gh employers survey

May 2015 – DRAFT 5/1/2015

Global Health Fellows Program II (GHFP-II)

SummaryInsights from nearly 50 global health project directors on the importance of non-clinical

skills, preparedness of MPH and GH graduates, and the value of domestic work for GH careers.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Overview and Key Findings.................................................................................................................1II. Background.........................................................................................................................................2III. Snapshot of Respondents...................................................................................................................4IV. Summary of Results............................................................................................................................4

A. Hiring of MPH and GH Graduates....................................................................................................4B. Importance of Non-Clinical Skills.....................................................................................................5C. Preparedness of MPH and GH Graduates with Nonclinical Skills.....................................................8D. Value of Domestic Work Experience..............................................................................................11E. Interest of GH Project Directors and Additional Comments..........................................................15

V. Going Forward..................................................................................................................................16Annex A: Organizations Represented........................................................................................................17Annex B: Methodology..............................................................................................................................18Annex C: Survey Results............................................................................................................................21

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 1

I. OVERVIEW AND KEY FINDINGS

An ongoing discussion in the global health (GH) 1 field in the U.S. centers on the future of the American GH workforce and how best to prepare professionals for this career path. The Global Health Fellows Program-II (GHFP-II) investigated with a survey prior to the March 2015 Consortium of Universities for Global Health (CUGH) conference, with the aim of better contributing to the discussion about finding the best ways forward.

The survey, conducted between Feb. 18 and March 5, 2015, focused on project directors at organizations implementing projects funded by USAID's Global Health Bureau in 2014. The aim was to obtain views, suggestions and insights in three key areas:

The importance of non-clinical skills2 in contributing to successful GH professional work. The preparedness of MPH and Global Health graduates with needed non-clinical skills. The value of domestic work experience at NGOs in low-resource and immigrant environments

in the U.S. for GH careers.

Forty-nine project directors from 32 organizations gave their perspective, for a response rate of 59 percent. The project directors had, on average, between 11 and 21 years of GH recruitment experience, and at least 90 percent had worked on non-USAID funded projects.3 Key findings are below, and details are available in Section IV. Full survey results are in Annex C.

Key Findings: Non-Clinical Skills for Global Health

1) Top non-clinical skills. The most important non-clinical skills for success in GH careers were said to be program management (57 percent); Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) (39 percent); communication with client, counterpart4 and community (37 percent), strategy and project design (33 percent), and collaboration and team work (27 percent).

2) Student preparation with non-clinical skills. Only 33 percent of project directors (16 people) agreed that MPH and GH programs prepare students well with non-clinical skills, while 55 percent (27 people) agreed that other academic programs – not schools of public health or GH programs – prepare students with non-clinical skills.

3) Academia and preparation. Overall, 85 percent agreed or strongly agreed that academia could better prepare students with non-clinical skills.

1 Global health (GH) refers to “…an area for study, research, and practice that places a priority on improving health and achieving equity in health for all people worldwide. Global health emphasizes transnational health issues, determinants, and solutions; involves many disciplines within and beyond the health sciences and promotes interdisciplinary collaboration; and is a synthesis of population based prevention with individual-level clinical care.” (Koplan et al., 2009)2 For the purposes of this discussion, clinical skills are defined as specific health/medical/scientific specialties and disciplines.3 At least 44 of the 49 respondents – 90 percent – have worked on non-USAID funded projects. In April 2015, survey respondents were emailed a follow-up question: "Have you worked on programs/projects that received funding from at least one donor other than USAID?" Thirty-five of the 37 respondents (76 percent) indicated that they had non-USAID experience. For the 12 non-respondents, a review of online bios showed that nine had non-USAID experience.4 A counterpart is defined as the local professional working most closely with the USAID GH professional.

, GHFP-II 1

4) Advice to graduate students. Nearly half of responding project directors indicated that the main advice they would give MPH or GH graduate students would be to get practical overseas work and field experience (49 percent) and strengthen their program management, M&E and/or proposal writing skills (24 percent).

5) Organizational training. Sixty-one percent indicated that skills taught in in-service training at their organizations relate to skills that could or should be taught in MPH and GH programs. The most commonly cited trainings were program design, management and M&E (55 percent), and communication, team work and collaboration (30 percent).

Key Findings: Hiring Domestic Health Professionals for GH

6) Hiring domestic health professionals. Sixty-four percent of responding project directors indicated that they had hired domestic health professionals for GH positions, however only four percent indicated that they had hired five or more, 17 percent had hired one and 20 percent had hired two or three.

7) Top skills lacking without international experience. The top skills that candidates with domestic experience were seen to lack included: understanding the context and realities of GH (43 percent); characteristics like flexibility, adaptability and creativity (30 percent); cultural sensitivity (30 percent); cross-cultural communication skills (20 percent); and knowledge of key players, systems and processes (13 percent).

8) Making up for lack of international experience. Thirty-nine percent of respondents indicated that a specific strong skill or depth in content area could help make up for lack of international experience.

II. BACKGROUND

In September 2013, participants at the Summit on the Future of the American Global Health Professional, organized and hosted by GHFP-II, discussed the environmental shifts affecting opportunities for GH professionals including:

Globalization where technology is quickly redefining service provider roles and access to health information;

The shifting prevention and chronic illness needs of an increasing middle class in emerging economies;

Countries taking charge of their own health systems; American academia increasing its focus on GH, resulting in new and expanded GH programs,

tracks, minors, majors, certifications and degrees; The majority of GH work now occurring in multi-organizational, inter-disciplinary groups, teams

and alliances.

Participants at the 2013 Summit agreed that a vision for the future of GH work would be best developed through a collaboration of three key sectors:

1. The schools and universities that train, teach and prepare professionals for GH work;2. The non-profit, for-profit public and private sector companies and organizations that hire

graduates and in which GH professionals implement their work; and3. The donors (public and private) who fund the work and whose strategic vision, expectations

and requirements influence the course of global health.


CUGH has proposed defining the GH field to reflect a focus on “interdependence” and disciplines beyond health. To that end, a subcommittee identified competencies that could guide the development of GH educational programs and curricula, and in 2014 developed a list of 82 inter-professional competencies in 12 domains (publication citation – Annals of Global Health, May 2015). This research instigated more questions at GHFP-II about the future of GH work for new graduates of MPH and GH programs, as well as for domestic health professionals interested in moving to GH work.

Preparedness of MPH and GH Students with Non-Clinical SkillsAs GH work is evolving, GHFP-II recognizes that it is important to identify the skills necessary for successful work in the field – both clinical and non-clinical. In brief, non-clinical skills are the GH competencies that are not specific health specialties and disciplines, such as infectious disease, reproductive health, family planning, nutrition and supply chain management. Non-clinical skills do not include the medical and scientific aspects of the work. Examples of non-clinical skills include communication, teaming and collaboration, project design and program implementation, and cultural sensitivity.

In its role working with hundreds of GH fellows and interns, GHFP-II aimed to identify the most important non-clinical skills for GH careers, from the perspective of experienced GH project directors at the companies and organizations that hire practitioners. GHFP-II’s objective was to better understand the preparedness of new graduates and the extent to which these types of skills were – or could be – taught in academia.

Potential for Linking Global and Local Health ProfessionsIn recent years, GH professionals in the U.S. have been examining the substantive differences between work in GH and domestic public health. Research has focused on the differences in academic and practical preparation of GH and community health professionals, as well as definitions of the local-global relationship. There has been concern about siloed GH and community health educational programing, along with an absence of university and educational models that successfully link global and local health. This has led to two challenges:

Limited pathways for sharing lessons and innovations from the local level to the global level and vice versa;

Rigid career paths that limit movement between both fields. More detail about this discussion is available in a concept paper for 2015 pre-conference CUGH event on global/local. [ADD TITLE]

GHFP-II has been particularly interested in the question of how universities and NGOs can operationalize the link between global and local in order to expand a diverse GH workforce, as called for by USAID5.

To investigate, the survey asked project managers about the qualifications and value of domestic health candidates who have only worked in the U.S., including at NGOs that focus on low resource or immigrant environments. Details about survey development, methodology and response rate are available in Annex B.

5 The GHFP-II cooperative agreement includes a section on the importance of expanding a diverse GH workforce.


III. SNAPSHOT OF RESPONDENTS

Information about respondents is provided for context. Data was pulled from the 2014 USAID Users Guide to USAID/Washington Health Programs, along with survey questions about their background. For a list of organizations represented by respondents, please see Annex A.

Disaggregated Data:

Respondents: 49Organizations represented: 326 # universities: 4#/% Male: 24 / 49%#/% Female: 25 / 51%% Organizations based in/near Washington, DC: 69% (approx.)#/% of respondents with current projects: 43 / 88%#/% of respondents with ended projects: 6 / 12%

Survey Questions about RespondentsIn the survey, respondents described their background in GH work:

Years GH Experience. Eighty-four percent of respondents have been working in GH for at least 11 years (41 people), and, of those, half have more than 21 years' experience (25 people).

GH Hiring Experience. Seventy-three percent of respondents have at least 11 years’ hiring experience (36 people), and 27 percent of those have more than 21 years’ experience.

Overseas Work. Seventy-six percent of respondents (37 people) indicated that they had worked overseas doing GH work for a year or more.

MPH. Thirty-five percent of respondents (17 people) have a MPH. GH Concentration. Of the 18 people who indicated that they had a MPH, 83 percent (15 people)

had a concentration directly relevant to GH. University Implementers. Sixteen percent of respondents (eight people) had projects that were

based at universities. Faculty. Of the eight people with projects at universities, 38 percent (three people) were full-

time faculty at that time.

IV. SUMMARY OF RESULTS

A. HIRING OF MPH AND GH GRADUATES

Five questions asked about respondents’ experience hiring MPH and GH graduates. Details are in Annex C. In summary:

Hiring. Eighty-two percent of respondents (40 people) indicated that they had hired new MPH or GH graduates.

6 A list of organizations is available in Annex A.


Percentage MPH and GH graduates. Respondents indicated that at least 55 percent of their hires were MPH or GH graduates.

International Work Experience. Eighty-eight percent of respondents indicated that at least half of their hires who were MPH and GH graduates had at least some international work experience. Of those, more than half indicated that at least 76 percent of their hires had international experience.

Number of Applicants. A majority of respondents (56 percent – 22 people) indicated that they had received at least 16 applications for each of the last several job openings for candidates with master’s degrees.

Qualified Applicants. Nearly 90 percent of respondents (35 people) indicated that some or most of the applicants had acceptable qualifications for the stated job description, with 40 percent of those indicating that most were qualified.

B. IMPORTANCE OF NON-CLINICAL SKILLS

Top two or three non-clinical skills that are key to becoming successful in the field of GH (Question 13)

The six most important non-clinical skills cited by respondents were program management (57 percent); M&E (39 percent); communication with client, counterpart and community (37 percent); strategy and project design (33 percent); the related collaboration and team work (27 percent); and attitude, flexibility and initiative (also 20 percent).

SUMMARYCategorized Answers % #Program Work (71% respondents – 35 people)Program management 57% 28M&E 39% 19Strategy, project design 33% 16Knowledge of USAID and fundraising mechanisms 8% 4Professional Capabilities (65% respondents – 32 people)Communication with client, counterpart; partnering; community engagement; diplomatic skills

37% 18

Writing skills 20% 10Training 14% 7Presentation and speaking skills 8% 4Leadership 6% 3Interpersonal Effectiveness (49% respondents – 24 people) Collaboration & team work 27% 13Attitude, flexibility & initiative 27% 13Cultural competency 8% 4Knowledge Management (27 percent respondents – 13 people)Contextual awareness, health systems & policy, USG 22% 11Strategic analysis 8% 4


Health Expertise (10 percent respondents – 5 people)Research, quantitative skills 10% 5OtherSales, marketing, advocacy; conflict resolution skills; change theory; multi-tasking; overseas experience; language skills

10% 5

Number respondents contributing: 49

Main advice to a MPH or GH graduate student regarding the non-clinical skills needed for their future career (Question 17)

Nearly half of the respondents indicated that the main advice they would give MPH or GH graduate students would be to get practical work and field experience (49 percent) and strengthen their program management, M&E and proposal skills (24 percent). Quite a few also focused on the importance of pursuing a range of experiences (16 percent) and identifying your skill strengths (16 percent).

SUMMARYCategorized Answers % #Get practical work and field experience 49% 22Strengthen program management, M&E, proposal skills 24% 11Pursue a range of experiences / diverse learning opportunities 16% 7Identify skill strengths - both technical and non-clinical 16% 7Focus on mentors/ networking 11% 5Strengthen communication, collaboration, diplomacy skills 11% 5Focus on attitude, motivation, creativity, flexibility 11% 5Take GH courses and attend GH events 7% 3Other (languages, accounting, quantitative skills, contextual understanding)

16% 7



“Critical thinking and creativity are a spark I look for in hiring, as well as documented evidence of the ability to work well in teams. Finally, become an expert on some topic, not just a generalist. That depth can often get you into the door of an organization.”

“Even if you have limited work experience, be able to talk clearly about your skills that you bring to that position/role.”

“I think that new graduates… look down on anything they consider to be management tasks. Once hired these graduates want to have responsibility for country-based programming or to lead activities, but feel that the "management" parts of the activity are a waste of time and don't let them get to their "technical" inputs. I've rarely seen an activity, including research, that didn't require both types of skills, so I would encourage MPH graduate students to strengthen both types of skills.”

Organizational trainings or workshops to improve non-clinical skills (Questions 18 and 19)

Seventy-three percent of respondents (36 people) indicated that their organizations provide periodic trainings or workshops to improve non-clinical skills. For those whose organizations provide periodic trainings and workshops, 55 percent indicated topics related to program design, management and M&E, and 30 percent had topics that focused on communication, team work and collaboration. Also popular: leadership and supervision (27 percent) and writing skills (21 percent).

SUMMARYCategorized Answers % #Program design, management and M&E 55% 18Communication, team work and collaboration (general) 30% 10Leadership and supervision 27% 9Writing skills 21% 7Health topics 18% 6Research and analytical skills 18% 6Computer systems and skills 15% 5USG, USAID specific and compliance 15% 5Presentation and speaking skills 15% 5Training of trainers 12% 4Other (time management, gender integration, capacity building, cultural competencies, ethics)

30% 10


C. PREPAREDNESS OF MPH AND GH GRADUATES WITH NONCLINICAL SKILLS

MPH and GH programs preparing students with non-clinical skills (Question 14)

Thirty-three percent of respondents (16 people) agreed that MPH and GH programs prepare students well with non-clinical skills, while 37 percent (18 people) neither agreed not disagreed. The remaining 31 percent (15 people) disagreed, strongly disagreed or didn’t know.

Seventeen respondents left comments for this question, with two themes arising. Seven people emphasized that the specific school and program were significant factors, while four people noted the importance of past work and personal experience.


Don’t know

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Neither agree nor disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

4%

4%

22%

37%

33%

0%

Do MPH and GH Programs Prepare Students with Non-Clinical Skills?

Respondents: 49

Academia’s preparation of students with non-clinical skills. (Question 15)

Eighty-five percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that academia could better prepare students with non-clinical skills. Nine people commented on this question, with suggestions focusing on the need for specific skills, including writing, project management, public speaking and critical thinking. Respondents highlighted internships, finding a mentor and the need for students to make choices to prepare themselves for the work.

Don’t know

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Neither agree nor disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

2%

0%

4%

8%

54%

31%

Could Academia Better Prepare Students with Non-Clin-ical Skills?


“Folks who have [important non-clinical skills] have them because they have pursued those interests themselves.”

“Gives theoretical skills, but these are really learned on the job and in the field over a period of years.”

“In program design, etc., graduates generally have the theoretical basis. However, international development (incl. global health), in my experience, requires a great deal of creativity, critical thinking, and willingness to promote and support change. That's "critical," and not everyone can expected to come out of grad school with these qualities.”

Respondents: 48

Non-clinical skill preparation by other academic programs – not schools of public health or GH (Question 16)

Fifty-five percent of respondents (27 people) indicated that other academic programs – not schools of public health or global health – prepare students a lot or some with non-clinical skills. In contrast, 31 percent (15 people) found that these schools prepare students only a little or not at all. The remaining fourteen percent were not sure.

Other programs mentioned as useful include public policy, sociology/social demography, anthropology and business schools. Two people mentioned Peace Corps specifically.

Not sure

Not at all

Only a little

Some

A lot

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

14%

4%

27%

47%

8%

Do other Academic Programs (not MPH or GH) Prepare Students with Non-Clinical Skills?

Respondents: 49


“Students also have to make their own choices to prepare them for employment (e.g. internships, volunteering abroad, learning a language).”

“Global health programs should focus more on the practical aspects of implementing donor- funded projects, which should include technical but also programmatic elements.”

”I think these are skills learnt through experience rather than academia.”

“An MPH is not the only degree that we will hire people with. Some schools have better international connections and programs than others.”

“Some business schools and public policy schools prepare people for negotiation, facilitation, and financial management.”

Link between organizational trainings and that could be or should be taught in MPH and GH programs (Question 20)

Sixty-one percent of respondents indicated that skills taught in trainings at their organizations relate to skills that could be or should be taught in MPH and GH programs. This relates to the 36 respondents who indicated that their organizations do provide trainings.

Not relevant

Not sure

No

Yes

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

3%

31%

6%

61%

Should Training Topics Covered by GH Organizations be Taught in MPH and GH Programs?

Respondents: 36

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 10

D. VALUE OF DOMESTIC WORK EXPERIENCE

Consideration of applicants with only domestic health experience (Question 21)

Sixty-five percent of respondents (31 people) indicated that they would be willing to hire a person who only had domestic work experience, such as at NGOs that focus on low resource or immigrant environments.

Thirty-three people (of 48 responding) left comments on this question. Thirteen people seemed particularly open to considering these candidates, depending on the “nature of their experience,” “how good they are,” if they were the “best applicant,” and if they had the right skill set. Another four people indicated that they would consider these types of candidates depending on the level of the position, such as an entry-level job. Others indicated that if they had the social skills and experience with diverse communities, they would be considered. One noted that the U.S. context was too different from the international context because the infrastructures do not compare.

No

Not sure

Yes

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

19%

17%

65%

Willingness to Hire Domestic Health Professionals

Respondents: 48

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 11

“Someone with a very specific niche can sometimes only be found domestically.”“That candidate would have a hill to climb in competition with candidates that did have overseas experience, but if the skill set and practical experience were there, they'd be considered.”

“[It] would depend on the level of the position. For most technical level people it would be a hard sell… unless [they had] a very specialized skill such as GIS.”

“Many relevant experiences to working in a culturally

Examples of skills that candidates with international experience have that project directors do not see in candidates with domestic experience? (Question 22)

The most commonly cited skills that candidates with international experience have that those with domestic experience lack include understanding the context and realities of GH (43 percent), characteristics like flexibility, adaptability and creativity (30 percent) and cultural sensitivity and openness (30 percent). The project directors also noted that cross-cultural communication skills and knowledge of key players and systems were learned in the field.

SUMMARYCategorized Answers % #Understanding of context and realities of GH 43% 20Flexibility, adaptability, creativity and mindset 30% 14Openness to other cultures and cultural sensitivity 30% 14Cross-cultural communication skills (counterparts, stakeholders, community)

20% 9

Knowledge of key players, systems and process 13% 6Program design and implementation 4% 2Language skills 9% 4Number respondents contributing: 46

23. What does a candidate with domestic health experience have to possess to make up for the lack of international experience? [Open ended]

While there is skepticism that anything can make up for domestic candidates’ lack of international experience, many respondents suggested that having specific skills or depth in a niche content can help (39 percent). Many pointed out that candidates also had to show – and discuss – how their skills were transferrable. A significant number of respondents also described the importance of attitude, such as the willingness to learn, motivation, dedication and humility (29 percent) along with related skills of approach, including creativity, initiative and problem-solving skills (18 percent).

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 12

“Just assuming the contexts and work are the same and that skills will naturally transfer is not realistic. I have seen some people who make the transition do OK, and others who don't do so well until they learn the international work better. Some humility is a good thing.”

“The context of low resourced global settings. The recognition that developing country professionals are often great professionals but just do not have the systems and tools to work with.”

“I don't think this is as much about ‘skills’ as it is about ‘understanding or knowledge’. Until you've been in the field and seen a health facility and understand how far a mother has to walk to get there and then realize that these health facilities often don't have supplies and commodities, you can't really start to understand how to approach these problems.”

“Being able to engage to design and implement public health programs that can function in spite of a weak public health infrastructure.”

SUMMARYCategorized Answers % #Specific strong skill or depth in content area (niche expertise) – transferable

39% 15

Learning attitude (motivation, dedication, humility, maturity) 29% 11Approach (creativity, initiative, innovation, problem-solving skills, flexibility)

18% 7

Cultural sensitivity and comfort 13% 5Show understanding of contexts and complex environments, USAID, USG

13% 5

Foreign language skills 11% 4Program management (includes proposals, HR, M&E, etc) 8% 3Communication skills 8% 3Writing skills 8% 3Experience in cross-cultural/immigrant environments 8% 3Other (depends on the job, sales/marketing skills, analytical skills, awareness of disease patterns and ways of doing business, broad interests, responsible and organized, training skills, go to meetings and volunteer, demonstrated interest, willingness to travel)

21% 8


Project directors hiring employees with domestic health experience (Questions 25 and 26)

Sixty-four percent of respondents (30 people) indicated that they had hired domestic health professionals for GH positions, and 36 percent indicated that they had not or were not sure (17 people).

In comments, project managers noted that the hires still had some international experience, such as Peace Corps. Others indicated that those hired were entry-level or “not necessarily hands on.”

Twenty-eight people who indicated that they had hired domestic health professionals gave details on the number hired. This chart shows the percentage compared to the entire survey population of 47 who had answered the previous question. Overall, only 4 percent indicated that they had hired five or more, while 20 percent had hired two or three. The greatest percentage – 17 percent – had hired one.

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 13

“Not as common now, as the pool of MPH grads is large. Typically, they at least have Peace Corps experience, and start at the program assistant level. This is partly due to language fluency requirements. All our PAs are fluent in a relevant language.”

“A few experiments - one was successful, one was not. Based on the people more than anything.”

Do not rememberNot specific

5 or more4321

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%

13%6%

4%0%

9%11%

17%

Number of Domestic Health Profesionals Hired

Results use responses from 28 people who have hired from this group and a survey population of 47 who indicated whether they had hired or not.

Reasons for selecting domestic health professionals for GH positions (Question 27)

For the 24 respondents who commented on why they had hired candidates with only domestic experience, half (50 percent) indicated that they had the right technical skills and expertise that could translate to international work. Also very common were descriptions of candidates who were a good fit for the organization or position (29 percent) or had the demonstrated interest, potential and motivation (25 percent).

Categorized Answers % #Technical skills and expertise; could translate work to international context

50% 12

Good fit for organization or position; strong candidate otherwise

29% 7

Demonstrated interest, potential, motivation

25% 6

Non-clinical skills 13% 3Other cross-cultural / language experience

13% 3

Professional, articulate, smart 13% 3Level of position (junior) 13% 3Other (their degree, recommendations, hiring manager, travel & study abroad)

17% 4


, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 14

“They wowed me in other areas and seemed to have the attitude to make it work.”

“One in particular had excellent clinical skills; another had excellent project management skills; several worked as interns and showed excellent potential.”

Advice for public health professionals who want to switch to GH (Question 24)

Half of the 42 respondents giving advice to those working in public health domestically, about switching to GH, suggested that they get overseas experience, whether an internship or through volunteer work (50 percent). A significant number (45 percent) emphasized that the person should be able to show the relevance of their domestic experience and special skills. Motivation and attitude also were important (19 percent) along with the suggestion to join organizations, network and find a mentor (17 percent).

SUMMARYCategorized Answers % #Get overseas experience (internship, volunteer, etc)

50% 21

Show relevance of domestic experience and special skills (build expertise)

45% 19

Motivation and attitude 19% 8Join organizations, network, find mentor 17% 7Language skill 10% 4Take GH courses 5% 2Learn the field and track issues 5% 2Get intercultural experience 5% 2Other (get political experience) 2% 1Number respondents contributing: 42

E. INTEREST OF GH PROJECT DIRECTORS AND ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

Project directors interested in results and updates about this work (Question 29)Sixty-three percent of respondents (31 people from 21 organizations) asked to receive survey results and other updates about this work.

Additional comments (Question 28)Eight people provided additional comments, reflecting on the complicated nature of these issues, how it can be very hard to go between domestic and international (either way) and the importance of differentiation.

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 15

“Volunteer overseas to prove you can hack it. Take whatever specialty you have, and find a way to use it overseas, even if in an unpaid internship. Even six months would make a difference in my thinking about hiring you.”

“Network with folks in international health to determine why you want to switch. Find champions in GH who would be willing to engage you - but engage on the issues themselves. Clearly define how you would make a contribution.”

“The person has to be able to articulate the relevance of their skills and experience to the role they seek in global health… So make the connections for people about what you bring to the table.”

V. GOING FORWARD

As the global health field evolves in an increasingly connected world, more and more GH work is being carried out by teams and alliances with multiple players – national, organizational and inter-disciplinary. The next wave of GH professionals needs to be prepared for the realities of actual GH work, including excellent communication and collaboration, and project design and management.Universities continue to build and improve their GH programs, and the focus, understandably, is on technical expertise in health and science, but there also needs to be an increased emphasis on the non-clinical skills that are valued in the workplace. Eighty-five percent of project directors thought that academia could do better. At the same time, it was understood that many of the desired non-clinical skills are developed during the experience of overseas fieldwork, such as learning the context and realities of GH work, and developing knowledge of the myriad web of stakeholders, partners, systems and processes. It’s for that reason that GH students need field experience to be competitive.

GHFP-II also is interested in possibilities for expanding the range and diversity of health professionals who might contribute to GH work. What this study showed was that a majority of the project directors were willing to hire applicants who did not have international experience (64 percent of respondents), however they have done so in very low numbers. The main concern was that these candidates lacked an understanding of the context and realities or GH work. However, 39 percent indicated that a specific skill or depth in content area could help make up for lack of international experience. In some way, these professionals who are interested in GH careers should understand the possibilities and how to best prepare themselves.

Considering future GH professionals is instrumental to building the GH systems of the future. Practitioners and educational institutions working together can best prepare new graduates for successful fieldwork – and productive careers.

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 16

ANNEX A: ORGANIZATIONS REPRESENTED

Organization # Respondents1. Abt Associates 22. AVAC 13. Columbia University 14. Development Alternatives Inc. (DAI) 15. EngenderHealth 16. FHI360 67. Futures Group 18. Georgetown University 29. ICF International 110. IntraHealth International 111. Jhpiego 112. John Snow, Inc 313. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public

Health 214. KNCV Tuberculosis Foundation 115. Management Sciences for Health 316. Marie Stopes International 117. Medicines for Malaria Venture 118. mothers2mothers 119. Partnership for Supply Chain Management 120. PATH 221. Population Council 422. Population Reference Bureau 123. Public Health Institute (PHI) 124. RTI International 125. Social Impact 126. The Carter Center 127. The Union 128. UC Davis 129. University Research Corporation 230. US Census Bureau International Programs

Center 131. Woman Care Global 132. Woodrow Wilson International Center for

Scholars 1

Total Respondents: 49

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 17

ANNEX B: METHODOLOGY

The following summarizes methodology for the survey.

* Timing. The survey took place over two weeks, Feb. 18 – March 5, 2015.

* Survey designers. A GHFP-II M&E consultant, Natasha Wanchek, designed the survey in February 2015 in conjunction with Morgan Blackburn, from Management Systems International, and GHFP-II director Sharon Rudy. Survey organizers received feedback on draft versions from GHFP-II staff, a member of CUGH and a colleague at another GH organization.

* Targeted. After discussion about whether the survey should be targeted to project directors or human resource directors, it was determined that project directors would have a broader perspective on the non-clinical skills needed for success in the field. Project director names and contact information were obtained from the USAID Users Guide to USAID/Washington Health Programs. It was determined that any director of projects that were active as recently as 2014, even if their project had recently closed, would have a useful perspective to contribute.

* Survey options. The questions were designed for phone and online versions, with only slight differences. Respondents were given the choice of survey method and nearly all selected online.

* Comments and open-ended answers. Of the 29 questions, 10 required open-ended answers. For these, results were categorized and are noted as such below. Every effort was made to represent all of the feedback. The survey also invited comments on many of the questions, and, with the exception of open-ended questions that were categorized, these were included with the results in Annex C. Comments were edited only slightly for grammar. Respondents were informed that their responses would not be attributed to them.

* Constraints. While project directors were considered the best recipients for the survey, it was recognized that they would not necessarily have extensive perspective on the number of CVs coming in or the qualifications of CVs that did not make the final cut for review.

The project directors surveyed are not an exhaustive representation of global health work. The respondents had direct experience with USAID-funded projects, although it is recognized that GH is a vast field with many other donors and implementers.

The length of the survey was a constraint in that respondents had to make time for the 10-minute online version or 15 or more minutes for the phone survey. By providing a choice, especially considering the length, the response rate was still high. With a shorter survey, however, specifically requesting phone surveys likely would have provided more detailed feedback (though with a lower response rate).

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 18

* Survey design. In the first section, questions aimed to identify the importance of non-clinical skills in contributing to successful GH professional work. In the survey description, four areas were given as examples of non-clinical, non-technical skills: community engagement, team skills (collaboration), project design (including funding mechanisms) and project implementation. The objectives and related survey questions included:

Objective Survey Question #Identify key non-clinical skills for success in GH

What do you consider the top two or three non-clinical skills that are key to becoming successful in the field of global health?

13

Identify professional advice for students regarding key non-clinical skills

What is the main advice you would give to a MPH or Global Health graduate student regarding the non-clinical skills needed for their future career?

17

Identify organizational non-clinical training needs

Does your organization provide periodic trainings or workshops to improve non-clinical skills, not including trainings at orientation?- What non-clinical trainings are provided? What skills are

emphasized?

1819

The second area of questioning focused on respondents’ experience with the preparedness of graduates with the necessary non-clinical skills for success in GH. The objectives and related survey questions included:

Objective Survey Question #Quantify perspective on adequacy of MPH and GH program preparation and training for GH careers

Do you agree with the following statement: MPH and Global Health programs prepare students well with these types of non-clinical skills?

14

Quantify perspective on adequacy of general academia preparation and training for GH careers

Do you agree with the following statement: Academia could better prepare students with these non-clinical skills.

15

Measure effectiveness of non-clinical skills training at other academic programs (not MPH/GH)

To what extent have you found that other academic programs – not schools of public health or global health – effectively prepare students with these non-clinical skills.

16

Investigate possible causation between MPH/GH preparation and organizational trainings

Do the trainings [provided by your organization] relate to skills that could be or should be taught in MPH and Global Health programs?[If yes to 18, above]

20

The third area of inquiry was to look at the value of domestic work experience at NGOs in low-resource and immigrant environments in the U.S. for GH careers. The objectives and related survey questions included:

Objective Survey Question #Measure willingness to Would you consider hiring a person who had only worked in 21

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 19

consider candidates with domestic work experience

the U.S., such as at NGOs that focus on low resource or immigrant environments?

Identify skills that domestic health candidates are missing

Can you give one or two examples of skills that candidates with international experience have that you don’t see in those with domestic experience?

22

Identify skills or characteristics that can compensate for lack of international experience

What does a candidate with domestic health experience have to possess to make up for the lack of international experience?

23

Quantify how common hiring of domestic health workers is for GH positions

Have you hired employees with domestic health experience, such as at NGOs that focus on low resource or immigrant environments?

o Do you recall about how many?o Do you recall any of the specifics of why they were

selected?

252627

Identify professional advice for domestic health workers who are interested in GH

What advice would you give to people who are working in public health domestically, who want to switch to global health?

24

A secondary purpose was to ascertain project director interest in survey results and possible future engagement on these issues.

Objective Survey Question #Share results and determine interest in future involvement

Would you be interested in receiving a summary of survey results and other updates about this work?

29

* Response Rate: The response rate was 59 percent. Details are below.

# Emailed project directors in the 2014 User’s Guide:

103

Possible respondents: 827 # Respondents: 49Response rate: 59%8

Dates:Initial survey invite (surveymonkey): Feb. 18, 2015Follow-up email (surveymonkey): Feb. 23, 2015Calls and personal emails (not surverymonkey):

Feb. 24-March 5, 2015

Survey closed: March 6, 2015

Phone or Online:Online interviews: 46 Phone interviews: 3

7 Of the 103 people emailed with the survey invite, 21 possible respondents had previously opted out of SurveyMonkey, had emails that bounced, wrong numbers, or indicated they were the wrong people.8 The response rate of 59 percent is based on 82 possible respondents that had not clearly opted out, had bounced emails, wrong numbers, etc. The response rate based on the original email invite of 103 would be 48 percent.

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 20

ANNEX C: SURVEY RESULTS

PART I: Respondent Background

1. About how many years have you been working for a global health organization, or on projects that primarily focus on global health issues? [open ended]

Categorized Answers Responses

1-10 16% 8

11-20 33% 16

21-30 37% 18

31+ 14% 7

Total 49

2. About how many years in all have you been involved in the hiring process of global health employees? [open ended]


1-10 27% 13

11-20 47% 23

21-30 18% 9

31+ 8% 4

Total 49

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 21

3. Have you worked overseas doing global health work, living in-country for a year or more (not necessarily consecutively)?

Answer Choices Responses

Yes 76% 37

No 24% 12

Total 49

4. Do you have a MPH?


Yes 35% 17

No 65% 31

Total 48 (one skipped)

5. Did you have a concentration directly relevant to global health? [If yes to 4]


Yes 83% 15

No 17% 3

Total 18

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 22

6. Was your USAID project based at a university?


Yes 16% 8

No 84% 41

Total 49

7. Were you fulltime faculty at that time? [If yes to 6]


Yes 38% 3

No 63% 5

Total 8

PART II: Respondent Hiring Background

8. Have you hired new MPH or Master in Global Health graduates?


Yes 82% 40

No 12% 6

Not sure 6% 3

Total 49

9. What percentage of your hires would you estimate were MPH or Master in Global Health graduates?


, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 23

0-25 percent 13% 5

26-50 percent 33% 13

51-75 percent 33% 13

76-100 percent 23% 9

Not sure 0% 0

Total 40

10. What percentage of your hires who were MPH or global health graduates would you estimate had at least some international work experience?


0-25 percent 8% 3

26-50 percent 5% 2

51-75 percent 30% 12

76-100 percent 58% 23

Not sure 0% 0

Total 40

11. Reflecting back on the last several job openings requiring candidates with at least a master’s degree, can you estimate how many people applied before applications were closed?


1-5 3% 1

6-10 18% 7

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 24

11-15 24% 9

16 or more 56% 22

Total 39

12. Of those who applied, can you estimate what proportion had acceptable qualifications according to the stated job description?


All 0% 0

Most 40% 16

Some 48% 19

A few 10% 4

None 0% 0

Not sure 3% 1

Total 40

PART III: Key Questions and Comments

13. What do you consider the top two or three non-clinical skills that are key to becoming successful in the field of global health? [open ended]

SUMMARYCategorized Answers % #Program Work (71% respondents – 35 people)Program management 57% 28M&E 39% 19Strategy, project design 33% 16Knowledge of USAID and fundraising mechanisms 8% 4Professional Capabilities (65% respondents – 32 people)

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 25

Communication with client, counterpart; partnering; community engagement; diplomatic skills

37% 18

Writing skills 20% 10Training 14% 7Presentation and speaking skills 8% 4Leadership 6% 3Interpersonal Effectiveness (49% respondents – 24 people) Collaboration & team work 27% 13Attitude, flexibility & initiative 27% 13Cultural competency 8% 4Knowledge Management (27 percent respondents – 13 people)Contextual awareness, health systems & policy, USG 22% 11Strategic analysis 8% 4Health Expertise (10 percent respondents – 5 people)Research, quantitative skills 10% 5OtherSales, marketing, advocacy; conflict resolution skills; change theory; multi-tasking; overseas experience; language skills

10% 5


17. What is the main advice you would give to a MPH or Global Health graduate student regarding the non-clinical skills needed for their future career? [open ended]

SUMMARYCategorized Answers % #Get practical work and field experience 49% 22Strengthen program management, M&E, proposal skills 24% 11Pursue a range of experiences / diverse learning opportunities 16% 7Identify skill strengths - both technical and non-clinical 16% 7Focus on mentors/ networking 11% 5Strengthen communication, collaboration, diplomacy skills 11% 5Focus on attitude, motivation, creativity, flexibility 11% 5Take GH courses and attend GH events 7% 3Other (languages, accounting, quantitative skills, contextual understanding)

16% 7


18. Does your organization provide periodic trainings or workshops to improve non-clinical skills, not including trainings at orientation?

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 26


Yes 73% 36

No 16% 8

Not sure 10% 5

Total 49

19. What non-clinical trainings are provided? What skills are emphasized? [If yes to 18]

SUMMARYCategorized Answers % #Program design, management and M&E 55% 18Communication, team work and collaboration (general) 30% 10Leadership and supervision 27% 9Writing skills 21% 7Health topics 18% 6Research and analytical skills 18% 6Computer systems and skills 15% 5USG, USAID specific and compliance 15% 5Presentation and speaking skills 15% 5Training of trainers 12% 4Other (time management, gender integration, capacity building, cultural competencies, ethics)

30% 10


14. Do you agree with the following statement: MPH and Global Health programs prepare students well with these types of non-clinical skills?


Strongly agree 0 0

Agree 33% 16

Neither agree nor disagree 37% 18

Disagree 22% 11

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 27

Strongly disagree 4% 2

Don’t know 4% 2

Total 49

Comments:

People that study development are better prepared than those with MPH The individuals I've hired have had these skills because I specifically select for them; however,

I'm not in a position to say whether all programs prepare their students well. It really depends on the specialty focus.

I think it has been more of the experience they bring to the table, usually through work. Not necessarily just the schooling.

I think too little diplomatic and sound communication skills. It depends significantly on the school and the student's area of focus. Depends on the individual and the program. I've found the people coming out of some of the

MPP programs stronger (like Woodrow Wilson School). It is hard to make a blanket statement about all MPH and GH programs. Folks who have them have been because they have pursued those interests themselves. Some programs focus on these skills, others don't. Degrees provide technical background, but rarely the "practical" aspects required on the job.

Besides the above skills listed in #11, other skills required are excellent organizational, analytical and writing, as well as everything BUT a sense of entitlement.

Some, but not necessarily the management skills. And writing skills take time and experience to build. New MPHs are rarely great writers.

Gives theoretical skills, but these are really learned on the job and in the field over a period of years.

There still needs to be some hands on education on how to prepare a complete design of a project including the financial side. Real training skills would be a boost for a graduate coming into the field: not just presentation skills.

Most programs need to do more training on public speaking skills. Depends on the program and the candidate. JHU produces graduates with strong quantitative

skills and a good technical background. Few focus on the management skills. However, other degrees also do that. The degree program is not a major factor in my hiring

decision. Partially agree. In program design, etc., graduates generally have the theoretical basis. However,

international development (incl. global health), in my experience, requires a great deal of creativity, critical thinking, and willingness to promote and support change. That's "critical," and not everyone can expected to come out of grad school with these qualities.

15. Do you agree with the following statement: Academia could better prepare students with these non-clinical skills.

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 28


Strongly agree 31% 15

Agree 54% 26

Neither agree nor disagree 8% 4

Disagree 4% 2

Strongly disagree 0% 0

Don’t know 2% 1

Total 48

Comments:

These skills need to be more explicitly emphasized at the academic level. I always think there is room for improvement when it comes to clear, succinct writing. With

regard to project design, implementation and analysis, I think that a solid foundation is essential, but that students right out of masters programs should hope to have excellent mentors in their first job to help hone these skills.

Internships with global health programs would be better. Global health programs should focus more on the practical aspects of implementing donor-

funded projects, which should include technical but also programmatic elements. Depends on what career track the student would like to pursue. To a certain degree. Students also have to make their own choices to prepare them for

employment (e.g. internships, volunteering abroad, learning a language). I think these are skills learnt through experience rather than academia. Public speaking (as above) writing for clarity and conciseness. Critical thinking and being analytical; risk taking; international development/global health as a

game changer. I'd like to see more folks with these attributes, or the potential and interest to develop those.

16. To what extent have you found that other academic programs – not schools of public health or global health – effectively prepare students with these non-clinical skills.


A lot 8% 4

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 29

Some 47% 23

Only a little 27% 13

Not at all 4% 2

Not sure 14% 7

Total 49

Comments:

I think that schools of public health, in general, do a better job than many other academic programs.

I believe in the power of unlike minds to solve global health issues. As per my comment above, Columbia and Princeton MPP programs are strong. Some students with public policy backgrounds have some of this. Or Sociology/Social

Demography. Or Anthropology. It is usually a combination of studies and other experience (e.g. an overseas internship, the Peace Corps or overseas residence) and studies that best prepares students.

An MPH is not the only degree that we will hire people with. Some schools have better international connections and programs than others.

Some business schools and public policy schools prepare people for negotiation, facilitation, and financial management.

Peace Corps, while not a school per se, prepares its Volunteers better than any institution e.g. MBA, PhD Fairly similar to MPH programs. Also, non-academic programs and work opportunities can prepare candidates in these skills. Some or a lot depending on the technical specialty. Economics; MBA; probably other. Many of the skills I list are taught in MBA programs

20. Do the trainings [provided by your organization] relate to skills that could be or should be taught in MPH and Global Health programs? [If yes to 18, above]


Yes 61% 22

No 6% 2

Not sure 31% 11

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 30

Not relevant 3% 1

Total 36

21. Would you consider hiring a person who had only worked in the U.S., such as at NGOs that focus on low resource or immigrant environments?


Yes 65% 31

No 17% 8

Not sure 19% 9

Total 48

Comments:

Someone with a very specific niche can sometimes only be found domestically. I've worked in domestic health and the skill sets are very different. They don't necessarily

translate well. I'm involved in a lot of clinical research where skills translate. That candidate would have a hill to climb in competition with candidates that did have overseas

experience, but if the skill set and practical experience were there, they'd be considered. I am more interested in the skills than in the specific discipline. Depends on the skill set , personality, past experience such as peace corps etc. Probably for an entry-level or Program Officer type position that has both administrative and

some technical functions. Experiences are not equivalent. Strong social skills and creativity trump technical knowledge which they can get along the way. Because skills and experience can be highly relevant, depending on the position We have although they tend to come from within our organization as we have a domestic

practice. The US context is so different from the international context - the infrastructures don't compare

well. I know some people make the shift easily, so I would consider such an applicant - if no one with global experience applied for the job.

We only do international work - the person would have to have some international experience. It depends on whether the experience afforded the person the requisite skills for the job. Probably not as all of our projects are overseas. Only if they have strong technical skills (eg research).

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 31

Transferable experience around cross-cultural understanding, problem solving, program management.

It depends on how good they are, and who else has applied. Generally I give high preference to international experience.

100% of our work is in developing countries. Unlikely but a lot depends on the nature of their experience. If they interviewed well, and were the best applicant in the hiring team's opinion. International experience required. But would depend on the level of the position. For most technical level people it would be a

hard sell to do so unless that a very specialized skill such as GIS. Many relevant experiences to working in a culturally different context; often institutional

context is useful. It would depend at what level. For an entry level or junior position, US experience is fine. For a

more advanced position, I would want to know that the individual has an understanding of working in other countries.

I don't think they have the experience/context needed to communicate effectively with our staff and partners in the field.

Depends on the particular post but some of the issues/necessary skills would be transferable. In spite of some US communities being low-resourced the public health issues are not similar to

those in global settings. For example the US has an excellent public health infrastructure which is not the case in most developing countries.

If they understand the social dimensions of health and have demonstrated the ability to work with diverse communities.

Many experiences in domestic settings are relevant for international work. I'm more interested in the potential and interest of a candidate than a perfect match to the model profile.

Experience in developing countries is a major criteria for selecting appropriate staff. We look for commitment to global health and development. We typically do have plenty of

applicants who have had some international experience. Yes, though only for an entry level job, and it would not be my first choice.

22. Can you give one or two examples of skills that candidates with international experience have that you don’t see in those with domestic experience? [Open ended]

SUMMARYCategorized Answers % #Understanding of context and realities of GH 43% 20Flexibility, adaptability, creativity and mindset 30% 14Openness to other cultures and cultural sensitivity 30% 14Cross-cultural communication skills (counterparts, stakeholders, community)

20% 9

Knowledge of key players, systems and process 13% 6Program design and implementation 4% 2Language skills 9% 4Number respondents contributing: 46

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 32

23. What does a candidate with domestic health experience have to possess to make up for the lack of international experience? [Open ended]

SUMMARYCategorized Answers % #Specific strong skill or depth in content area (niche expertise) - transferable

39% 15

Learning attitude (motivation, dedication, humility, maturity) 29% 11Approach (creativity, initiative, innovation, problem-solving skills, flexibility)

18% 7

Cultural sensitivity and comfort 13% 5Show understanding of contexts and complex environments, USAID, USG

13% 5

Foreign language skills 11% 4Program management (includes proposals, HR, M&E, etc) 8% 3Communication skills 8% 3Writing skills 8% 3Experience in cross-cultural/immigrant environments 8% 3Other (depends on the job, sales/marketing skills, analytical skills, awareness of disease patterns and ways of doing business, broad interests, responsible and organized, training skills, go to meetings and volunteer, demonstrated interest, willingness to travel)

21% 8


25. Have you hired employees with domestic health experience, such as at NGOs that focus on low resource or immigrant environments?


Yes 64% 30

No 28% 13

Not sure 9% 4

Total 47

Comments:

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 33

We've hired people with only domestic experience for entry-level or Program Officer positions, doing mainly administrative and support tasks. Some of these staff members have taken on international technical responsibilities over time, as we've managed to get them out to the field or better immersed in the technical work. We've also hired people with limited international experience (e.g. short internships overseas) who also need to have their understanding and knowledge developed.

A few experiments - one was successful, one was not. Based on the people more than anything. Yes, but they didn't just have that domestic health experience. Only a few, and had to have worked hard to make the transition. However almost all had some international experience in their past such as Peace Corps or study

abroad in low-resource setting. But they also had international experience. Not as common now, as the pool of MPH grads is large. Typically, they at least have Peace Corps

experience, and start at the program assistant level. This is partly due to language fluency requirements. All our PAs are fluent in a relevant language.

These folks are not necessarily hands on and practical in their implementation of activities. Not recently, but I may well have in the past.

26. Do you recall about how many? [If yes to 25]


Do not remember 6 21%

1 8 29%

2 5 18%

3 4 14%

4 0 0%

5 or more 2 7%

Vague answer 3 11%

Total 28

27. Do you recall any of the specifics of why they were selected? [If yes to 25]

SUMMARY

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 34

Categorized Answers % #Technical skills and expertise; could translate work to international context

50% 12

Good fit for organization or position; strong candidate otherwise

29% 7

Demonstrated interest, potential, motivation

25% 6

Non-clinical skills 13% 3Other cross-cultural / language experience

13% 3

Professional, articulate, smart 13% 3Level of position (junior) 13% 3Other (their degree, recommendations, hiring manager, travel & study abroad)

17% 4


24. What advice would you give to people who are working in public health domestically, who want to switch to global health? [Open ended]

SUMMARYCategorized Answers % #Get overseas experience (internship, volunteer, etc)

50% 21

Show relevance of domestic experience and special skills (build expertise)

45% 19

Motivation and attitude 19% 8Join organizations, network, find mentor 17% 7Language skill 10% 4Take GH courses 5% 2Learn the field and track issues 5% 2Get intercultural experience 5% 2Other (get political experience) 2% 1Number respondents contributing: 42

29. Would you be interested in receiving a summary of survey results and other updates about this work?


Yes 56% 27

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 35

No 38% 18

Not sure 6% 3

Total 48

An additional respondent who completed the survey for a colleague indicated that she wanted to receive results. The results, therefore, were that 63 percent of respondents (31 people from 21 organizations) requested survey results and other updates about this work.

28. Do you have any additional comments?

Comments:

I think this issue is a bit complicated and related to the level of the position someone with only domestic experience is looking at. If it is a position where there is room for a steep learning curve then there may be more willingness to hire someone with little to no international experience. But I probably wouldn't ever hire someone with that background as a technical specialist or technical advisor. Some skills sets may be more adaptable - M&E, survey methods, qualitative research, etc. where there would still be a learning curve but one that is worth investing in.

While the world is becoming more flat, the target groups are getting more equal, which require (even more than in the past) to work in partnership based on respect, trust and equity,

What a great survey. Simple questions. I would be happy to continue to engage on this topic - it is really important. Should make more of an effort to help people transition between global and domestic. My long experience is that is seems very hard to go between domestic and international: either

way. Our organization talks about this a lot and has looked for those opportunities, but often our clients want to see consultants with long experience overseas and even with country specific or at least region specific experience.

Only that I was a fellow many years ago, hosted by an NGO in Mexico and it launched my career - it was a very valuable experience.

Some of these skills can only be learned on the job, but students should look for opportunities to develop them as they prepare for the job market. Differentiation is always a major factor in hiring decisions.

, GHFP-II – MAY 2015 36

gh employers survey

Documents

global health gh footnoteref

global health graduates

health sciences

nonusaid experience

global health fellows

global health cugh conference

needed nonclinical skills

usaids global health