinking is not common just to academics, however, that I have seen equally among undergrads.
Does it get easier after the first non-academic job to find subsequent ones?
IF one has learned in the process of getting that first job, what has helped to make it work, yes, it does get easier. If one stays in the same field, and develops good working relationships with a broad range of people, yes, it gets easier. If one does good work enthusiastically and becomes a valued part of the field, and enough other folks know it, yes, it can be easier. No guarantees, but yes, it can be easier.
cheers, Kate
Subscriber VG:
I will receive my Ph.D. in Art and Archaeology in May, and I am now on the market for museum jobs. I have just been interviewed for one job that I would love, but I want to keep my options open in case I don't get it or funding falls through.
Is there anything wrong with applying for two related jobs at the same institution? In my case, one position is an entry-level post-doctoral fellowship, and the other is a curatorial position at the Assistant or Associate level. (Both are in the same field of art at the same museum.) I have held a number of curatorial internships and related positions, and I feel that I am qualified for the curatorial position at the Assistant level. However, I probably have a better chance of getting the post-doctoral fellowship. Would it detract from my application for the more senior position if I apply for the fellowship as well? Should I write something in my cover letter to explain my decision to apply for both? I am fairly certain that the same people will initially review the applications.
VG
Cathy Wasserman:
My experience in the nonprofit world is that it's not looked upon very well to do this. Recruiters may feel you're not really clear on what you want to do or you're not really in love with their particular opening. My gut response is to just go for the assistant position unless you're totally in love with the fellowship, but I hesitate to fully advise you without knowing the details and specifics of your situation!
Best! Cathy
Subscriber NQ:
Here's an interesting one that just landed in my inbox. I wrote an email yesterday chasing up an application. Today I get 2 emails - one from someone in HR saying adios amigo, the other from someone else saying we're still interested and we'll let you know in March! Any ideas for an appropriate response?!
NQ
Riall Nolan:
Well, it could be an illustration of something I mentioned the other day, which is that HR people are gatekeepers, your resume often doesn't fare too well with them, and it's a good idea to reach out to others in the organization. So I don't know who the "someone else" is or where they are on the organization chart, but don't worry about HR, follow up with the other one as if nothing had happened, see where you go. Your experience is frustrating, but perhaps not all that unusual. It's happened to me twice.
Riall
D. Financial Support While Searching?
Subscriber CH:
Can you help with some suggestions about how to search for a job but support yourself while doing so? Are there good---or at least better---ways you can combine the need for a paycheck with the opportunity to learn about, apply for and get a "real" job?
I lost my health insurance, went into debt etc. when I was searching for a job. I have a very strong fear that this will happen again and I'd like to be better prepared and more savvy next time. And I know that lots of people on this list talk about the need to support themselves, to have health insurance and so on so I am guessing that this might be a universal concern...but how do you combine those needs with the search for a good job-especially since searching for a good job can sometimes be a full-time occupation?
CH
Riall Nolan:
It's true that job-hunting takes time, and most of all energy, but it shouldn't be a full-time occupation. Think of it instead as a second, part-time job. Try to work smart instead of hard.
There are lots of things to help you these days: the Internet, for one. Email can be sent, received, and pondered on at all hours. The Web can be searched whenever you have a few moments. You can do quite good informational interviews on the phone, with a little practice. You can combine activities to make things count twice --if you have to go to a meeting or conference in another city, for example, take advantage of being there to check out some organizations.
Above all, network, and get other people working on your behalf. If you create a good professional network, and let them know what sorts of opportunities you're looking for, they can be your eyes and ears even while you're doing your day job.
Riall
Cathy Wasserman:
I very much agree with everything that Riall said and particularly that optimally you set up a network that can do, at least, some of the work for you! But setting one up takes time and energy and even if you have one, the job search is, at least, a part time job and often more than that. I often recommend to people to consider getting what is sometimes called a "B" job- that is, a job that may not be perfect, but gives you health insurance or whatever other bare minimums that you need, while you continue along in your search. It's not ideal, but it can help give you a little bit of freedom to find work that's a really great fit: often doing that takes some time, but is always well worth it!
Cathy
Kate Duttro:
Again, I agree with Riall, that job searching should not be full-time, especially if you find part-time work. I agree also with Cathy, who I think said that the "B" job can give you the basics while you continue looking for the right work.
Don't assume that part-time work never includes insurance. At my university, even half-time jobs carry full insurance options. And that's one reason I'm still there. I like the time it gives me for projects, but it would be fine for looking for full-time work, too. I think that you need the time for doing all the things, for example, that you mentioned you're doing to pursue your interest in public relations. If you had a part-time job that paid the basics, you could volunteer for one of the professional associations (like PRSA, or Women in Communication, or whatever fit your interests best) and thereby get to know the folks who do that kind of work. That leads naturally to the relationships that allow you to do your best, and them to recognize your contributions and abilities. That's so often how you find out about jobs that haven't been advertised yet (and that is MUCH more common than assumed).
cheers, Kate
Kate Duttro:
This is an obvious one and you've probably thought of it, but it is to find that "B" job or (part-time work) as close as possible to what you want (as in that field, or company, or that kind of organization), so that you have a chance to see what other people are doing in that field, and more important, so they have a chance to see you, and to get an impression of your abilities and qualities. (And that's the kind of networking I've already heard you talk about being able to do.)
Or, another way to do it is to try for part-time work in the "B" field and then volunteer, intern or work part-time in the "A" field, again, to have a chance to become known as a competent, willing and able contributor to the field or endeavor.
Those are just generalizations, and I know how hard it is to use general advice, but it all comes back to opening up the black box of what "they" want. If you don't know what they want, how can you clearly show that you have what matches that?
I think I'm getting punchy - don't believe a word I say.
cheers, Kate
II. Academia vs. Other CareersA. Academia: Distant from the "Real World"?
Darryl Stevens:
There are basic socialization processes that one acquires only in the day-to-day working world. Over time, graduate students become so distanced from these social processes that they begin to fear them and demonize them. They are referred to as being 'In The Real World.' The Real World is a derisive comment, not an ontological postulate.
Darryl
Riall Nolan:
I just wanted to say how much I agreed with Darryl's comment on how graduate school puts distance between students and daily reality. That's useful for some things, but in excess, it can be very limiting. Folks who spend too long in graduate school and then return to the so-called real world often have to be de-programmed to an extent. Whereas, if they stay in academia, they never have to do that. Anthropologists warn us against the dangers of "naive realism," which is the belief that the way you see the world is the way the world really is. Folks who work outside the academy very quickly, I find, learn to deal with diversity, stress and ambiguity in ways their academic colleagues may not appreciate.
Riall
Subscriber DL:
I just want to pick up on this point of distance from the real world. Speaking from experience, I think that academia and especially our mentors/advisors train us to believe that there is only route after the Ph.D. I was lucky, it took time, but my advisor supported my decision to go into administration. When I was in Graduate School, I saw an ad that the Career Center was holding a talk on nonacademic jobs - it was bad enough that it was not advertised to our entire graduate student list serve as say a one year position at the University of XXX, but could you imagine my surprise when I was the only one to show up in the entire university? My question to the panelists who advise graduate students: do you find that your students are hiding from their committee members when seeking this alternative route, fearful of being branded (for lack of a better word), a traitor?
DL
Riall Nolan:
I can only speak for anthropology students, but yes, a discouraging number of them have told me during our workshops that they don't feel that they can talk about non-academic options with their advisors. One of them -- a doctoral student -- commented that if her department knew of her interest in work outside the academy, they would essentially shut down on her.
That said, there are other of my anthropology colleagues who ARE supportive. It's just that it's a political minefield at many schools, and students need to choose whom they talk to carefully.
Riall
Kate Duttro:
I am ashamed to say that I have seen students with that same fear (of being branded traitors) here and at two other academic institutions. On the other hand, it was not across the board, but once in a while, in just a few departments.
Part of it may be coming from the possessiveness with which some faculty see their stable of students (who, after all, feed into their glory and power), but also because the faculty sometimes are trying to do their best by their students, and assume in the process, 1) that they know exactly how it should be done and 2) that there is only one way to do it.
I have had students who have mentioned their relief that one of the main university computer labs is in the same building as the career center, so they didn't have to worry so much about being seen going out of the building. If you find yourself in that situation, do consider looking for help at the career center of your institution.
Kate
B. Feeling Comfortable with Leaving Academia
Subscriber HG:
When did you feel good or at least comfortable with your decision to leave academe? I think a lot of us were forced to leave after we couldn't find teaching jobs; or after we realized that academe clashed with a fundamental value. So, how did you handle the emotional impact of "the switch," especially if you felt *forced* to switch? How did you get through the tough times? Was there any particular moment(s) that made it clear you made the right choice to leave academe?
HG
Riall Nolan:
I'm not a particularly good person to ask about this, since I didn't "switch" in the sense you mean. I went the other way.
I was determined to take my degree in anthropology and work in the field of international development, and I had not the least notion of taking an academic job. But as luck would have it, with money running out and a dissertation half-completed, I took the first job that came along (well, actually the second) and it turned out to be an academic one.
Had I waited a few more months, I probably would have found a development job, as I'd intended, but I thought what the heck, being an assistant professor for a while won't kill me. And the fact that the job was in Papua New Guinea made it development work of a sort anyway.
So I did the job, and actually liked it, but after four years, I wanted to get back on track. My wife was doing consulting work for an international firm, they mentioned that they needed a project manager in Tunisia, and she gave them my name.
I see lots of graduate students in mild agony over whether to give up their dreams of academia, and although I can sympathize, I can't really identify. I mean, I can understand why someone might like to teach, or might like to do research, or might like to be paid to write, but what it takes these days to get and hold a tenure-track job is daunting. And I think, for a lot of the folks I see, they haven't really given it a lot of conscious thought, they just fell into a pattern of thinking that they were going to go to graduate school, and then, well, then they'd get a tenure-track job. And they never really put the statistics together, the ones that say, for anthropology (my field) that only about 40 - 50% of the Ph.D.s in a given cohort get academic jobs. They don't think much about the fact that their discipline -- and anthropology is particularly guilty here -- doesn't do much of anything to address the needs of folks who don't want academic jobs.
And so there's a kind of panic that sets in as graduation draws near, where folks realize how tough it is to get inside the academy's walls, and how little preparation they have for life outside the walls. I know this doesn't describe every grad student, but believe me, I've seen dozens of 'em just like this. They can't talk with their advisors about their non-academic options, because that would be seen as selling out, going over to the dark side, etc. They have tons of highly usable skills, but they've been trained to think very narrowly about those skills, and they often find it hard to imagine that they can actually be put to use outside the university.
Often, they'll take a non-academic job because they can't find an academic one, and that I can identify closely with, because as I explained above, I did that too, only the other way around -- I took an academic job only because I couldn't find a non-academic one.
But the difference, as I think about it, is that unlike a lot of the grad students that I've advised, I didn't have to rework my self-concept to make the "switch." In that, I was probably fortunate, because I think that is the hardest part of that transition for many people, giving up a particular notion of yourself and your future, and substituting for it an open-ended, self-reliant, unbounded, and sometimes a little scary vision of the future. I think that many fine people choose to become academics, but I'm particularly impressed by the bravery and resourcefulness of those who choose the other path, at whatever stage of life, because they are true pioneers, and we don't hear enough of their stories.
One place -- to finish this up -- that you can hear their stories is in the pages of the Chronicle of Higher Education, (www.chronicle.com) which has a very comprehensive and thoughtful series of articles on job-hunting, including quite a few articles on moving out of the academy into the world. Look in their archives section, as the articles go back for several years.
Riall
Kate Duttro:
I'd like to second Riall on this reply - excellent points, and I'll just add that there are also similar stories and advice to be found on Science's Next Wave website, although it is available only to those in institutions that have a subscription.
Kate
Subscriber WI:
Riall, I've really enjoyed your posts because 1) I am a Purdue grad and 2) my major was in anthropology/sociology. When I started my freshman year of college I didn't declare a major, I was officially "undecided". I knew it would probably be in the humanities or social sciences. I picked sociology and anthropology as my major cause I loves the classes and found the subject matter so interesting. I thought to myself I have to pick something that interests me and that I enjoy, otherwise I won't do the work. I didn't really think about how these fields would translate into a job until my senior yr.
I started to really freak out my senior yr trying to figure out what I was going to do after I graduated. This was in 1992 and the economy wasn't that great. I thought about law school, researched it a little bit but found that I didn't have the drive to complete law school, it wasn't what I really wanted. What I really wanted to do was get my masters, then Ph.D. in anthro. I had figured it out that anthro was pretty much an academic career. I think my ideas of academia were of what I saw from my professors, that they maybe taught 2-3 courses a semester, held office hours 3 hours a wk and the rest of that time was for them to pursue their own interests. Well to make a long story short, I did awful on the GRE and was becoming scared that if I got advanced degrees, I still might not be able to find a job. I stayed in Lafayette, IN and worked at a retail shop and lived in a tiny efficiency apartment and tried to figure out what to do next.
So I went to library school and got my masters in library science. I thought my skills and interests fit well with the profession. And I was pretty sure that when I got done with the library science program, I could find a job. And it's been true, since 1995 when I graduated I haven't had trouble finding a job. Currently I work as a researcher/librarian for the Illinois General Assembly researching various public policy issues.
WI
Subscriber RO:
I am a doctoral candidate in Political Science from Indiana University. I have a finished dissertation and a defense date for July (the only reason the defense isn't tomorrow is that my committee and I are in 3 different countries and scheduling has been difficult). My focus has been twofold. One is democratization politics in Central and Eastern Europe and the other is methodology (I am the stats guy). This past year, instead of spending my last year of graduate school in Indiana, I decided to move to Germany to work as a research team leader at a research institute. I think of it as an �academic halfway house�, which has enabled me to try out a half-n-half position (no teaching, lots of research, although the projects are in conjunction with the University of Mannheim Department of Political Sociology).
This brings me to my first question. I like this work environment and am interested in returning to the states (for a number of different reasons) to work at a similar research center. The networking and, as What Color is Your Parachute suggests, the going door to door, are difficult from here. I plan to return in the summer not only to defend but to move to a job (which gives me about 5-6 months from now). I feel as though by being here in Germany, I am 'out of the loop' and others may see it as a hassle to get in touch with me, etc. What are the best ways to assuage the concerns of employers that hiring me is no more difficult than someone down the street? Or maybe even before that, is this a problem that I should concern myself with?
RO
Riall Nolan:
Both good questions. It's definitely harder to get a job in the US when you're living outside the US. I know, because I've had to do it on several occasions.
It's easier now than it used to be, if that's any comfort. Telephoning is much cheaper today, faxes work well, the Internet and email are wonderful, and in some places you can videoconference very economically. So all of that is working for you.
Your overseas experience is also working for you, of course. Language, context, solid work experience, all very good.
Despite all that, it's still more difficult, and as I explained to someone in an earlier email, when I came back after nearly twenty years spent overseas, I took a job because it was there, not because it was my ideal job. Two years later, I moved to my ideal job. I saw it this way -- living overseas was like being on a wonderful merry-go-round, fun and exciting and all that, but jumping off took nerve, and it was hard to calculate precisely where you'd wind up if you jumped. So I picked a spot, and jumped, and when I'd dusted myself off and had a look around, I was ready to jump again. No job experience is ever wasted, as long as you know what to do with it.
Good luck. Sounds exciting.
Riall
Kate Duttro:
I definitely agree with Riall on this one and I really like the image of the merry-go-round and the return from overseas. Good advice on the talk with the advisor too.
Several of us have mentioned the Next Wave website of AAAS's Science mag. I have seen articles dealing with much of what you describe in terms of getting an advisor's support, moving from one country to another, and working in not-quite-pure academics - and making transitions. Try it for some good ideas and background.
If you really want to be working back in the US, don't wait to start contacting others until you get here and don't worry about how others might find it a hassle to get in touch. You could be reading that situation incorrectly, so try it. If you don't, you'll never know. A colleague once said that anyone can refuse to help someone else, but if you don't ask (or do the contacting), you'll never know if they would have helped - here's her advice. "Always make them say no."
Best wishes,
Kate
Cathy Wasserman:
As others have said, it is certainly tougher to run a job search from another continent and even another state! I believe one of the keys to doing so as effectively as is possible, is to schedule a couple of visits over the next 5-6 months, if at all possible. Although this will likely be logistically challenging and also not cheap (!), I'd say, in the long-run, it will be well worth it. You can let prospective employers know right in your cover letter that you have a couple of trips planned and would be available to meet with them to further explore the possibility of working with them. Additionally, visiting will allow you to do some face-to-face networking. Your trips will be most fruitful if you can get as focused and clear about what you want to do and where you want to do it as possible right now!
Much good luck! Cathy
Subscriber ZA:
A large part of my motivation for finishing my degree was the fear of being branded with the mark of Cain--"What, you spent X years working on a degree and didn't finish? LOSER!" Rather than arrogance, using the Ph.D. can be a defensive mechanism. Those TEN years (as it finally turned out) were not in vain!
ZA
Kate Duttro:
You're right about that fear and using it as a defense mechanism, but doesn't it also mean that continuing with the degree was at least bearable and (I would hope) somewhat interesting to you!?
It's one thing to be developing other interests while you're in grad school, and wondering about life "outside," but it's something else if being in grad school is a total drag (finances, health, family) and a series of stressful events when you have no idea of what is next. I wondered about it too, and I probably did have some of that need to "finish," drilled into me because of social pressures, but I also really liked being in grad school. (I still consider it one of my favorite "careers.") And, that made "finishing" more of an anticlimax, rather than being the primary goal. But, for some, the balance weighs heavier on the negatives (that they are experiencing in their lives at that time), and for those, the value of "finishing" may not be nearly as important as getting out of a bad situation as quickly as possible. Ah, RB, your next post just came through, and you make a REALLY good point here, where you say. "My question for you would be, "Can you think of a dissertation topic that interests you enough IN AND OF ITSELF to put in the effort?" If not, I don't think you will be able to keep up the momentum. It would be like being married to someone just because you are supposed to be married." I think that not being excited about a dissertation topic can make everything else you have to do twice as hard, because the pressures are external to you. Sometimes that makes you come face to face with the question of who's running your life anyhow. When you WANT to explore the dissertation topic, the pressures forcing you onward are internal, and you ARE in charge. THAT may be the important point for making that kind of a decision.
Basalla gets at that, too, in her book So What Are You Going To Do With That?
Kate
C. Is it a One-way Street Out of Academia?
Subscriber RC:
I am in the humanities, in foreign languages, going on the job market this year. I have been very successful and already have job offers. However, part of me has always wondered if teaching and research is the right path for me and I've explored other things on the way. I may leave academia in few years but I would like to opportunity to come back -- how do you think this would be perceived? Can I use my "real world" experience as a strength in order to come back to teach at the university level? Or will it be perceived in a negative light? Once I hit the road, will I be told to "come back no more, no more? Your opinions and experiences are very much appreciated.
RC
Subscriber KL:
What do you all think of the idea that the transition from academic to non-academic work is a one way street? In Education, I know there are people with substantial professional experience who get their Ph.D.s later in life and become academics. I often find these people have exciting research programs and are excellent teachers. I don't know many cases outside of Education though and I don't know of anyone who left academia after their degrees and came back. Is life really so great after academia that nobody wants to come back or do the doors shut behind you?
KL
Riall Nolan:
Interesting question. Now you know someone who did come back -- me!
I was newly married, writing my dissertation and ran out of money in a foreign country. Flee forward, I thought, and took a job as an assistant professor at the brand-new University of Papua New Guinea. I left four years later and went into non-academic work in international development, where I'd wanted to be all along. Did that for a number of years and came back to the university, where I have remained ever since.
What made it possible for me to do that was the fact that I had the Ph.D., had continued to publish, and looked for academic jobs focused on applied and development anthropology. To get back in, however, I had to take a job that was not my ideal, in a location that was not my ideal, and then jump off to a better job and a better place several years later.
It is difficult, but not impossible. I agree that there's a lot more movement in the other direction.
Riall
Kate Duttro:
In what sense one way? If you mean, can you return into exactly the same place you left and just go on from there? I'm not so sure anyone would want to, but it's not very likely.
If you mean, can you leave academics and ever expect to come back, I'd have to say that I've seen examples a number of times, but they generally have developed some expertise outside that is valued inside. It may be more likely in writing, art and business, where I have seen it happen more than once, and of course, we've all seen it happen with fading and retiring politicians. (Of course, they've always been strange bedfellows.)
You may be closer to the answer when you say "Is life really so great after academia that nobody wants to come back" than mentioning the door closing. But it all depends on what you have that they want. You might expect to hear the door shut if you go back to the truck farm in Alabama. However, if you also develop an organic and sustainable farm that feeds thousands and professors are beating the path to your door, you can expect to be invited back to talk about it, maybe even to teach. If you become Secretary of Education or State or even Interior, chances are that some university or college will want you. I think it's a market-driven process like any other. What's it worth to you?
cheers, Kate
Darryl Stevens:
I think that you all must remember that my training is as a behavioral scientist. I am typically quite suspicious of "anecdotal evidence." Any assertions on this topic would be anecdotal at best.
I have a friend who, after completing his Ph.D. in Economics, worked as a labor analyst for the Feds for 8 years and then as an economist for a large national union for another 4 years. He did little in the way of research or publishing during this time. Twelve years after completing his degree, he returned to a rather large state university and has since obtained tenure. His contacts in government and organized labor have provided his students with jobs, internships, and valuable "real world knowledge." I am also aware of Music Ph.D. who "took off" for three years to work as a music critic for a large daily newspaper. He in addition to his journalistic work, he published two books during this time and was a principal in a small civic orchestra. He has not been able to find more than part-time positions in the 15 years since he decided to return to academe.
I wish that I could tell you the difference between the two. I will say this. The economist is a friend of mine. He is someone whose company I enjoy. He has exceptional people skills and the ability to make everyone seem like his best friend. The musician I have known just as long. I refer to him as an acquaintance, primarily because he is difficult to be around and seems to have a way of annoying anyone within earshot. You tell me why one got a faculty job and the other didn't.
Darryl
D. On Not Finishing the Degree Program
Subscriber QX:
My question has to do with applying for non-academic jobs while in the middle of a Ph.D. program.
I am contemplating (actually seriously leaning towards) dropping my Ph.D. pursuits after 2-3 years of post-M.A. study. Were I to continue in my program, after another one or two courses my near-term activities would be dominated by preparation for candidacy exams and a diss proposal.
My story is that while my present discipline (archaeology) is fine, that's all it is, fine. In addition, I have lost an interest in pursuing an archaeological career after grad school, so my logic is: why finish? Sure, it would not only be psychologically great to finish, but I would also undoubtedly take away all sorts of learned experiences from pushing through the final stages. However, it would also be a disservice to both myself and my committee if I half-assed it all the way through the next 2-3 years. What's more, my interests in modern phenomena -- international relations, government, socioeconomic stuff is what has been really blowing my hair back during the last year or two. I do not want to delay entering these fields, especially on the order of 2-3 years until I graduate. So, my goal is to find work in government or think-tanks related to my area of expertise, east Asia.
I would welcome any advice on how I should handle my period of Ph.D. education on a cover letter & resume. I want to try to soften the "I Quit" of it all. Also, I wonder if anyone can provide feedback concerning some doubts/concerns that HR or other folks considering me for a position might have regarding someone who left a Ph.D. program after 2-3 years. Anticipation allows for preparation, and so I am hoping some of you out there will help me anticipate.
Perhaps, one of the first red flags to come up is what the heck is an archaeologist doing looking for an international relations position? Well, I have always been much more of an anthropologist than an archaeologist, and have been vigorous in using modern anthropological studies, theories, and methods in my archaeological pursuits. Furthermore, my BA and M.A. are both in anthro. Plus, I have east Asian language skills and I have dipped into numerous cognate fields throughout my course and field work (sociology, urban planning, history, public policy, political theory). Well, perhaps this not all together a screaming endorsement. However, just as previous participants on the list discussed the circuitous, but in hindsight logical, route through which their careers developed, this could be my 'thread'. My anthropological pursuits led me to be interested in modern policy issues, social concerns, cultural differences and this will (hopefully) lead to employment in foreign policy, government, etc.
Any advice addressing my questions above would be welcomed. And one more thing. While I will obviously emphasize my anthropological work in correspondence and interviews, archaeology will come up. Other than telling the truth, any advice to be given on how to handle this?
QX
Darryl Stevens:
Let me get this straight. Are you saying that if my recommendation is to tell the truth, you don't want to hear that? Does this mean that you will only entertain very creative prevarications as candidates for how to handle your situation? Very intriguing.
I am not sure what to tell you. If I were hiring someone who gave me a bunch of double talk about their history as a graduate student, I would likely not consider them. I do not always know what someone is lying about, but I do often get a sense that they are trying to keep me from discovering something.
Remember that fewer than 2% of the people in the US have Ph.D.'s. The question is seldom why did you decide not to complete an obscure and esoteric degree, rather it is more often...what on earth were you thinking when you decided that a Ph.D. was a good career move.
Aside from that, I can't imagine why people in public service or government settings would look beyond your Asian language skills and ask stupid questions about your decision to start a career sooner as opposed to later.
Darryl
Subscriber QX:
Darryl, quite to the contrary, I meant that other than suggesting I tell the truth, which I of course would do, could anyone provide additional advice which could make the fact the I quit the Ph.D. program go over more smoothly.
Of course, the "truth" is that I found my self in an archy Ph.D. program but that my interests were developing elsewhere.
QX
Darryl Stevens:
Which portrays you as a candid, flexible individual who is willing to take risks. Both risks in exploring possibilities and the risk of changing when the potential of those explorations have been fully mined.
These are traits that I admire and value. You should be proud that you have broadened the scope of your life and not fear others assessment.
Darryl
Subscriber NQ:
"The question is seldom why did you decide not to complete an obscure and esoteric degree, rather it is more often...what on earth were you thinking when you decided that a Ph.D. was a good career move."
Would "the decision was right but the program not good" be an acceptable answer? Might sound a bit negative surely?
NQ
Darryl Stevens:
Actually, I believe that any answer would be acceptable...as long as it is true.
Early in my career, I was a marriage and family therapist. I would often hear one or both members of a dissolving marriage say, "Getting married was the biggest mistake I ever made." I always tried to get them to see that the mistake was not getting married, but having had an overly idealistic vision of what married life would be. It was very clear sometimes that the best decision a couple could make was to dissolve their relationship. That did not mean that they had failed or made a mistake or anything of that sort. What it meant was that as they grew, one or both of them lacked the emotional resources or personal commitment or shared vision to stay involved. Don't get me wrong...some folks make a real mess of their relationships and pile up one bad decision and mistake after another. Usually, they simmer in the bad situation for years before someone gets the courage to say, "Enough."
I would have to say that about half of the couples that I saw ended up staying together, not because I was a great counselor, but because at a very critical point they both invested energy in exploring ways to make things work. Considering the fact that I never saw "happy couples," only couples in crisis, I think that a 50/50 rate is pretty good.
Such is also the case with students that I see who are considering leaving their program. I think that a good many of them stay because they believe that leaving is admitting that they made a mistake, not that they have grown or changed or simply lost interest.
I have an unfinished Master of Divinity Degree wandering around the streets of Berkeley. I think about it from time to time, but I just see it as another part of my career arc, not a failure or a mistake.
Darryl
Subscriber ZD:
I find myself in a relatively similar situation: after I finished the coursework for my Ph.D., I was lucky to land a job in university administration. The prospect of juggling both research and a full-time job was daunting - and I had the feeling that I would be forced to pick one at the expense of the other or do a crappy job in both places. So, I started looking for shortcuts: were there any connections that I could make between my new job and a research area that I could pursue? Was there any point were they merged? I wasn't ready to quit (but I was also sick of living on a student stipend): having spent so many years on something that I did and still do enjoy (research) - I was not ready to just let it go. So I decided to finish - at a slower pace and trying to merge my job with more theoretical work...
ZD
Subscriber GI:
I faced the same decision a couple of years back and decided to go through with the Ph.D. (in archaeology as well). Even if I don't follow an academic career I don't regard graduate studies as a waste of time. As many people (also on this list) point out repeatedly, what you get out of this is not only academic specialization, but a whole range of skills (not to forget life experience). While I cannot really give you any advice on whether to drop out or not, I wouldn't necessarily go into a job search (if that's what you decide to do) with the mindset that the past years were a complete waste of time. Think about it and you might be seeing some really useful experiences you've had. I know that interviewers don't necessarily see it that way- but then it doesn't really seem that you consider quitting because you don't have the *ability* to go through with it. Regarding your CV, can't you get an M.A. when you leave the program? It would be your second, but still- this might make it a little easier to explain. You can still say that you were contemplating the Ph.D. but felt the urge for change after you reached the M.A. level. So, if you didn't regard your graduate studies as useless (and believe me, I know how it can often seem that way), you won't "quit" but "change", which is also easier to sell.
GI
Kate Duttro:
My background is similar, in that I was part way through a doctoral program in anthropology (and about to write a master's thesis) when I was offered a collection of artifacts to analyze (potsherds that had been dug several years previously). It conflicted with my big picture way of thinking and I felt trapped in learning increasingly more about increasingly less. One of my colleagues found herself in a similar position in psychology (at Harvard, I might add).
She remained ABD and I finished my doctorate, but we both worked together happily for several years, and our careers have progressed satisfactorily in different directions, both up to that point and afterwards.
I know that it seems like a large problem to you at this point, but I do think that time will modify that perception, as it has for both my colleague and myself. Your decision will have to be yours in any case, but I would suggest that you not worry about what other people think. You must be able to justify the change to yourself first. If you know it is the right decision for you, then go with it and get on with your life. In the US (and you'll recognize this as a cultural value), your career should be based more on what you think than on what others think.
I also agree with Darryl's estimation of "what people think" about going for an arcane degree in the first place.
"The question is seldom why did you decide not to complete an obscure and esoteric degree, rather it is more often...what on earth were you thinking when you decided that a Ph.D. was a good career move."
And I like GI's point, "Even if I don't follow an academic career I don't regard graduate studies as a waste of time. As many people (also on this list) point out repeatedly, what you get out of this is not only academic specialization, but a whole range of skills (not to forget life experience)."
For me, I "use" what I learned in grad school practically every day, when I'm trying to understand where someone is coming from, who has a different point of view from mine. And, I too, am a generalist by nature, and nearly all academic disciplines require thorough focus on specific knowledge areas, so that one becomes a specialist. In the US, our reward system (another cultural value) is based on specialization. (In hard sciences and tech fields, the reward is monetary and in humanities and social sciences, the reward is more likely to be status - yes, I'm generalizing pretty wildly here). But, I have heard many, many grad students with this same dilemma, because they see no reward for the generalists in academics. Having not seen the non-academic world, they see themselves as "not being able to DO anything," when in fact, it may be those very skills of analysis, evaluation, and the ability to juggle many pieces of information from many different places, and to see the patterns that specialists may not be able to see, that makes them valuable.
The difficulty is that they (the grad students with these skills) have to perceive these skills and their value, and to find places where they are valued. Thus, the responsibility falls on you, to go out and find your place - because those looking to fill positions do not have time to act as career counselors. You have to be able to show them how your skills and abilities will fit their job and their organization. But, as a trained researcher, you can find out. It is a different kind of research, so you will have to find out how to do it. At your school's career center, at the library, at the bookstore, and from this list, and in Next Wave and the Chronicle. You are more prepared to do this than any of the non-college educated majority of the population out there. But you have to make the decision first, on how you want to go about it.
cheers, Kate
Subscriber KQ:
I've done some work at a think tank in a field not related to my specialty. I've also spent some time looking into the world of NGO's/IR/development work.
About addressing the embarrassing question in a cover letter or interview: my wife is in advertising, and whenever I bring up this issue, her response is to put it on the table up front, make it a virtue instead of a vice, and thereby remove the elephant from the living room. A gap in the resume/cv, a change in fields, anything that might raise eyebrows can be neutralized by dealing with it head-on and in the most positive light.
About leaving the program for policy work: have you considered an internship at an organization of interest to you? This is a great way to network the think-tank world (which is itself a great way to network the government side of things), and get a taste of things outside your Ph.D. program without forcing you to drop out completely. Spending some time as an intern somewhere would also make your departure from academics look less abrupt, and offers grounds for a plausible transition to something new. With an internship, you could build on subsidiary practical interests (urb. planning, public policy) that would set you up later as someone grounded in the realities of these fields even though you aren't degreed in them. (Think tanks DO place a value on Ph.D.'s -- whatever they can do to bolster the legitimacy of their work).
KQ
Subscriber ZA:
I have mentioned before that fear of failure kept me going. There is one other thing: I was REALLY interested in my dissertation topic. My question for you would be, "Can you think of a dissertation topic that interests you enough IN AND OF ITSELF to put in the effort?" If not, I don't think you will be able to keep up the momentum. It would be like being married to someone just because you are supposed to be married.
Here's one suggestion. Would it be possible to combine your interests in International Relations with archeology? I would strongly suggest looking at the recent work by archeologist in human rights cases, particularly truth commission investigations. (Try the International Center for Transitional Justice for leads there.) How about international cooperation to preserve cultural treasures? The looting of Iraqi museums? Or maybe a study of ancient warfare?
ZA
Darryl Stevens:
Over the years, I have moved quite some distance from believing that finishing a degree should be one's primary option. While I would like to recognize the achievement that is part of completing a graduate degree, I often feel that my decision to do so was both selfish and cowardly. As Kate has put it (in my words...not hers) we are very socialized into believing that we must FINISH...at all costs. Let me point to three of the costs.
The divorce rate for doctoral students is well above the national average...and the national average is already 50/50. I have not found this to be terribly different for domestic in straight or gay relationships, either. So, statistically speaking, you decrease the survivability of your primary relationship. My wife used to say to me, "You and those boneheads you go to school with need to get real lives for a change...no body worries about the stuff you guys worry about." Sadly, I think she was correct. Of the 10 people in my entering cohort, all but one were either married or in a committed relationship. When I graduated, two were married to different people, two others were living with different people, three were living alone, and three of us were still with the same partners, but one of them left the program to save his marriage.
The rate of depression is dramatically higher among graduate students. My background is something of a plague for me, in that I see students here all the time and I realize that they are suffering from severe depression or anxiety disorders. I make the referral to the counseling center, but I know that fewer than 1 in 5 go. Much of what is perceived of as a lack of creativity or motivation or energy is simply the effect of the symptoms of mood disorders.
One final cost is self-awareness. The nature of graduate study and research is so solitary that even the hardiest extroverts have difficulty remaining "in the loop." Faculty seldom morn their lost graduate students. They come and go. In fact, the most focused (not the brightest...just the most focused) are in and out in two or three years. Otherwise, for faculty graduate school is an ever-changing landscape of young scholars who are here for a while and gone. I was talking with a biology faculty member not long ago about a student who, after six years in his lab, left two years ago for a postdoc in another state. He had great difficulty retrieving the student's name and finally said, "You know, he's the one who did all the work on the FasL 6xHis." I don't have a clue what a 6xHis is, but I did remember this student also saw himself as the "6xHis Guy." Hell, I was "Supervisory Emphasis Guy" when I graduated. My friends were "Ecological Sensitivity Man", "Androgyny-in-Freshman-Athletes Girl", "Diagnostic Certainty Boy", and "Situated Learning Woman."
I wish the Academy did a better job of telling students, particularly humanities students, what the costs are. They are not hidden, not have they ever been secret. The current model of scholarship, however, does not lend itself well to honesty about the rigors of graduate school. I firmly believe that if there were an informed consent, pointing out that Ph.D.'s actually make less over their careers than M.A.'s and that the chances of a newly minted Ph.D. finding a permanent teaching position have declined annually for the past 12 years, then perhaps graduate classes would be a bit smaller.
As to completing...yes, I am glad that I did. While I winced at Larry's assertion that completing was about fear of being branded a failure...I think that it would be disingenuous to say that it was not often a greater motivator for me than those of more purely intellectual kinds.
Darryl
Subscriber VX:
I am thinking about leaving without completing too. I've completely lost interest after I finished my coursework and don't even want to finish diss. proposal and take exams because I know that I probably won't have enough energy for a dissertation, so what's the point of going through the motions of becoming ABD and doing something I almost hate now?
My question is, how do I put years that I've spent at grad school (and it's more than there should've been if not for my indecision and procrastination) on my resume? I am not talking about work experience part of the resume, but specifically about education part. Can I put something to the extent of "advanced graduate coursework in blah blah blah..."? I already had an M.A. before I started Ph.D. so it's already there. Or should I just leave it off completely. That seems like such a waste, leaving it off, because I did learn a lot of things (including about myself) during my years at grad school and I'd like a potential employer know about that.
VX
Subscriber ZU:
I was in the exact same position you are in now when I left my Ph.D. program in history at the University of Toronto after a year and a half. Unable to find work, I enrolled in an M.A. program in economics the following year to expand my skill set. To answer your question about the resume, here is an excerpt from a recent resume that got me a permanent f/t job with Statistics Canada, the federal statistical collection/analysis agency up here. Note my two sentence explanation, which I think is positively worded and shifts emphasis to the (relevant) M.A. and leaves my uncompleted doctorate in the background. I spent some hours agonizing over how to include the Ph.D. on the resume, but came up with the format below with the help of a career advisor at my university. The explanation also serves as a career goal statement, which is commonly used on resumes.
EDUCATION:
2003-2005 Master of Arts, Economics University of Alberta
My current career objective is to obtain work doing policy analysis with the federal government. Hence I have transferred into a Master's program in economics.
2001-2003 Doctoral Program, History University of Toronto
2000-2001 Master of Arts, History University of Toronto
etc, etc,
I had a number of interviews before landing the offer from Stat. Can and only one person ever asked me about my reasons for leaving (one interviewer noted "my interesting career path" and asked for an explanation. In interviews, I discussed the doctoral to attest to my research, writing, public speaking (ie: TA work, presentations), and analytical skills, which was decisive in me receiving the offer. In my opinion, cast your experience in a positive light and discuss it in your cover letters and in interviews whenever it strengthens your application for any particular job. I never mentioned my reasons for leaving at anytime, but I did note in cover letters, for example, how my TA work, research, etc was relevant, if that was the case. In my cover letters and interviews, I would state for example, that "my graduate work in history has honed my research and writing skills." Terms like "graduate background" or "graduate work" are vague enough to include the fact that I have an M.A. in history and pursued a Ph.D. for a while without emphasizing the non- completion. In short, I was very pragmatic about using my experiences in the Ph.D. program.
ZU
Riall Nolan:
Don't leave it off; put it in. Under "Education," put something like "coursework toward the Ph.D. in -- " or "ABD in --" and leave it at that. But DO, please, do the analysis of the skills you learned as a graduate student -- and they will be considerable -- and put them into your resume under "skills," "experience" or some other heading.
Riall
Cathy Wasserman:
ZU and Darryl are right on with their advice. You really want to focus on the skills that you learned in your graduate school experience, whether or not you finished. But I'm not a fan of career objective sections on resumes- I think they appear rather self-serving (although that's usually not their intent), whereas you want your resume to show how you can potentially serve an organization. I do think it's crucial for job seekers to know what their objective is and to convey that the particular position they're applying for fits within that objective through: How they show their career arc in their resume How they briefly explain their passion for the position and its connection to their skills and experience in their cover letter How they do all of the above in the interview
For example, in ZU's case, he could make a brief statement in his cover letter simply stating that he transferred into a master's program in economics to focus on his passion for x and it has provided him with x skills, which he can directly apply to x functions of the open position.
It's helpful to bear in mind that life is a discovery process and many of us discover what we're really passionate and good at through trying a variety of jobs. Each experience gives us more clarity and builds our skills. Graduate school is no different. If you've realized that it's not the right fit, then you're that much closer to knowing what is. Your discernment process in and of itself surely included the development of numerous skills. I'd advice clarifying exactly what those are as well as the skills you built in the grad. experience itself. I have no doubt that you will discover a bounty!
Much good luck! Cathy
Kate Duttro:
I agree completely with Riall on this, and if you are in doubt on how to do it, go to your school's career center and ask for help with it. Look in particular at the job descriptions where you're applying and parallel their language as much as possible, to show that you know their terminology.
Kate
Kate Duttro:
I do have a question on this ZU. Does your objective actually come in the middle of your education (as if in explanation for the shift), or is in a section labeled "Objective?"
Kate
Subscriber ZU:
I put the objective statement in the education section. Because my academic career has taken several unusual terms, I thought that a clear statement would provide some sense of continuity and would explain why I had made the shift. I would not necessarily recommend this for everyone, but in my case, I think the statement was beneficial.
In the introductory paragraph of all of my cover letters, I also offered a similar two line explanation. I found the explanation useful as a way to convey my interest in economic policy analysis and government work. I formally withdrew from the doctoral program about two weeks before starting the M.A. in economics. Hence, in my cover letters, I tried to portray the shift as desirable given my (genuine) interest in federal government careers. This is the "positive" reason for my career change. I NEVER discussed the negative reasons which motivated my decision, such as a disastorous performance on the comps exams, fears about the academic job market, etc, etc
ZU
Subscriber DN:
Really great discussion this week. I've come away from all of this definitely feeling encouraged - and with many more ideas about how to think about a career. On the topic of finishing the Ph.D. or not, I mulled this over (well more like agonized) for a couple of years while going forward with classes and presenting papers, etc. Finally I decided to take an informal leave of absence from the department and spent all last Fall talking to all kinds of people (including Riall who was great - thanks! - and reading his book which is also great) about what options there were outside of academia and how to find them. When I finally told my advisor two weeks ago that I was going to leave the program, all that research came in very handy. My advisor's comment was: "well I'm concerned that you will end up being a secretary if you don't get a Ph.D." I was able to remind him that I already had two M.A.s and had experience in the field and had spoken to many people with experience in the field who assured me that there were some options between secretary and Ph.D.. It was at that moment I really knew how disconnected academia (at least this department) is and how much I don't want to be there.
I don't feel like a quitter actually. I feel like I got my life back. I'll miss some things but I really felt so cut off from the world and have really really appreciated the perspective offered by this particular strand of the discussion.
DN
Cathy Wasserman:
A big congratulations to you too! It sounds like you have found a great way to view your decision to leave graduate school and that it is, indeed, a great decision for you!
Much luck in your future endeavors! Cathy
Kate Duttro:
Good job, DN. Doesn't it feel good to KNOW when you've made the right decision for yourself.
(I can count a few of those moments myself, and I think I can guess that you, too, will remember that moment for a LONG time.)
cheers, Kate
Subscriber VX:
Thank you all for great advice. I've been lurking on this list for a while and constructed what I think a pretty decent resume based on my grad school experience. The hardest part now is actually presenting the grad school years properly in the education section and I am taking all your advice to heart.
I just wanted to mention something about ABD. Every person outside the world of universities and grad schools that I talked to had NO idea what that means. And even inside not everybody knows about ABD. For example my husband, a prof in electrical engineering had no idea what that means. It's different in sciences and engineering, the students take their exams after their first year of grad school, and it's called qualifying exams, to proof that they have enough background knowledge to be in a Ph.D. program. So the concept of ABD simply doesn't exist.
Just a word of caution to those putting it on their resumes.
VX
Riall Nolan:
We haven't really mentioned the value of having one or more mentors. I think this can be really important for some people. Mentors aren't the same as advisors, and they aren't the same as a network, although some advisors turn into mentors, and mentors are clearly "in" your network.
But a mentor is someone, usually senior to you, who takes a personal interest in your career, and who will help you. They can help in a great many ways. There are some things to watch out for (the Pygmalion and Svengali effects, for example) but in general, if you can identify one or more mentors, it's a good idea to cultivate them.
Remember, though, they have to choose you, too. They can be within your organization or outside it. They can be local, or across the globe. Many people have more than one, chosen because they have different qualities.
Riall
Subscriber CY:
Can you please elaborate on "the Pygmalion and Svengali effects" and how to watch out for them?
CY
Riall Nolan:
Sure. These aren't clinical syndromes, just names I've seen in the literature. The Pygmalion effect (remember "My Fair Lady?") refers to a situation where a mentor takes a promising young thing (yes, it's usually an older male and a younger female, although not always) under his tutelage, and attempts to transform her into his own idealized image of -- what? A Ph.D. student? A doctor? A rising young executive? It works as long as the mentee goes along with it, but once she begins to develop a mind of her own, problems start.
The Svengali effect (remember, the evil hypnotist in the novel who brings an innocent person under his spell?) is more sinister, involving someone manipulating someone else for the first person's agenda. Like the first case, only nastier. Think about graduate students being used as political footballs by senior academics in their squabbles with one another. Very few mentors are this unscrupulous, but it happens.
How to watch out for them? Step back from your relationship from time to time, discuss things honestly with your mentor, and if you're not feeling comfortable with things, gently disengage. I should have mentioned that one of the most important characteristics of a mentor is that he or she should have no direct authority over you. That is, they really shouldn't be your supervisor, committee chair, or any form of boss. Plenty of graduate students have advisors who later turn into mentors, that's okay, but you definitely don't want or need a mentoring relationship with someone who can wreck your career.
Riall
Cathy Wasserman:
Riall has brought up an important topic. I'd just like to add that in my experience it can often be even more helpful to have a mentor who does not work within your organization. It can feel rather awkward to discuss certain issues with "insiders." For example, if you're having challenges within your supervisor and need guidance, speaking to someone within your org. can create additional tensions as your mentor may have their own relationship with your supervisor. It's often most helpful to have a more unbiased eye assist you.
I also want to add that it's a good idea to 'test-drive' mentors. Take some time to get to know them before committing to a mentor/mentee relationship: it's really important that you both feel comfortable and excited to work with each other and it takes some time to determine that.
Cathy
Subscriber RO:
I have an appropriateness question. At some point I will have to inform my advisor that this is the direction I want to go. Although he has been tremendously supportive over the past few years, he is a 'hard core' academic and I actually feel as though I am betraying his efforts (he did help me get this job here in Mannheim). What is the best way to handle my "confession" and get a good letter from him? He is an honest person so I don't think that he will undermine my efforts to leave the academe, but I know that it will disappoint him.
RO
Riall Nolan:
I fully understand your qualms about breaking the news to your advisor. If he is a decent sort, and it sounds like he is, he will probably understand, and forgive you, but you do need to have a heart to heart with him. As long as he does not feel that his time with you has been wasted, I think he will continue to be supportive. But at some point in your talk with him, you need to bring this up directly -- will you be able to count on him for positive references? There's no harm in asking, and again, if he's a decent sort, he'll tell you straight out.
Riall
Kate Duttro:
The appropriateness question is a tough one. You want to wait as long as you can without being dishonest yourself. As long as it is possible that you will stay in academics, you probably don't need to have the conversation. But, if you're sure, it may be a case of the sooner the better, so you can get on with it and so he can find another person to bring along. You do have to make decisions based on your life, not on whether you are disappointing someone else. Although, I admit that it is hard to disappoint someone you respect and who probably respects you.
Kate
Cathy Wasserman:
As for your advisor, it sounds like although you would like to work in a different area, it is still a related area. So while you certainly need to be direct about your decision to leave academia, you also can let him know that his mentorship and work with you has played a significant role in helping you find a field that's a terrific and exciting fit for you and you're very grateful for that!
Cathy
Darryl Stevens:
For all of you nascent psychologists out there, I am about to butcher a couple of constructs so please resist the side road of correcting my explanation. Bandura's social learning theory (SLT) has been built on a few fundamental premises about the interaction of the individual and his/her environment. We could spent days and days on that, but I would like to look at two issues in particular. One that is directly related to Bandura and one from another set of speculations, that was an indirect outgrowth of social learning theory.
For the unwashed, SLT suggests that we learn both directly and indirectly from our environment. Not only do our parent modify our behavior through direct reinforcement, but our behavior is also molded indirectly by watching others. This indirect reinforcement is much more powerful than direct reinforcement. Somehow, seeing others rewarded or punished has more impact. There are several reasons for this, which I will not go into at this time, but I believe that if you think about it you will realize it to be a fairly faithful portrayal of reality.
Supplementing indirect reinforcement is the notion of "reciprocal determinism." Once again, I will short cut this description. In a nutshell, SLT allows that much of our behavior is determined by our environment, but that we often made decisions about our environment. For instance, a very bright boy or girl is presented with the environmental choice of going to class or ditching school. He/she chooses class. On that day, the teacher brings in a guest speaker who is a graduate student from a local university. The student invites class members to visit her. Suddenly, the environment of the class room contains a whole new variable...one that would not have existed had the student chosen to ditch class. And before you think, "Oh, what it the student can't arrange to visit the university? Does the variable make any difference?" Absolutely, because it is not the variable of actually GOING to the university that we are talking about...it is the IDEA of the university. Two weeks later, the student is in the local mall and sees someone who looks like that graduate student (See, it doesn't even have to BE the grad student...just a cognitive representation of her!) and this causes him or her to think about higher education. The more the student thinks about higher education, the more likely he or she is to wrestle with the reality of attending college. The more real college becomes, the more likely he or she will make choices that positively affect such an outcome. I trust you see the reciprocity here. By choosing a slightly different environment, the student created a wider universe of choices. This wider universe of choices amplified the possible environments, which in turn multiply choices....ad nauseum.
The second set of constructs is loosely know as attribution theory. Folks like Bernard Weiner from UCLA have been telling us for years that our perception of events is every bit as important as the events themselves. The attributions that we make about others' behaviors will modify our behavior. Example, my sister and I watch as our brother is punished for eating candy between meals. My sister attributes the punishment to my parents caring about our health and resolves not to eat between meals. I attribute the punishment to my belief that my parents do not like my brother as much as they like me, so I continue to eat between meals. Do my attributions change when I get caught and am punished...barely. I now believe that I put my parents in the position of having to seem fair. They only punished me because my brother knew I had been caught. Does my behavior change...barely. Now I am sneakier when I eat between meals. What can this possibly have to do with a non-academic job search? EVERYTHING! Our behaviors are limited by the environment we choose and is premised by our beliefs about why things happen. Over the past three years on this list, I have noticed two things.
First, is the asking for specific directions about what to do in this or that situation. (I actually have students who fret endlessly over whether to use Helvetica or Times Roman on a resume. One solved the dilemma by using Helvetica for the cover letter and Times for the resume.) hmmmm,...where's my point...OH...there it is! We seldom know why people get jobs, because we know so little about attributions of the individual doing the selection. I was horrified to find out once that a committee member was arguing against candidate because she reminded her of character from Dynasty. We can get an idea of the sorts of behaviors that are universally poor form. It is probably not a good idea to arrive twenty minutes late. You diminish your chances by calling committee members 'Dude' and 'Chiquita.' Resumes scribbled in crayon will probably fall to the bottom of the pile. But actual affirmative, no-lose, sure-fire, do-this-and-you'll-get-a-job behaviors are not possible.
One of the things that I have enjoyed about Riall's postings is that they have been grounded largely in broad-brush, ideas about the world that surrounds work, as opposed to "do this and you'll get that." For instance, his recent post about mentor included the rejoinder to remember that the mentor/protégé relationship is reciprocal (and in a sense...casual) in that the mentor must also "pick you." This means that such a relationship is probably spontaneous and non-directive. Intriguingly, research into formal mentoring programs seems to indicate that only the mentor in such programs benefits. Levinson's books, Seasons of a Man's Life and Seasons of a Woman's Life place high value on the mentor/protégé relationship, but describe them as informal relationships of love and trust that "just happen." Twice in my "coherent career arc" I have been assigned mentors as part of coming into a new organization...I don't even remember one's name. But, I can easily identify three people who mentored me during my development. The first was over thirty years ago. I have not seen him in twenty years, but we talk at least once a year and exchange Christmas Cards. I think that our mentor/protégé relationship had been underway for a couple of years before I actually realized it.
The second thing that I have noticed on the list is the fear of change. Okay...maybe I am too change-friendly and the list is "normal" in that respect, but still pushing out into a new environment is going to create a whole new series of problems, uncertainties, conflicts, etc. There will be a dramatically changed field of expectations. Then there's that whole Plato's Allegory of the Cave thing. You know what I mean. As you venture out into the non-academic world, all of the folks chained to rocks in the cave will think that you are stark-raving. You cannot do this in pieces. There is a point in a child's development in which they wish to get a bright, shiny object that has attracted their attention. Having learned to walk through a painful process of tripping, falling, slipping, and belly-flopping, they built confidence by staying very close to mommy. They grip tightly to mom's skirt and stretch out. Pulling farther and farther on the skirt, stretching every joint, every muscle, every tendon...they still come up inches away. Looking up at mom who is talking on the phone, they know she will not...cannot move. So, they let go and in abject fear they trundle toward the bright, shiny object. They grab it with both hands, clutch it to their chest, and run back to the safety zone at mom's feet. Their life, however, is forever changed. They did it without mom. While it seems a lifetime to most children, it is an instant to a parent. Children move into the world with alarming speed. As we become adults, I think that university life becomes the orbit of safety at mom's feet. For Students, leaving the Academy seems to take forever. For most faculty you are gone (and unlike parents...forgotten) in the twinkling of an eye.
I have often said that the difference between Academe and the world beyond its gates is one of time. This is most obviously seen in the sciences. Science faculty will often spend 25 or 30 years researching one tiny aspect of molecular behavior. Graduate students come and go, each tasting only a tiny piece of the pie. Faculty are quite content with this. Industrial science, on the other hand, moves with much greater speed and focus. If a project does not bear fruit quickly...they move on to the next big thing. It is as if universities operate on a geological time scale and they are more than happy for you to hang around and do their dirty work for them. But, the longer you remain, the less reciprocity there is between you and life outside the Ivory Tower.
It is quite scary out here where most people ply their trades. Getting a job is a tough proposition, but not nearly as tough as raising children or being a good husband or finding ways to live a meaningful life in a community of friends.
Darryl
Riall Nolan:
Something Darryl just said resonated with me. The part about how "arranged" mentoring programs don't seem to benefit folks much. I didn't know that, but it doesn't surprise me.
When I wrote about mentors, I was really talking about ones you choose yourself -- and who choose you -- and yes, it's a very personal thing. I have really only ever had two or three, and the relationships arose because of some deeper bonds.
Riall
F. Is Academic Experience Transferable?
Subscriber BE:
Perhaps the panelists could comment on stretching academic experience into non-academic requirements. Or if you disagree panelists, perhaps you can explain why academic experience or certain experience is not transferable.
BE
Riall Nolan:
Good question. I'd argue that academic experience is most definitely transferable, and that indeed, putting your resume together ought to factor in all those years in grad school as work experience as well as academic background.
Graduate students know how to do an amazing number of things -- collecting information, analyzing it, presenting it, teaching it to others. They can also think on their feet, cope with discrepant information, deal with high stress, ambiguity, diversity -- I could go on, but you get the idea.
Some of these things are hard skills, some are self-management skills (ie, part of your personality). All of them are things an employer looks for.
Richard Bolles, the "What Color is Your Parachute" man, had a great section in one of his books. He took apart a wait-person's job in terms of functional skills, and showed you how, although you could always say, "I'm just a waiter," you could also rattle off a rather long list of fairly complex skills that you had to have in order to do the job.
Well, grad school is just like that. Everything you learn to do there can be transferred to something else.
Riall
Cathy Wasserman:
I totally agree with Riall! And just to add as I've said in some other postings, the key after realizing that you have many transferable skills is learning the language of how to translate them into nonprofit terms as well as learning what issues and concerns are most pressing for nonprofits now and/or for the particular area of the sector you're interested in entering. Doing on-going web research, reading books on the sector, volunteering, networking all enable you do that!
Cathy
Kate Duttro:
I do want to see experience stretched into whatever shapes it will fit! (Won't always, but you need to have two pieces of information before you can tell if your experience will fit. You need to know what needs to be done and you need to know if you can objectively do it.) Rather than waiting until you see an advertisement for an editorial job, go find editors and talk to them about the kinds of experience/skills they consider valid experience for their situation. As I mentioned to VX recently, the kind of experience one editor considers valid may be a bit different from another's perspective.
If we all continue to talk in terms of "they" and if we do not explore and actually get into that black box, you will continue to be making decisions based only on your perception of what THEY want. It is necessary to find people doing the kind of work you want to do, or the kind of work you think you want to do and talk with them about what it is that they DO do.
I think that the key in making this match in experience, once you know what skills are needed, is your own ability to articulate your experience in the employer's terminology. When you can demonstrate that you understand what they need and how it is that you can do that, then you have demonstrated that your experience is sufficient to do that job. But, it does put the burden on you to be able to learn their language.
cheers, Kate
Subscriber ZA:
I think many of us are selling themselves a bit short by assuming their academic work is not part of the "real world." My dissertation research involved five months of fieldwork in El Salvador. I interviewed journalists, human rights activists, victims, war criminals, public officials--that's not "real world" experience? Indeed, I have experience in a part of the real world that most U.S. citizens know nothing about.
"Ah, but that has nothing to do with work outside of academia..." Well, actually, it does. I am looking for human rights work. Groups like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, etc. want to see that you have experience living and working abroad. It also translates into transferable skills like "demonstrated sensitivity while working with individuals and groups from diverse cultures" and PROVEN language abilities. My accomplishments also demonstrate that I am incredibly adaptable and work well under pressure.
(By the way, teaching also involves working with students from diverse cultures--there's another part of the real world that even Ancient Greek Lit scholars deal with.) I have also been applying my findings to the real world. As some of you may know, Teamsters Representative Gilberto Soto was murdered last November while trying to organize truck drivers in El Salvador. When I heard about this, I called the Teamsters and offered my assistance. I believe that this helped me get an interview that I have scheduled with a labor think tank tomorrow afternoon. (I must admit, of course, that one of the reasons I don't fit the tenure-track mold is that I am "too activist.")
ZA
Riall Nolan:
Good points, ZA, excellent examples of how skills and experience translate.
Riall
Kate Duttro:
I agree too! And, I would point out that you seem to know what it is that you want to do - and you're able to point out the similarities between their work and your work, and may have had something to do with that interview also. So, will you let us know what happens?
Kate
Subscriber ZA:
The interview itself went well. The bad news is that this was part of a first round of 25 interviews--out of six hundred applications! I should hear if I made the second round in a couple of weeks. I also had a phone interview yesterday for a Policy Analyst position with the Close Indian Point division of Riverkeeper. It's not human rights, but it is something I believe in and uses the same skill set. That interview went really well. The interviewer is a former academic herself, so she responded very favorably to my explanation of why I wanted to move into advocacy. She said my writing sample (the same one I used for the Urban Agenda application) helped a lot because there are so few good writers around. She was also interested in my volunteer work with Amnesty. It turns out she volunteers with a women's rights group, PAVE, and wanted to know if AI will be taking part in a rally against sexual violence in DC in April. I hope to hear if I made it to the next round in about a week.
ZA
G. Coherent Career Paths
Paula Foster Chambers:
Darryl said, "Having focused only on one type of job, teaching, they have never stopped to see that career is a series of jobs strung together by a coherent path or arc."
Or incoherent, as the case may be! What you are saying is true, except coherence is very much in the eyes of the beholder.
For example, I spent my twenties in the film business as an Assistant Director, my thirties in academia as an English instructor, and am now happily spending my forties in a delightful third career as a nonprofit fundraiser. All that time, I was dreadfully worried about changing careers so often and had a lot of self-esteem issues about it--was I a dilettante, was I ever going to add up to anything, what would be my legacy, etc. Now I look back and see coherence where I had previously seen none. Each career choice reflected and expressed specific aspects of my personality and aptitudes. My current career as a fundraiser incorporates ALL of them, plus some that never got addressed before. So, looking back from my current position, I now feel that my career has been remarkably coherent. What a nice feeling! Hard to feel it "in medias res" but when you look back in the rear view mirror, there it is.
Paula
Riall Nolan:
I think Paula has said something very important here. Coherence IS in the "eye of the beholder" and what looks random now may reveal a clear pattern in later years.
This was certainly true in my case. On several occasions, I was taken aback in job interviews to hear people say "you've jumped around a lot, haven't you?"
At first I thought, o god, I'm really confused, and they see that. . . and then I thought, no, wait, there's a reason my jobs go like that. And as I explained it to myself, I could see the pattern emerging.
My pattern emerged from three things that I think guided my choices of job at any given time. Sometimes one took precedence over the other, but all three helped define, over time, my career arc:
Interests: what are you curious about, excited by, interested in?
Values: how do you feel you ought to live?
Skills: what do you know how to do?
If you've been to graduate school, you will have been focused almost exclusively on the last of these, on the skills. But it is following your values and your interests, I think, that will get you the best work of your life, and the skills, as you will quickly learn if you don't know already, can be applied to a wide variety of things.
So thank you for that comment, Paula, you are right on the mark there.
Riall
Cathy Wasserman:
Both Riall and Paula have made important points. To share something from my own career closet, several years ago I was able to get an informational interview with the President of one of the biggest foundations in the world. When I went in to chat with her, she took one look at my resume and said, you seem to have a lot of different interests, but no expertise. I have to admit I was pretty crushed by her statement at the time, but I thanked her later because I realized that I had both a lot of interests AND expertise, but had not told the "story" of my expertise very well. I redesigned my resume to reflect how all of the different strands of my professional career were woven together and began to get some wonderful feedback. My varied experience turned into a major plus. It's crucial to weave together a story of your career arc and to discover how it, in fact, makes sense even when it seems not to! If you can do that, you will gre! atly help recruiters to behold you as you behold yourself!
Cathy
Subscriber EE:
I'm also wondering about how to assess one's temperament in trying to figure out a career path. That could mean being an introvert or extravert, wanting to work in large groups, small groups, by yourself, etc.
I can think of lots of jobs where they would fit my values and interests just fine, but not my temperament. (Teaching high school would be a good example.) What is the best way to work with these aspects of oneself?
EE
Riall Nolan:
Good points. I guess I had assumed "temperament" went somewhere inside "values," but it might not. It's certainly a very important component of what makes us happy in a job, that's certain.
There are any number of ways to approach temperament and its connection to career. Myers-Briggs is one way. Bolles the parachute man suggests that people decide whether they like working with data, things, or people (he actually gets into a host of other similar distinctions as well), etc. Knowing your temperament is pretty important, isn't it? Someone once suggested that a way to start career planning is to make a list of the 3-5 most enjoyable things you've ever done in your life (notice I didn't say "jobs" but "things" -- ie, experiences) and then try to figure out why you liked them so much. I supposed you could reverse this, too, and focus on 3-5 horrible experiences, and learn from that, too.
Riall
Cathy Wasserman:
I agree with Riall that personality assessment tools like the Myers-Brigg indicator can be helpful in giving you a sense of your base-line temperament as can career path indicators that match your personality type with particular jobs. I also agree that taking your own personal inventory of what you love to do (or what gives you energy) and what you don't like to do (or what drains you) is helpful. And, there are certainly some careers that are more suited to certain temperaments, but I also want to say, that I've found that often there is a huge range of the kind of personality that might be a good fit for a particular kind of job- a larger range than we might expect. For example, I have seen great fundraiser who are amazing schmoozers and I've seen great fundraisers who work much more quietly and still build an organization's network and bank account significantly!
Best, Cathy
Paula Foster Chambers:
I'd like to second, or rather third, the notion of taking inventory of the best and worst experiences you have ever had. I hired a career coach a couple of years ago and that was the most valuable thing she had me do. She asked me to list some times or situations when I was a my best--happiest, most satisfied, etc. Then she asked me to look at the list and write down answers to this question: "What was present when I was at my best?" That yielded a list of things I desire in a job, which in turn fed into my search for the right type of position. Now that I have what I consider to be the perfect job, I look back at that list and completely understand why I am so happy today. I highly recommend this exercise!
Paula
Darryl Stevens:
I am something of a Whiteheadian thinker. I realize that this probably not chic in this post-post-modern age, but I remain reasonably firmly entrenched in a world view that suggests that most of what we experience day to day is episodic and overly concrete. My first job after my first undergraduate degree was as an insurance adjuster. I worked large casualty losses in the millions of dollars. This required the development of reasonably sophisticated interviewing and investigative skills. Although I left the job because it did not quite fit me, I took with me the communications and research skills that I developed. Later, during an internship in an Episcopal Parish, I came to realize that I did not wish the constraints of parish ministry, but I took pastoral listening and homiletic skills to my next job working with adolescents in East LA and South Central LA. Which led to graduate school, which led to community mental health, which led to yet more graduate school, blah, blah blah. The point? I have no difficulty seeing the coherence of my career path. As a result, I can understand how seemingly unconnected "actual occasions" may cohere for others. In other words, I can anticipate what experiences might lead to a "dream job" and by focusing on the process (the journey) I can relax about whether or not I achieve my goal (the destination).
Darryl
Subscriber LJ:
I am expected to finish my Ph.D. in philosophy from Columbia, and I am looking for a job in a more business-minded environment. I know of a couple of firms that position themselves as open minded in terms of their applicants' background, and who claim they are more interested in the general qualities of their candidates than in their educational background. I guess I am interested mainly in places who would naturally hire people with MBAs. The two companies I know of are McKinsey and D.E. Shaw. If you know of others, or of a list of others, I'd love to know about them.
LJ
Subscriber EE:
Morningstar Mutual Funds in Chicago has a reputation for hiring people with diverse educational background. You might want to try talking to somebody there, if what they do interests you. Here's their website: http://www.morningstar.com/?topnav=home
EE
Subscriber KT:
I've been doing a bit of research into this kind of work myself- it seems that the best known consulting firms are McKinsey, BCG and Bain -- in business-speak, they're known as the 'top 3.' You might consider taking a look at www.vault.com -- they have a lot of information about these kinds of companies, as well as chat-groups about what it is like to work there, etc. I was able to find a partner with whom I practiced the 'case interviews' that are the norm among these companies... Good luck!
KT
Subscriber OO:
A couple of other companies who consider Ph.D.s in their hiring process are Mars & Co. and Boston Consulting Group. I interviewed at the former and they tended to be interested in quantitative backgrounds, and I imagine D. E. Shaw would be similar because of their emphasis on technical and proprietary trading. On that note, I'm actually quite tempted to go "back to school" and get an MBA myself in order to obtain more formal credentials for these types of jobs (mgt. consulting in particular). I think I'd get more interest from the types of companies that I'm interested in by fitting into their "MBA category," but I don't want to waste my time if there are smart ways to route around this obstacle. I'd be interested in what the guest speakers have to say about this process - good idea? bad idea? depends on the specific situation?
OO
Subscriber OS:
I recently got my Ph.D. (October, 2003), but have been in a nonacademic field for some time. What I would like to know is, assuming one gets an initial job in a field, how do you go about moving up into more desirable positions in the same field if no one is asking you to do so? I know that happens but sometimes I think we need to make things happen for ourselves, but I haven't quite figured out how to do it in a work context. Yes, I've volunteered for stuff, and that has gotten me raises and promotions to a higher title for what I already do, but it hasn't actually gotten me a distinctly new position.
OS
Cathy Wasserman:
You've hit on a very tricky situation. I can attest to the fact that it's not always so easy to work one's way up the ladder! Sometimes, it requires being quite direct with one's supervisor by letting them know that you'd, ultimately, love to move into another position. Letting your supervisor know what you're very committed to the organization over the long-haul is a good way to help them see that you mean business and also that it's to their advantage to help you develop. Good professional development always bears the kind of wish you have in mind, but it's often not in place. It's also a good idea to chat with others to find out how they got into the positions they're in within your org. and also to really network and collaborate with them so you can continue to build your case for how valuable you are to the org. and not just in what you're doing. But ultimately direct communication about your commitment to the org. and desire ! to move up is critical.
Best!
Cathy
Subscriber OS:
I wanted to add that I know of cases where people "create" their own new positions. If there is some need not being met, i think some companies are more than willing to hear about solutions to fix these problems that require the creation of a new (higher up) position. The really proactive approach, I guess.
OH
Riall Nolan:
Do you want to move up in your present organization, or outside it, or doesn't it matter?
Inside an organization there are usually pretty clear rules and procedures for moving up. Or not, in the case of a "flat" organization with nowhere much to go for some jobs.
That's my case, for example. There's only going to be one Dean of International Programs (or equivalent) at each university (if that), and unless I want to do some other type of work (and I don't) my only option is to move out -- that is, to change universities. And a lot of us do that, because that's really the only way to raise your level of job responsibility and your salary. Very different, incidentally, from faculty members, who have incentives to stay where they are.
And you find your new job the way you do anything else. Network, read the job ads, talk to people, let it be know ever so subtly that you're interested in hearing about new opportunities.
While you're doing that, of course, you're learning as much as you can about the fit between your skills and experience and the requirements of your new hoped-for position, because if there's any sort of major disconnect, you'll have to remedy that before you go much further, and even if there's not, you should at least be thinking about how to portray your accomplishments so that they shine their brightest.
Riall
Subscriber OS:
To some extent, it doesn't matter. There are definitely some good things about the university I work at in MIS. By coincidence, my boss last week told our group that he is not cut out to be a manager and is looking to change to a different position within the group. There are some basic "best practices" we don't do, and I think, if I was allowed to implement them, I could contribute a lot to the group in his position. The one big thing it involves that I don't have is budgeting experience, though I don't think my boss had that either, based on what he has said. The chance to have a position with the title "Director" is appealing, but not because I deeply want this specific job but because I want the experience to move to another, more desirable position.
What I know about myself is that I'm at my best when mentoring, teaching, or in some other way equipping others for their own tasks in a direct way (writing code might do that indirectly but it's too impersonal--I worked for IBM writing code that literally flipped bits, something that somewhere along the line affected someone, but pretty far away from directly aiding someone. That isolation is one of the things that makes my job as a programmer a sub-optimal fit.
When I started my job here (my eighth job in or related to software development), I really was hoping that I could take my position and my experience and skills and find another position in the university that more directly had contact with students in a mentoring/teaching/equipping/advising kind of role. This was a strategic job choice that I was hoping would lead to something that I better fit. (My job is all about tiny details, literally semicolons and quote marks, but I'm very much concept-oriented; my job is a pretty much solo activity, but I really want to work to some degree with people; I really want to fix processes that are broken when I see them, but I have yet to be in an IT organization that gives any more than lip service to wanting individual contributors to do that because it implicitly critiques management, I suppose.)
I've given that up now, because of being told on this list that nothing I've ever done has any meaningful value for the skills or knowledge required to work in a university outside of being a prof. So I guess I need to find something outside my current organization. I've been a technical trainer, and that was a lot better than programming, but I've been in software so long that the thought of doing anything else related directly to software makes me lose my appetite. I feel like I'm stuck in a rut: I can do what I do now, but don't want to, and I can't see what to go to instead. I looked into an organization that I thought would have just the right spot, even though I would have to raise my own salary (common in Christian organizations), but even there, I was under-qualified for what I really wanted to do, and when someone hears you can program computers, that's the skill they seem to want the most. I feel like writing a book, The Programmer Mystique. What I do does take skills and experience to do well, but it's not the magic, Gnostic thing so many people take it to be.
Sometimes I meet people and we talk about what we do, and when I tell people I'm a software engineer or that I program computers, unless they are feigning interest, I get responses that suggest people just think being a programmer is an amazing thing, second only to being Harry Potter. That's sure not my perspective. Anyway, no, I guess I probably have to change organizations, as I don't want to risk doing poorly in my boss's role just to get experience budgeting.
OS
DISCUSSION CONTINUES ON NEXT PAGE >>>