Career perspectives and job choice: a survey of recent PhD graduates of five Dutch universities
Cathelijn J. F. Waaijer
STI conference, 4 Sept 2014
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Numbers of PhD graduates
Source: VSNU
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Sectors of employment
Auriol, Misu & Freeman (2013)
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Career aspirations
Sauermann & Roach (2012)
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Career perspectives in academic R&D and their effects – some evidence
• Uncertain prospects and long spells on temporary contracts decrease attractiveness of scientific career according to leading scientists (Waaijer 2014)
• Insecurity about career affects well-being of postdocs (Höge, Brucculeri & Iwanova 2012)
Fox & Stephan (2001)
1: poor2: fair3: good4: excellent
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Research questions
• How do PhD graduates perceive their career perspectives in different sectors of work?– Academic R&D
– Non-academic R&D
– Non-R&D
• Do career perspectives influence the choice of sector of work?– Measured effect on sector of work
– Opinion of PhD graduates
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Main variables
– Career perspectives: rated very good – good – neutral – bad – very bad• Long-term career perspectives (in general)• Availability of permanent positions• Usual length of period holding temporary positions• Quality of human resource management and career policy
– Employment sector: academic R&D, non-academic R&D, non-R&D• Constructed from variables “involved in basic research”, “involved
in applied research” and “involved in experimental development”, and description of employer
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Survey
• Follow-up to 2008 Netherlands Survey of Doctorate Recipients among PhD graduates (April 2008 – March 2009) of:– Delft University of Technology (engineering and technology)
– Erasmus University Rotterdam (focused on social sciences, medicine)
– Utrecht University (all scientific fields)
– Wageningen University (agricultural sciences, natural sciences)
• New: PhD graduates from Leiden University (January 2008 – April 2012): all scientific fields except economics, and engineering and technology
• Total: 2,430 PhD graduates (half of them from Leiden)
• Surveyed sample: 2,207 PhDs; through email or LinkedIn
• Survey open for 91 days
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Descriptive statistics• 51.5% (partial) response rate
• 43.6% progressed to the final question– Respondents were allowed to leave questions unanswered,
except if a response was required for routing
• Females: 45%
• 96.3% had paid work at time of survey
• Scientific field of PhD by university (in %)Delft Leiden Rotterda
mUtrecht
Wageningen
Total
Medical and health sciences 0 38 61 36 9 34
Natural sciences 17 23 5 33 70 26
Social sciences 7 18 31 16 9 17
Humanities 4 19 3 9 1 13
Engineering and technology 73 3 1 7 11 11
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Perception of career perspectives
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Long-term career perspectives by sector of work
Opinion on:Academic R&D
Non-academic R&D
Non-R&D
Current sector of workAc R&D
N-Ac R&D
Non-
R&D
Ac R&D
N-Ac R&D
Non-R&D
Ac R&D
N-Ac R&D
Non-R&D
Very good 11 6 5 6 14 6 8 15 14
Good 31 17 10 36 50 30 34 49 47
Neutral 22 28 30 39 30 49 44 32 31
Bad 26 37 40 16 4 14 12 2 7
Very bad 10 12 16 3 2 1 3 2 1
p-value <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Self-reported influence of perspectives in academic R&D on job choice by sector
Current sector of work Ac R&D Non-ac
R&D Non-R&D Total p
Long-term career perspectives 53 57 50 54 0.443
Availability of permanent positions 35 49 45 40 0.001
Usual length of period holding a temporary position
23 35 35 27 0.001
Quality of HRM/career policy 12 25 23 17 <0.001
% who agree “strongly” or “very strongly”, in %
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Other factors in job choice
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Factors important for job choice – by sector of work
Ac R&D N-ac R&D Non-R&D p-value
Intellectual challenge 87 78 68 <0.001
Degree of independence 76 58 57 <0.001
Possibility to develop new skills 69 77 62 0.008
Creativeness 66 60 39 <0.001
Job security 28 41 43 <0.001
Salary 24 45 38 <0.001
Job opportunities within organization
19 35 24 <0.001
Benefits 21 31 17 0.002
Availability of permanent jobs within organization
21 28 21 0.049
Personal and family-related circumstances
25 16 17 0.006
Organization's career policy and HRM
8 21 11 <0.001
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Multinomial logistic regression – several factors included• Perception of career perspectives in academic R&D
• Perception of own scientific oeuvre
• Availability of sufficient job opportunities
• Years since PhD
• Field of PhD
• Which job characteristics play a role in job choice
• Personal characteristics (nationality, gender, age)
• Pseudo R2: Cox and Snell 0.369; Nagelkerke 0.449
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Non-academic R&D cf. academic R&D• Career perspectives in academic R&D:
– More positive about long-term career perspectives -> less likely to work in non-academic R&D
– More positive about HRM -> more likely
• Other factors:– More positive about sufficient number of positions in preferred sector of work
-> more likely
– Medical sciences, social sciences, humanities -> less likely than engineering
– Value intellectual challenge, degree of independence and personal circumstances -> less likely
– Value contribution to society, salary and job opportunities within organization -> more likely
– Dutch nationals -> more likely
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Non-R&D cf. academic R&D
• Career perspectives in academic R&D– More positive about availability of permanent positions -> less
likely to work in non-R&D
– More positive about HRM -> more likely
• Other factors:– More positive about own scientific oeuvre -> less likely
– Value creativeness, intellectual challenge, and personal and family-related circumstances -> less likely
– Value job opportunities within organization -> more likely
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Conclusions
• Career perspectives perceived as much worse in academic R&D than non-academic R&D and non-R&D
• Difference in career perspectives between sectors perceived as larger by those working in non-academic R&D and non-R&D
• Self-reported influence of different career aspects in academic R&D quite large, even more so for PhDs in non-academic R&D and non-R&D
• Aspects of personal development and job content main factors influencing job choice, but less so for people outside academic R&D
• Perception of career perspectives plays a small but significant role in job choice (controlled for other variables)
Acknowledgements
• Cornelis van Bochove
• Rosalie Belder
• Inge van der Weijden
• Rens van de Schoot
• Hans Sonneveld
• Moniek de Boer
• Danique van den Hanenberg
• Malu Kuhlmann
• Lisa van Leeuwen
• Lisette van Leeuwen
• Suze van der Luijt-Jansen
• Laura de Ruiter
• Bert van der Wurff
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Other factors that might play a rolePush factors
• (Own perception) of academic quality (e.g., Sanz-Menendez et al.)
• Preference for current job
• Field of PhD
• Year of PhD
Pull factors
• Job characteristics job satisfaction is acquired from (personal development vs. terms of employment: “taste for science” cf. Sauermann & Roach)
• Personal characteristics: gender, age, nationality
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Positions for PhD graduates