(Not answering for any organization in particular, this is non-extensive and would depend heavily on the role) From my experience, some qualities may stand out when evaluating candidates coming from academia for roles in applied research:
Relevance of work/field of research: Have they worked on problems that are directly relevant to the role? Even if the topic isn’t a perfect match, the underlying skills, e.g. such as data analysis, modeling, literature synthesis, etc., can often transfer well.
Intellectual humility: I think this is underrated, but also difficult to “list” in your CV, for example. Either way, I think it’s generally a good trait to have when looking for academics (and others).
Translating complexity: it’s impressive when someone from academia can explain their research and general surrounding topics clearly, transparently, and accessibly across audiences (to both experts and non-experts). This feels like a good proxy for sensible reasoning and epistemic humility. While peer-reviewed publications help, so does public writing like a blog, Substack, or thoughtful Twitter/X threads.
Broad/cross-domain experience: significantly role-dependent, but in positions that require generalist thinking or frequent context switching, someone who can operate across different domains stands out. This could look like interdisciplinary collaborations, switching topics or methods over time, or participating in cross-functional projects.
(Not answering for any organization in particular, this is non-extensive and would depend heavily on the role) From my experience, some qualities may stand out when evaluating candidates coming from academia for roles in applied research:
Relevance of work/field of research: Have they worked on problems that are directly relevant to the role? Even if the topic isn’t a perfect match, the underlying skills, e.g. such as data analysis, modeling, literature synthesis, etc., can often transfer well.
Intellectual humility: I think this is underrated, but also difficult to “list” in your CV, for example. Either way, I think it’s generally a good trait to have when looking for academics (and others).
Translating complexity: it’s impressive when someone from academia can explain their research and general surrounding topics clearly, transparently, and accessibly across audiences (to both experts and non-experts). This feels like a good proxy for sensible reasoning and epistemic humility. While peer-reviewed publications help, so does public writing like a blog, Substack, or thoughtful Twitter/X threads.
Broad/cross-domain experience: significantly role-dependent, but in positions that require generalist thinking or frequent context switching, someone who can operate across different domains stands out. This could look like interdisciplinary collaborations, switching topics or methods over time, or participating in cross-functional projects.