Thanks for asking, Sen, and congratulations on making it to the last leg of your PhD! As someone who hasn’t gone the academic route, I’m probably not the best person to advise on postdoc applications or academic career paths, especially when it comes to things like publishing expectations or letters of recommendation. I do think connecting with a career adviser or mentor in academia could be really helpful (I see you’ve asked this in the AMA with career advisors, so you’re ahead of me here).
You might also have better luck posting in academic-focused spaces (like the Effective Thesis network, perhaps), where folks have been through similar challenges and could offer more specific advice.
Thank you so much for the advice! I will surely look into the Effective Thesis network. :)
Although on the flip side, what do you think is the best skill/aspect of a candidate that stands out to recruiters when recruiting people purely from academia within industry positions?
(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.
Thanks for asking, Sen, and congratulations on making it to the last leg of your PhD! As someone who hasn’t gone the academic route, I’m probably not the best person to advise on postdoc applications or academic career paths, especially when it comes to things like publishing expectations or letters of recommendation. I do think connecting with a career adviser or mentor in academia could be really helpful (I see you’ve asked this in the AMA with career advisors, so you’re ahead of me here).
You might also have better luck posting in academic-focused spaces (like the Effective Thesis network, perhaps), where folks have been through similar challenges and could offer more specific advice.
Thank you so much for the advice! I will surely look into the Effective Thesis network. :)
Although on the flip side, what do you think is the best skill/aspect of a candidate that stands out to recruiters when recruiting people purely from academia within industry positions?
(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.