The United States' National Science Foundation (NSF) collects a large amount of data on individuals receiving their doctorate degrees from U.S. universities.

These data include:

• Survey of Earned Doctorates (SED)
• Survey of Doctorate Recipients (SDR)
• Science & Engineering Indicators, published by National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics

The SED focuses on recent Ph.D. graduates from a wide range of fields (lifes sciences, physical sciences, earth sciences, engineering, education, psychology, humanities) each year while the SDR captures employment information of individuals with Ph.D.s in science, engineering, or health fields, regardless of when they received their degree. 

I referenced some of these data a year ago in my blog post:
​Post-Ph.D. Career Plans: Consider the Possibilities 

A new batch of SED data was released in December 2020 containing data reported in 2019.
​So, while this data does not yet capture the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on new Ph.D. graduates, we can still look at trends in employment, earnings, and more across a wide range of disciplines. New SDR data (from 2019) will be released in April 2021. So, stay tuned for a deeper dive into insights from that survey in a future post.

How US Ph.D. Employment Has Shifted from 1999 to 2019
The SED contains much historical data, allowing us to look at trends in Ph.D. production, employment, and more. The survey's Post-Graduation Commitments data is reported from 1999 to 2019 and we'll delve more into it below. 

Ph.D.s with Post-Graduation Commitments: Employment vs. Postdoctoral Training
The data plotted below reflects the breakdown of doctorate recipients with either employment or postdoctoral training commitments post-graduation.

​Keep in mind, though, that many recent Ph.D. recipients do not report definite commitments post-graduation in the SED survey. In the data from 1999 to 2019, the average percentage of all Ph.D. recipients reporting definite post-graduation commitments is ~60%. ​

For the purposes of the data plotted above, postdoctoral training and employment are separate post-graduation commitments and the percentages in these two buckets plotted in the graphs above sum to 100% within each degree field. In these data, all post-graduation commitments are categorized as either employment or postdoctoral training. 

These historical post-graduation commitments data tell us a few things:
1) Pursuing postdoctoral training is far more common in the Life Sciences and Physical (Chemistry, Physics) & Earth Sciences
2) Data collapsed across all fields show a trend toward a lower percentage of Ph.D. recipients securing employment post graduation, with particular declines in the Humanities & Arts and Psychology & Social Sciences
3) More Humanities & Arts and Psychology & Social Science Ph.D.s with post-graduation commitments are pursuing postdoctoral training, especially over the last 10 years 
4) There are trends toward greater employment pursuit and lower engagement in postdoctoral training over the last 15 years in the Life Sciences and Physical & Earth Sciences (with a hint at a "peak postdoctoral training" level in the high 60% range in the year 2004)

Again, the data plotted above reflects only those Ph.D. recipients with definite post-graduation commitments. Let's examine the trends in the percentage of Ph.D. recipients reporting definite post-graduation commitments over the same 20-year time period, below. 

Takeaways from the graph above:
1) The "shock" of the financial crisis beginning in 2008 is evident slightly in the 2009 SED data and noticeably in the 2014 data of recent Ph.D. recipients with definite post-graduation commitments
2) While post-graduation commitment percentages recovered by 2019 in most fields, the Humanities & Arts were an exception with percentage of recent Ph.D. graduates with post-graduation commitments lower in 2019 than in 1999, 2004, or 2009
3) Mathematics & Computer Science Ph.D.s consistently experience the highest percentage of definite post-graduation commitments
​
It will be interesting to see what the SED show in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on post-graduation commitments in the coming years. 

Overall, there has been a 35.5% increase in the number of total US doctorates awarded from 1999 (41,100 Ph.D.s) to 2019 (55,703 Ph.D.s). Education doctorates (Ed.D.s; Ph.D.s) awarded decreased by 29.3% from 1999 to 2019 while the decline was 4.2% for the Humanities & Arts. The growth in Ph.D.s awarded in other fields over this twenty year time period was staggering: a doubling of degrees (118.7% increase) awarded in Mathematics & Computer Sciences and near doubling (93.3% increase) for Engineering Ph.D.s awarded. While less dramatic, the growth of Ph.D.s awarded in the Life Sciences (55.8%), Physical & Earth Sciences (53.7%), and Psychology & Social Sciences (22.8%) was still quite robust from 1999 to 2019.

​Take-home point from the Ph.D.s conferred data:
There are a lot of Ph.D.s being produced each year and while some fields may be producing recipients with good job prospects (Mathematics & Computer Sciences, 70.2% with post-graduation commitments in 2019) others continue to produce very high levels of Ph.D.s with moderate job prospects based on the SED data (Life Sciences, 62.3% with post-graduation commitments in 2019). The Humanities & Arts field showed a plateauing to slight decrease in Ph.D.s awarded over the past 20 years, suggesting this field is responding to lower "demand" for Ph.D.s (52.3% with post-graduation commitments in 2019), though some may argue not rapidly enough.

The sector employment data make clear employment in academe has declined over the past 20 years across all doctorate recipients, though more so in some fields of study. Across all doctorate recipients, there has been a 15.4% decline in the proportion of individuals employed in academe from 1999 to 2019 while the proportion employed by industry or business grew by 40% over the same time period. 

​The Ph.D. degree areas with the largest decline in the proportion of recipients working in academe from 1999 (48.1%) to 2019 (27.5%) was Mathematics & Computer Sciences at 42.8%, followed by a decline of 24.2% in the Life Sciences - from 47.5% of recipients in 1999 to 36% in 2019. In fact, as the graph above shows, the 2019 SED data indicates a larger proportion of Life Sciences Ph.D. recipients employed in industry or business than academe, a first since the data have been collected. Again, a reminder that postdoctoral training is NOT INCLUDED in these data. Rather, the graphs above display the breakdown of 2019 Ph.D. recipients with employment post-graduation commitments by sector.

Interestingly, employment in academe remained relatively stable in the fields of Psychology & Social Sciences (51.9% in 1999 and 51.7% in 2019), declined more modestly in Humanities & Arts (10.4% decline from 80.7% of 1999 Ph.D. recipients to 72.3% in 2019), and actually increased for the field of Education (20.3% increase from 47.2% of 1999 Ph.D./Ed.D. recipients to 56.8% in 2019).

Regardless, the data make clear that employment trends for recent Ph.D. recipients, especially in the Science, Technology, Engineering, & Math (STEM) fields, have changed markedly over the past 20 years.

​These data bring to light a question that continues to be asked more and more in graduate education: Are we preparing Ph.D. students for a 21st Century career landscape or one of the past? Clearly, employment prospects in academe are shrinking. 

It should be noted that there are vast differences in which sectors employ Ph.D. recipients based on their field of study, as indicated in the pie charts below. 

While not plotted above the breakdown for employment sectors for 2019 Mathematics & Computer Sciences Ph.D.s was: 64% Industry/Business, 28% Academe, 5% Government, 2% Nonprofit, & ~2% Other or Unknown. 
Clearly, being employed by industry or business sectors was the most common career path for recent Ph.D.s in STEM in 2019.
Conversely, academe is by far the largest sector employing recent Ph.D.s in Humanities & Arts, Psychology & Social Sciences, & Education.  

Clearly, in 2019, the sectors employing Ph.D.s varied WIDELY based on Ph.D. field. These facts raise the question, are we adequately preparing all Ph.D.s for their next career step given the diversity of paths they pursue?

Post-Ph.D. Plans: Pursue a Postdoc or Not?
While I have discussed my personal perspectives on the value of doing a postdoc, including using it for career exploration and self reflection, this is often a crucial decision point for many recent Ph.D. recipients. There are clearly financial considerations as postdoctoral salaries or stipends are relatively low compared to many Ph.D. holders' earning potential (discussed in more detail, below). However, the freedom and autonomy one can have in a postdoctoral position may not be matched for the rest of one's career and it can provide a nice period of scholarly and self exploration before making your next career move in academe, industry, or beyond. 

Postdoctoral training has also become necessary in many fields to be competitive for faculty positions as this additional training allows time for Ph.D. holders to build a larger collection of scholarly work, begin to demonstrate research independence, and develop crucial skills in lab management and grant writing, among other tasks required of faculty at research-intensive institutions. Teaching postdocs have also become more common for recent Ph.D.s seeking to build pedagogical and classroom management skills as they pursue teaching-focused faculty positions. 

As mentioned above in the breakdown of post-graduation commitments of recent Ph.D. recipients over the past 20 years, postdoctoral training is the majority commitment path for many fields: 59% of Life Science Ph.D. recipients in 2019 with post-graduation commitments pursued postdoctoral training while that percentage was ~56% in the Physical & Earth Sciences. The postdoctoral path is less common in other Ph.D. fields, though. 

The sheer numbers of 2019 Ph.D. recipients (collapsed across fields) pursing postdoctoral training (12,091), though, still dwarfs employment numbers in any other single employment sector (8,019 employed in academe; 7,476 employed in industry; 3,929 employment in other sectors).

​For many a postdoc is the default "next step" in their academic training and while it may fulfill this role for some, we should be empowering Ph.D. students with the information and space to decide if a postdoc makes sense for them (whether it fits into a career plan). 

Median Salaries of US Doctorate Recipients in 2019
While others have published about the financial impact of pursuing postdoctoral training versus employment post-Ph.D., the 2019 SED data allow us to look at how salaries differ between those pursuing postdoctoral training or employment by field of study (and by sex, though not discussed in this post). 

The percentage of median postdoctoral salaries to other employment salaries for new doctorate recipients demonstrate that the salary discount for pursuing postdoctoral training various greatly by field. In the Life Sciences, median postdoctoral salary ($50,000) is 61% of the median of other employment salary ($82,000). The percentage is as low as 49% in Engineering and as high as 94% in Humanities and Arts.

The median salary for recently employed doctorates also varies greatly by field. $53,000 was the median salary for Humanities and Arts doctorate recipients in 2019 while it was $68,000 in Psychology, $70,000 in Education, $85,000 in Biological and Biomedical Sciences, $95,000 in Chemistry, $102,500 in Engineering, and $120,000 in Mathematics and Computer Sciences. 

While these data are aggregated over many sub-fields and employment sectors and represent the median of a wide salary range, they hopefully allow Ph.D. holders to have a sense of the salaries they can obtain post-degree.

An interesting question these data cannot answer by themselves is whether there are more Ph.D.s interested in employment in certain sectors than there are positions, which affect their ability to secure employment. It is possible (and probable) that many individuals pursue a postdoc after their Ph.D. because they cannot secure other employment upon graduation. ​

More Data to Explore
There is a wealth of data in the SED and beyond. This post has just scratched the surface. 
Next​ month I hope to touch on some of the SED data comparing temporary visa holders and US citizens and permanent residents. In addition, 2019 SDR data should be published by NSF in April, which will allow for a deeper dive into employment trends for Ph.D.-holders in the US.

​If you are interested in exploring the data that made up this post, please visit the link below.
​You can also check out all the SED data on NSF's website.  

Conclusions
While the NSF SED data prompt several questions about the doctorate workforce and career pathways that remain to be interrogated, what is clear is that post-Ph.D. career pathways for doctorates issued in the United States are changing across a wide range of disciplines. Through data such as this, those of us interested in improving graduate student and postdoc career and professional development can hopefully share post-Ph.D. employment insights with a variety of stakeholders (students, postdocs, faculty, university administrators, & lawmakers) to influence the environment at our universities.

​We must be more intentional in considering what we are training Ph.D. students and postdocs for and how their employment prospects have changed. By doing so, we can hopefully build a responsive graduate-level training ecosystem at our universities that takes into account the future economic stability and prosperity of our Ph.D. students and postdocs. 

While my background is in the biological sciences, during my time working in career and professional development I have learned about career resources for a variety of fields.

Here, I share resources and datasets I am aware of that speak to the career prospects of individuals working outside the biological and chemical sciences, particularly those in the humanities and social sciences.

General Career Resources for the Humanities & Social Sciences

​Modern Language Association Career Resources
​In particular, see their Job Market Data

American Psychological Association - Careers in Psychology Resources


Career Outcomes Data & Insights for the Humanities & Social Sciences

American Academy of Arts & Sciences
Humanities Indicators
​Humanities Indicators - Workforce Data

​American Historical Association
Where Historians Work Database

Closing Gaps in our Knowledge of PhD Career Pathways: How Well Did a Humanities PhD Prepare Them?
Publication from the Council of Graduate Schools' PhD Career Pathways Project

​See the Association of American Universities' PhD Education Initiative Activities Page for a List of Several Ongoing PhD Program & Career Outcome Data Efforts from Institutions, Multi-Institutional Efforts, & Professional Societies.

Despite its name, the Coalition for Next Generation Life Sciences data often contain humanities and social science programs (for example: Cornell Graduate School, Emory Graduate School PhD & Master's data, University of Wisconsin Graduate School, University of Toronto 10,000 PhDs Project). Explore all the data.

The National Science Foundation's Survey of Earned Doctorates also has some data on general workforce trends for Ph.D. recipients by field of study.  

Last month, my blog post focused on growing your personal brand and network and the importance time plays (i.e., starting early) in experiencing compounded returns. This month, I turn to discussing the importance of conveying your value, especially as it relates to a job search.

Selling Yourself
Most scientists and scholars dislike the idea of "selling" themselves when on the job market. It feels a bit forced and disingenuous, right? Shouldn't good work and your abilities speak for themselves? The answer is, unfortunately, NO.

As all of us, including hiring managers, are bombarded with ever increasing amounts of information and content you need to work to ensure your brand and message can rise above the noise. For a job search, this relies on ensuring you as an applicant can convey a coherent value proposition of how your skills and abilities translate to an employer's needs clearly and succinctly. This fact applies whether you are seeking positions in academia or industry. There is data showing the average resume is viewed for only 7.4 seconds by recruiters. In addition, faculty searches routinely receive 200+ applicants per open position in the biological sciences.

How do you stand out from the masses? Through powerfully communicating who you are and the expertise you bring to solve problems an employer cares about. It starts and ends with effective communication in your conversations, on social media, and in your application documents. 

The Academic Job Search - Building Impactful Documents
For those readers looking to pursue a faculty career, the quality of your research, teaching, and diversity statements is essential. But don't forget to craft a cover letter that provides a description of how you fit the department, institution, and role. The key across all of these documents is to convey the value you bring as a potential colleague to the department you are applying to. You should ensure throughout these application documents that your tone is written from the perspective of a colleague that has expertise and knowledge to add to the unit's teaching and research efforts. And please don't write these materials with a deferential tone, saying things like "it would be an honor to join your department" or "I would love the privilege of working at institution X". Words like honor and privilege convey the idea that you are asking for a job (that they are doing you a favor by considering your application). Rather, you want your tone and word choice in your application documents to speak to how you can add to their department and bring value through teaching needed courses or leading new research efforts (via particular techniques or areas of expertise you possess) at the institution (that you are doing them a favor by applying).

Shifting back to discussing general tips for a broad job search outside faculty positions, informational interviews and networking are essential as many jobs are not advertised. Tapping this hidden job market will increase your odds of landing a position but building the relationships you need to accomplish this does require considerable time and effort. 

Informational interviews are a powerful entry point to building a professional relationship with someone in a career field of interest to you. By talking with individuals with job titles you are interested in or who work at companies you think you would like to work for, you learn:

• ​Whether a particular position fits your skills, interests, and values
• Whether a potential employer fits the environment you want to work in
• What an employer's future plans are - where they are growing, what types of positions may become open in the coming year
• How individuals with similar backgrounds to you (Ph.D., postdoc) made career transitions
• Advice on how to make a career transition yourself
• Whom else to speak with in your career field of interest or at the company
• And more....

Remember to treat these conversations as fact-finding missions and a chance to learn and connect. Be sure to take notes and follow-up with those you speak with as well as strategize ways to keep them updated on your plans and accomplishments as you progress toward the end of your training. Also, be sure to consider ways you can provide value to those you speak with by either sharing research (recent publications) or news that could be relevant to their work or by connecting them with individuals you know who could help them fill an open position, learn about a new technique or process, and more. You have more to "give" than you think. 

Read more on career exploration and informational interviews on the blog: 

• Start Here
• ​Career Exploration 101
• Exploring a Variety of Career Paths
• Post-PhD Career Plans: Consider the Possibilities

​Build Your Narrative
As you speak with professionals about their career (via informational interviews) or attend networking events, you will certainly also need to be able to talk about yourself and your value in an effective way: your professional narrative. 

As human beings we are all working to construct narratives of others...it is how we make sense of a complex world. So, if you don't do a thorough job of crafting your own personal narrative and value proposition, one will be created for you.

When scanning your resume or LinkedIn profile, instead of "10+ years of experience working with leading genetic editing technologies including CRISPR-Cas9", someone may see career "student" focused on academic minutiae. Or, they may see you as just a scientist with a lot of great technical skills but wonder how you will do interacting with others or with clients who lack a full understanding of the technical details you take for granted. You must ensure you craft a compelling and clear narrative about your experience and expertise that is accessible. Less jargon and more focused on results and the impact of your work. 

Reframing
One of the largest challenges faced by graduate students and postdocs when describing their experiences and skills is ensuring they frame the work they have performed and tasks they have accomplished in an accessible way. Filling your application documents with technical jargon and listing out the papers you have published is fine when applying for academic positions. If you are looking for a career outside faculty or university research roles, however, you need to reframe and tailor your application documents. 

A resume should always be tailored to a position and be focused on how your contributed toward various projects, with an emphasis on the results and impact of your work.

For more advice on reframing and tailoring your experiences in a resume, see this Guide for CV to Resume Conversion from Yale University. 

Your professional narrative needs to be coherent and pervasive across platforms like LinkedIn, your resume, and in your communications with others.

Some other points to consider as you work to convey your narrative and value as part of a job search:

Appeal to Emotion and Not Just Logic
While many believe they must appeal to concrete examples and data points that speak to their fit for a position, they often leave out the clear role "feeling" plays in most human interactions and decisions. Human beings are very good at rationalizing a decision based on "gut feeling" after the fact and the hiring process is not immune to this rationalization process. So, it is critical to ensure you are also making a reader of your application materials feel something​.

If you have successfully used your network to have your application materials elevated to the point that a human being is reviewing them (i.e., a referral), remember that a human being is influenced by more than just metrics and data. Why we often think of ourselves as logical beings, our emotions and "gut feelings" play a larger part in shaping our choices and behavior than we consciously realize. In terms of crafting your application materials, remember that a potential employer wants to hire someone who is qualified for the role (i.e., has made a good argument) but also someone who conveys interest and passion for the position and work it will entail. Going even further, people want to hire people they want to work with as colleagues. So, show a bit of humanity in your materials. 

​For example, it is sometimes worth using a few sentences in the cover letter to speak to why the role you are applying to is right for you as a human being. You might add details related to how the role fits with your personality or passion for working in a particular area...things that can't often be conveyed in a resume. This is certainly a personal decision but also mentioning you have family in the area or, after speaking with employees at the company/institution, really value the emphasis they place on work/life balance can demonstrate that the choice you are making is about more than just the job. It also emphasizes your priorities and shows you are thinking about the long-term prospects associated with working there. Remember a potential employer is also trying to surmise ​whether you will take the job if offered. So, be sure you convey why you are interested in the position professionally and personally. 

Job Interview Narratives - Ensure You Hit Your Key Points 
When it comes time for a job interview, you will need to be sure you have a compelling career story to share and are ready to use narratives around your experiences to respond to the behavior-based interview questions that are certain to be asked. 
​
You have heard these behavior-based interview questions before:

• Tell me about a time you encountered a set-back or failure and how you worked to overcome it.
• Give me an example of a time you faced a conflict while working on a team. How did you handle that?
• Tell me about a time you were dissatisfied in your work. What could have been done to make it better?
• Describe a decision you made that wasn't popular, and explain how you handled implementing it.

The critical piece of advice I want to offer here and one that you should remember if nothing else from this piece: Be the author of your own story.

By this I mean make sure you are speaking to key talking points you want to convey whenever you are interacting with someone professionally as part of your job search. Don't let behavior-based interview questions hem you in. Rather, be sure you have 5-7 great stories to tell that emphasize key aspects of your personality, work ethic, or expertise that you want to ensure a potential employer hears about. Then, it is your job to weave these stories into your response to an interviewer's questions. The goal is to leave a job interview with the sense you expressed what you can offer to the best of your ability and have few regrets that you missed a key talking point.

None of this is easy and practice makes perfect. While mock interviews can certainly help, nothing beats the real thing. As such, consider taking any interview you are offered, even if you aren't sure of the career fit. Getting experience telling your story is never a bad thing and you never know when talking with someone, even an interviewer, could lead to unexpected opportunities down the road. 

See the two Resources at the end of this post on tips for navigating a job interview, including a Story Circle activity that can help you frame your talking points in response to questions you might encounter during an interview.

Caveats
There has been much mentioned in this piece and my previous post about the need to start early, network, and have conversations with professionals (informational interviews) well before you are on the job market to effectively uncover opportunities. I acknowledge that this advice might not be feasible with your current timetable, though. 

I completely understand many of us need a position NOW and cannot lay the networking groundwork referenced above to land our immediate next job. Certainly you may need to take the best position available to you right now. This doesn't mean the tips shared above can't be used once you have a job.

Maybe you want to explore how you advance at your new company? Maybe you are interested in learning about other roles at the company? Maybe after working in your new role for a few months you realize it isn't right for you.

In all these cases, you can use informational interviews and networking to learn more about your employer, coworkers, or other careers available to you. It is never a bad thing to work to expand your network and continue to learn about options available to you in your career. 

As a graduate student or postdoc, many of us have seen how an academic career path is quite linear and regimented:
Ph.D. student -> postdoc -> Assistant Professor -> Associate Professor -> Full Professor 

Most careers aren't that way, though, and most professionals don't stay with one employer or in one job family for their full career.

Thus, you need to be continually accessing your skills, interests, and values and how your current career fits with them. By continuing to have conversations and working to convey your current and future value effectively, you will keep yourself open to opportunities and be agile enough to take advantage of them. All this is crucial in a rapidly changing world where we can't even begin to imagine what career opportunities will exist in the near future. 

Finally, remember that no one will care about your career more than you. So empower yourself to take charge of your story and talk to people to discover what possibilities await for you out there.

​You can do it!

For Further Reading

A Ph.D. is Not Enough: A Guide to Survival In Science

​If Your Really Want a Job, Show You Have These 6 Qualities

How to Tell a Concise, Compelling Career Story in an Interview

How to Write a Personal Value Proposition

Interview Question: "Tell Me About Yourself"

Storytelling: The Secret Weapon To Wow A Hiring Manager
Contains excellent advice and tips to assist you in telling your stories during a job interview

Mirror Neurons: Why Good Stories Provoke Empathy and Connection

Go with Your Gut: Emotion and Evaluation in Job Interviews

Emotions in the Hiring Procedure: How ‘Gut Feelings’ Rationalize Personnel Selection Decisions

Emotion and Decision Making (from Annual Review of Psychology)

Resources

Informational & Job Interview Overview & Resources

Story Circle Activity Worksheet - a framework for crafting stories around your experiences and skills to use to convey your expertise and value during an interview (credit careercontessa.com)