​Human beings are by nature risk averse. The field of behavioral economics has demonstrated unequivocally that loss aversion is a real and powerful force. Specifically, we have a loss aversion bias where we tend to prefer avoiding losses to acquiring equivalent gains. When the psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky presented this and other findings in their 1979 paper on Prospect Theory they challenged established dogma that human beings are rational economic agents. 

To summarize the loss aversion thesis: Losses Loom Larger Than Gains  
An equivalent loss is subjectively perceived as “worse” than the same amount of gain. 

Our aversion to loss makes sense in an evolutionary context as the loss of resources could be severely detrimental for survival. However, there can be severe repercussions to a bias of avoiding loss over seeking gains: we sometimes don’t take the chances we should. 

Kahneman and Tversky also found in their prospect theory research that people tend to over-weight both low and high probabilities and under-weight medium probabilities. We often perceive events with relatively low probabilities as more likely to occur than they are. So, any risk that is non-zero is perceived as risky, even when, objectively, risk probabilities vary quite a bit from the extreme ends of a distribution when compared to an intermediate level of risk. 

Combining human loss aversion with our over-weighting of low probability events, one can imagine that when the potential for loss intersects with an event with a <100% probability of success, human decision making becomes even more warped relative to what would be expected in a purely mathematically-based, objective world. Rationally, pursuing an opportunity with a 5% chance or failure is far better than if the chance of failure was 25%. Both are relatively low probabilities but the 25% failure rate is 5 TIMES that of the 5% rate. However, most people will perceive a 5% failure rate as HIGHER than it actually is. 

Taken together, then, potential losses that occur at relatively low probabilities are perceived as more likely to occur and, thus, avoided at a higher frequency than one would expect “objectively”.  

​What does all of this have to do with one’s pursuit of a career? 

Well, we can all get very comfortable with the status quo and what we “know”, often at the expense of venturing out and exposing ourselves to new experiences. This is especially true if there is a risk of “failure” or “loss” in pursuing new avenues or experiences AND even if the frequency of those losses are not high, we will perceive the risk of loss as HIGHER than it actually is. 

How this can manifest for graduate students and postdocs is that their current work and experience in an academic setting is a 100% “known” quantity (whether or not it is supportive, a good fit, or well-liked) and therefore may seem not to pose the risk of the unknown. Venturing out to even explore alternative environments can often seem relatively risky in comparison, and may feel disproportionately scary due to the element of risk introduced by the unknown. This can manifest itself in things as low stakes as attending workshops or events that are not “related” to their research/scholarship. 

​Why go out of one’s way to attend that networking event or workshop on a “transferable” skill? 
What if it is uncomfortable? 
What if I am made to do something I am not familiar with or that challenges my sense of self-worth? 

Growth involves pushing oneself beyond what you know or feel comfortable with. However, in many ways technology and the readily available amount of online information can lead one to think less risks are needed to map a path forward in your career. It is important to realize, though, that some of the most useful information and insights related to career progression cannot be found online but instead through human conversation, connection, and experiential learning - which may involve some level of risk or vulnerability. 

There will always be some uncertainty when pursuing something new. And given both graduate school and postdoctoral training are finite periods that will end…you will be pursuing something new when your time as a graduate student or postdoc is over.

So, how might one de-risk the next step in your career? How would you know you are pursuing an appropriate path? There is no substitute for doing the job…you can’t fully know what it is like to be in a role until you are in it. However, there are a few steps you can take to begin understanding what roles might be right for you and thus “de-risk” your career choice.

Perhaps one of the most difficult risks we encounter as humans is putting our faith in others. And our fear of the unknown gets ramped up another notch when it requires us to engage with programs and people completely new to us. However, it is critical to engage in broad communities. There is also data showing that “weak ties” are critical in one’s job search.

A very practical place to start when seeking connections and career conversations is via informational interviews with individuals working in areas you are interested in learning more about. The University of Pennsylvania Career Services team has a superb guide to informational interviewing for graduate students and postdocs and you can also find a great guide available through ImaginePhD (create a FREE account to access this and other ImaginePhD resources).  Informational interviews can also be helpful for your faculty job search. I encourage graduate students and postdocs to begin their search for potential individuals for informational interviews through LinkedIn, leveraging their amazingly powerful Alumni Tool in particular. These conversations will be immensely helpful as you learn more about potential roles and get a sense of how you might make a career transition. 

​A step beyond conversations with professionals though, is to experience what it is like to work in a particular role or on a relevant professional task first-hand through experiential learning. You can also engage in experiences to build transferable, “work” skills through volunteer and leadership efforts at your institution, in your community, or via professional societies. While not traditionally labeled as experiential learning, these volunteer experiences can also be extremely valuable on a variety of levels - fostering belonging, building teamwork and leadership skills, and providing a means to “give back” and help others.   

Formal experiential learning involves applying concepts through active experiences to better understand the applications of one’s skills and knowledge to real-world problems. In addition, one’s self-reflection of the experience and how it aligns with one’s interests and values is crucial in helping inform future career choices.

Experiential learning can range from job simulations to internships and everything in between.

• Job Simulations
  • These prebuilt “simulations” are created by professionals to walk others through typical tasks/deliverables and give them a sense of the types of projects and work performed in certain professions. They are a great way to experience a “day in the life” and reflect on whether you could see yourself performing these tasks as part of a future career.
  • Explore InterSECT Job Simulations
• Job Shadowing
  • This relatively informal process involves spending a day or two with a professional to see what their work looks like. You might be able to leverage informational interviews into future job shadowing opportunities. 
  • Industry "site visits" provide a more high-level overview of an employer but also serve a similar function of allowing students and postdocs to experience an employer first-hand. See this publication for an example of one site visit model implemented in North Carolina's Research Triangle Region.  
• Internships
  • The most immersive of the options listed here often involves spending typically 8-12 weeks embedded in a work environment. While some graduate programs offer formal internship opportunities, not all do. 
  • Even if your institution does not have a mechanism to support internship programs, the National Science Foundation (NSF)’s INTERN Program provides supplemental funds for graduate students supported on NSF research grants to pursue up to six months of an internship experience in a non-academic setting. 

​Some of these experiential learning options require risk and uncertainty. Thus, starting with informational interviews to narrow your scope before pursuing more immersive experiences is a good idea. What I think you will learn after giving the process time is that the more you talk with and learn from others, the more information you will have on a potential career. As you delve further into understanding day-to-day activities and processes through job simulations and shadowing and potentially via internships, the more confident you will feel in pursuing a certain career path. You will de-risk taking the next step through these information gathering and immersive experiences. The ultimate goal is to be fairly confident that the next step you take is the right one for you right now. 

The right now is important to remember as our professional goals and needs will change over time. In most cases, the next job you undertake after graduate school or your postdoc will not be your last. You may eventually need to explore different professional paths. But, having gone through the process once, hopefully you will find it a little less uncertain and daunting the next time around. 

​To close, try not to be scared of the unknown, the unpredictable, the uncertain. Realize that in uncertainty often lies unexpected opportunity and discovery. For example, when I was a postdoctoral fellow at Vanderbilt, I (reluctantly) took on a leadership role in our local postdoctoral association that seemed risky for me at the time - I was/am introverted and didn’t see myself as leadership material. I went from treasurer of our postdoc association one year to vice president the next to a professional working in postdoctoral affairs and serving on the National Postdoctoral Association’s Board of Directors a few years later. I built confidence in my leadership skills through each successive experience. If you had asked me as a postdoc if I would have expected to be here professionally seven years later, my answer would have surely been no. But, circumstances pushed me to step outside my comfort zone and ultimately I found a career path where I felt I could make a difference in higher education. Life is unpredictable and career paths are windy but one has to be willing to venture down new avenues of experience and exploration to gain a better understanding of what pathways may be out there for you. 

There is a big, wide world out there…bigger than any of us can fully appreciate. If only we are willing to step outside our comfort zones and take some risks. Being strategic, however, in how you approach the unknown, specifically seeking out opportunities for informational interviews and experiential or volunteer-based learning, can de-risk your situation quite a bit. However, at some point you will have to take the leap. Hopefully, though, you can do that with a bit more confidence and conviction, leveraging the resources and advice you learn along your career exploration journey. Like many, it took a lot for me to take the leap into a profession outside what I “knew.” Hopefully, though, the resources and methods shared here can help make that leap feel a little less risky for you.

Personal Perspective, Future of Work, Innovation

The rapid globalization and integration of the economy, including the power of technology to make work performed and done anywhere more accessible have resulted in our 21st Century societies finding themselves at a potentially critical moment in humanity's millennia-long story. 

Our world has shrunk considerably over the past 50 to 75 years. The end of World War II saw with it the birth of a more integrated global economy with capitalism gaining influence as communism waned into the early 1990s. The emergence of China from the 1990s to 2020s also reflects the triumph of global capitalism, albeit state-sponsored capitalism.

​As with any change in how society is structured, there were groups that benefited massively from this shift to a globalized, capitalist (neoliberal) world and those who didn't. One of the main results of this shift was many goods became cheaper to produce and consumer prices, at least in the United States, remained low for decades. 

For nearly 40 years, the average percentage change in consumer prices in the United States barely crossed 5%. In fact, median "inflation" (ie, yearly change in consumer prices) was 2.8% from 1983 to 2021 (we are a far cry from those levels in 2022, though). Compare this to the growth of capital and investment returns over the same time period. The median rate of yearly return for the S&P 500 (a basket of the 500 largest US-based corporations) from the same period, 1983 to 2021 was 12.8%. While this is not perhaps the most elegant economic analysis, I think it demonstrates how much relative value in capital was produced relative to costs passed on to consumers...nearly 10% more per year. 

Clearly, the returns to capital relative to the costs born by consumers was the result of companies trading more expensive labor for cheaper means of production. For a time, this bargain seemed "good" for many...prices were kept (arguably) artificially low through low-cost labor. Many workers in more economically developed countries didn't see this shift in economic structure as a problem as it benefited many of their pocketbooks either via high rates of return on capital and/or lower cost goods. Some individuals, especially those working in manufacturing sectors in the United States, Europe, Japan, and other developed countries saw opportunities shrink in favor of increased outsourcing of their work to China or, at least in the past few decades, automation. 

For a time, a global, capitalist, and neoliberal economy seemed to produce more overall prosperity than what came before it. Millions were lifted out of poverty and provided jobs that allowed them to live a life of greater convenience and security. The emergence of China's middle class was the growth engine of the global economy for the past 20-plus years. In a cruel twist of fate, however, the continual pursuit of maximum profit, minimal cost, and "optimization" of a global, capitalist economy may end up resulting in an overall more impoverished world. Globalization produced ever more competition amongst labor markets and the shock of the COVID-19 pandemic illustrated that a complex, global supply chain only works when all its requisite components and inputs are allowed to flow across borders and oceans.  

Competition drives innovation. The market forces that have dominated western economies in the neoliberal area allowed corporations and organizations with more innovative products to increase their profits. In sum, the lives of those using these products also became better. However, those groups that could not innovate and adapt died, resulting in layoffs and loss of entire sectors of our economy. The destructive nature of capitalism is fundamental to its success. There must be winners and losers. 

A bigger philosophical question facing the United States in particular as we approach the end of the first quarter of the 21st Century is whether we will allow the innovative and destructive forces of capitalism to continue to affect our citizens' personal health and wellbeing. Deaths of despair (from suicide and drug overdoses) have risen in the United States over the past 15-20 years despite our overall gross domestic product (GDP) per capita continuing to rise relative to other developed economies. 

The juxtaposition of income inequality and high poverty rates in the US along with overall greater economic growth and productivity of our economy as a whole illustrates that our current form of "US-led, global capitalism" results in big winners and losers. 
​
Some illustrative data from McKinsey's Rethinking the Future of American Capitalism report drive home the point: 

• American firms rank among the most widely known and the most profitable globally: in economic profit, they make up 38 percent of the top 10. 
• In the United States, just 6 percent of counties account for two-thirds of GDP output.

​In addition, a variety of data available from inequality.org, sourced from OECD statistics and the Credit Suisse Global Wealth Report highlight the enormous share of wealth concentration in the United States relative to other developed countries.

In exchange for our dynamic and growing "economy" (ie, corporate profits) in the US do so many have to be left behind?
​
What is the ideal balance between creative destruction, economic progress/reinvention, and the stability of our society? When should workers be protected at the potential expense of consumers? Will work as we know it be a thing in the future? And if not, is more time for leisure and creative pursuits for all a good thing? Will humanity fill the free time of a technology-laden future making the world better or worse?  

These are thorny questions and ultimately how things transpire is unpredictable but that does not mean we don't have some agency in shaping the future we want to see. ​

We have constructed a society in the United States where so much of the social safety net has been removed that we may ultimately become less innovative as a society. Who can afford to take the risk of starting a small business or company when they lack affordable access to health insurance or reasonable childcare costs? There is data supporting the notion that innovation is lower in more unequal societies. ​

Innovation also threatens many people's sense of value and contribution to society. As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes more capable at replacing work traditionally performed by humans, even white-collar work, many are left asking how they can contribute to society. The decline in American's confidence in institutions leads one to wonder whether individuals will feel the need to engage with larger societal structures in the future or choose to escape to some version of the metaverse (a la Ready Player One). 

Clearly, this is a time of immense change and uncertainty.
Will we become a less globalized and interconnected world, retreating inwards as societies and people?
Will the speed of automation and change result in many being left behind economically in the new world order?
​Will inequality continue to increase with potentially explosive societal consequences? 

A fundamental set of questions arises: Is our system broken? Can it be reformed? Must it be re-envisioned? Do we have the collective and political will to make real change?

The current structures of our society add further complexity to addressing the problems we face. What is "right" is not always what is popular making it difficult for a democratic country to push forward with changes that may be difficult in the short-term but lead to long-term positive impact. While pursuing my Ph.D. in neurobiology from UNC Chapel Hill, I looked at delay discounting behavior...the tendency for people and animals to discount the future. The future is "worth" less than the present partially because at an individual level the future is uncertain. You may not make it to the future and so why delay consumption now? The YOLO ("you only live once") choices of many young adults reflects the underlying basic instinct of all living things to prioritize the NOW over the LATER. It is in our nature to do this.  

In large part, I think our politicians and leaders have failed to articulate a truly promising view of the future and America's place in it. Rather, "othering" and blaming certain groups is used for political gain while real solutions go undiscussed and our two-party system fosters division and extremism. We have the potential to move closer to being a true melting pot of culture and ideas, welcoming immigrants from across the world who seek to better their futures and our country as a whole by leveraging American Capitalism and the innovative ecosystems it can foster.

​If we don't find a way to strike the right balance between growth at any cost and compassion for all people within our society, though, we could lay the seeds for the destruction of the future we all want to see. 

More from the blog:

• The End of Work as We Know It: How an Increasingly Automated World Will Change Everything
• The Challenges of Being an International Researcher: Implications for Advanced Degree Labor Markets
  • Part 1
  • Part 2​

For Further Reading:

• What exactly is neoliberalism?
• Book: Capital in the Twenty-First Century
  • See also the documentary on the topic
• Rethinking the future of American capitalism (from McKinsey)
• Inequality: A persisting challenge and its implications (from McKinsey)
• The social contract in the 21st century: Outcomes so far for workers, consumers, and savers in advanced economies (from McKinsey)
• Book: The Power of Creative Destruction: Economic Upheaval and the Wealth of Nations
• Book: US vs. Them: The Failure of Globalism
• Book: Six Faces of Globalization: Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why It Matters
  • More on this concept from one of the book's authors, Anthea Roberts on her personal website
  • Who wins and who loses from globalization? There are (at least) six answers (excerpt from the Book)
  • The Corporate Power Narrative: How Corporations Benefit from Economic Globalization (excerpt from the Book)
• Book: Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism 
• America's crisis of despair: A federal task force for economic recovery and societal well-being
• Book: Forward: Notes on the Future of Our Democracy 
• Relevant political reads from The Atlantic:
  • ​How the U.K. Became One of the Poorest Countries in Western Europe
    • ​A cautionary tale?
  • The Wreckage of Neoliberalism
    • The postwar neoliberal economic project is nearing its end. The question is who will write the last chapter, the Democrats or the totalitarians?

Sites Worth Exploring:

• INEQUALITY.ORG (United States and global data)
• realtimeinequality.org (United States data)

Last week was National Postdoc Appreciation Week, an annual event organized by the National Postdoctoral Association (NPA) to raise awareness for the work postdocs do and encourage the institutions they work at to show their appreciation. 

As someone who was a postdoctoral scholar and now works as an administrator to support postdocs, I know the value they provide to their institutions. However, many people - including those working at our institutions - either don't understand what a postdoc is or the impact they make through their research, mentorship, and teaching efforts.

The NPA has launched a whole campaign to try to better articulate that while postdocs perform important research and scholarship, they are also human beings like anyone else - mothers, fathers, leaders, volunteers, immigrants, and innovators. If you are a postdoc, I encourage you to share your story as part of the What's a Postdoc? initiative. 

The definition of a postdoctoral scholar (postdoc) by the NPA reads:
"An individual who has received a doctoral degree (or equivalent) and is engaged in a temporary and defined period of mentored advanced training to enhance professional skills and research independence needed to pursue his or her chosen career path."

The major task associated with postdoctoral scholars is helping lead and drive forward research and scholarly work at their institutions. And these institutions can range from universities and academic medical centers to national or government labs and corporations. My experience lies in supporting postdocs at universities which is what I will touch on in the rest of this piece. However, there is important emerging research that pursuing postdocs outside academic institutions does not necessarily preclude one from pursuing a faculty career. Perhaps a topic for a future post.  

​I ran climate surveys on our postdoctoral population at North Carolina State University in 2020 and 2021 as well as at Virginia Tech in 2022. In these surveys we asked how postdocs spend their time and the distribution of their work devoted to the tasks below were remarkably consistent across survey years and institutions.  

As you can see in the figure above, postdocs spend a nearly equivalent amount of their time performing research or scholarship related to their personal interests/goals and those of their supervisor(s) and that these efforts take up ~60% of their total work hours each week. It is great to see postdocs are working on their "own" research/scholarship efforts as a key point of the postdoctoral position is to develop as an independent researcher and scholar.

​Writing takes up another large portion of postdocs' time (~16%) with manuscript writing being the largest area of focus outside research/scholarship. Finally, mentoring junior colleagues (7%) and teaching (6%) were tasks most postdocs reported doing as part of their roles, although there was large variation in the distribution of effort on these tasks based on the disciplinary background of the postdoc. 

Clearly, then, postdocs do report focusing largely on research/scholarship but are also doing work beyond that, including mentoring others. There is data to emphasize that postdocs play a critical role in the development of research skills in Ph.D. students working in their groups. The authors of the PNAS study that investigated postdoc mentoring of graduate students discussed a "cascading mentorship model" where faculty supervisors' mentoring of postdocs allows for postdocs to then mentor their more junior colleagues. So, postdocs are both mentoring and are being mentored. 

Given many postdocs also seek to move into future careers where they will need to mentor others, increasing the development of effective mentoring skills in this population is critical. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's report and online guide on the Science of Effective Mentoring in STEMM is a great place to start. 

Many readers may wonder what is the purpose of a postdoc? How is it different from graduate school? These are good questions. Traditionally, a postdoctoral position was seen as a type of apprenticeship where aspiring faculty members (especially in the sciences and engineering fields) would be mentored by a more senior faculty member as they worked to develop the various skills (experimental design, analysis, manuscript and grant writing, people and project management, etc...) needed to become an "independent researcher". To achieve a faculty position at many research-intensive institutions a postdoctoral position is becoming essential. And data demonstrate that completing a postdoc improves scholarly productivity and positively contributes to securing a tenure-track faculty appointment. However, one can have too much postdoctoral training and experience diminishing returns from extended postdoc positions. 

Many postdocs do not ultimately land faculty positions and move on to a variety of careers, post-postdoc. Additionally, while postdocs are at their institutions, they contribute importantly in a variety of ways from mentoring students (as discussed previously) to teaching and assisting in the management of their research groups. Perhaps their most important contribution to their institutions, however, is driving research and innovation forward. 

Innovative programs that promote start-up company creation led by postdocs are gaining steam including those at Cornell University's main campus and Cornell Tech in New York City; University of Memphis; University of Washington in Seattle; Carnegie Mellon University; Duke University's Department of Biomedical Engineering; and now Virginia Tech. Postdocs are uniquely situated to help lead the commercialization efforts of new technologies emerging out of university research groups. It will be exciting to see in the years to come how these programs perform in allowing postdocs to spearhead the creation of start-up companies from universities' intellectual property. ​

While many anecdotes and assumptions exist suggesting postdocs are critical drivers of research and innovation at their institutions, I have found surprisingly little analysis of this topic. 

So, I set out to do a crude analysis myself. 

The National Science Foundation (NSF) publishes a wealth of information on research expenditures and snapshots of the graduate student and postdoctoral scholar population at institutions across the United States. Specifically for this analysis, I leveraged data from the Fall 2020 NSF Survey of Graduate Students and Postdoctorates in Science and Engineering (most recent data available) and NSF Higher Education Research and Development (HERD) Survey data from fiscal year 2020 (released in December 2021 and the most recent data available). So, we will be comparing research expenditures from the HERD Survey (both overall and federally-funded) to postdoctorate and graduate student population size in 2020. 

Caveats: NSF data on population counts are self-reported and institutions are left to determine the best process for counting their graduate student and postdoc population. Postdoc population counts can be quite variable (see this blog post from Gary McDowell for more on that). 
In addition, I removed three institutional data points as they vastly skewed the postdoc data in particular: Johns Hopkins (1,723 postdocs in 2020), Harvard (5,787 postdocs), and Stanford (2,446 postdocs) all had postdoc populations >2.5 standard deviations of the mean postdoc count of all reporting institutions in 2020 (mean postdoc count: 260, Std Dev: 520). In addition, Johns Hopkins research expenditures are nearly double that of the next largest institution (University of Michigan), making its data an outlier on both metrics - postdoc counts and research expenditures. With those outliers removed we are left with 200 institutions who reported postdoc counts in 2020. 

Let's look at the correlation between the number of postdocs at an institution and its overall research expenditures in 2020.

An R-squared value of 0.81 demonstrates a very strong correlation between the number of postdocs at an institution and its overall research expenditures in a given year. The R-squared value between postdoc counts and federally-funded research expenditures was 0.75. As a reminder correlation does not equal causation but clearly there is a strong association between research expenditures and number of postdocs at an institution. 

Plotting the same 200 institution's fulltime Ph.D. student populations against research expenditures we see a strong but weaker correlation. 

The R-squared value between number of Ph.D. students and federally-funded research expenditures was 0.59.
​
The trendline equations for the relationships plotted above can be used to "measure" how research expenditures associate with either the number of postdocs or Ph.D. students.
​REMINDER: This is an overly simplistic interpretation of the data as there are many factors we aren't looking at here but for sake of argument, let's run the math.

For the postdoc vs research expenditure trendline: y=1038.4x + 81898
Where x=postdoc number & y=research expenditure (in $1000).
If x=1; y=82,936.4
So, based on these overly simplified (and not to be taken literally) data, 1 postdoc equates to $82,936,400 in research expenditures & 1,000 postdocs to $1,120,298,000 or $1.12 billion in research expenditures. 

If we do the same math for Ph.D. students, 1 Ph.D. student equates to $48,629,790 in research expenditures & 1,000 Ph.D. students to $331,137,000 or $330 million in research expenditures. 

So, while this is a very crude analysis, hopefully it emphasizes the very strong relationship between postdocs and research "output" (ie, expenditures of funds on research) at institutions AND that this relationship is stronger than for Ph.D. students who also lead research will making progress towards their degree. 

While research expenditures are perhaps not the best metrics of "output" from postdocs or Ph.D. students, it is available data we have. Long term, we must do a better job of understanding the impact of graduate students and postdocs on not only research/scholarship and innovation but the teaching and outreach mission of many of institutions.

​I discussed the need to better measure the impact of postdocs in a prior blog post from 2020 and there is still much to do in that regard. 

Postdoctoral scholars do a lot. Clearly they play a large role in research output at their institutions but are also critical mentors for many working in research groups and universities and other academically-focused research organizations.

While it is difficult to fully capture the impact postdocs make, those of us who work in this space know it is large and often underappreciated. We must do better to measure and report on postdoc impact moving forward. Why? Because if institutions don't find a better way to understand postdoc impact, they will not invest in supporting them. This in turn, will make the postdoc path less desirable. In fact, that is already happening, with many faculty reporting difficulties in recruiting postdocs. Granted, some institutions - St. Jude Children's Research Hospital and the Van Andel Institute in particular - are working hard to increase compensation for their postdocs but systemic barriers (grant budgets, organizational classification of postdocs as non-employees, etc...) make it challenging for compensation and benefits to be increased for many postdocs. Add these challenges to the opportunity cost in pursuing a postdoc and one should not be surprised to see Ph.D.s pursuing different paths post-degree.

It is my belief that we must think of creative ways to reimagine the postdoc experience to make it a more holistic training experience that sets those who pursue it up for success. The innovation postdoc fellowship programs I mentioned earlier are one example but I think a variety of creative solutions could be proposed. To begin with, though, we must all do better in collecting and reporting on data that allows us to advocate for postdocs and the critical roles they play at our institutions and beyond.

For Further Reading
From the Blog

• ​Measuring Postdoc Impact​
• Reimagining the Postdoc Experience
• Factors That Affect Career Choice and Diversity in Science
• Ph.D. Recipients' Employment Trends: Insights from National Science Foundation (NSF) Data
• Ph.D. Employment Trends: Insights from NSF Survey of Doctorate Recipients 

Papers and Programs of Potential Interest
United States National Postdoc Survey results and the interaction of gender, career choice and mentor impact

Career choices of underrepresented and female postdocs in the biomedical sciences

Surveying the experience of postdocs in the United States before and during the COVID-19 pandemic

​A startup postdoc program as a channel for university technology transfer: the case of the Runway Startup Postdoc Program at the Jacobs Technion–Cornell Institute at Cornell Tech

​Postdocs to Innovators program (consortium of European universities and partners)

Virginia Tech Presidential Postdoctoral Fellowship Program

In my last post, I touched a bit on some of my challenges in my first role, post-postdoc managing the Office of Postdoctoral Affairs at NC State University. As the year 2021 began, certainly there were challenges in my workplace in terms of feeling supported and appreciated, which only grew into the Spring. I realized I owed it to myself to start exploring other opportunities.

A cynic would tell you the grass isn't always greener on the other side...that changing employers will not necessarily change the challenges one encounters working in a specific space or just working in general. All work contains its challenges and annoyances. So, even if we think a change may be needed there is no guarantee a change will be good for us in the log run. All that said, applying to other positions while you remain employed can serve a variety of useful functions:

• It forces you to keep your application materials (resume, cover letter) up-to-date and ensures these materials are ready to go when you see a truly amazing opportunity. It ensures you are prepared to seize opportunities.  
• Part of keeping those materials up-to-date involves revisiting your past successes and impact. This process can remind you of your accomplishments and that you are a great employee...ie, it improves your self confidence. 

I applied to several different types of positions in Spring 2021 including some very close to my current sector of postdoctoral affairs, some tangential to it (graduate student career and professional development), and some further removed but still of interest to me (science communication, project management). 
​
Importantly, I leveraged people in my network for their advice and consul and reached out to others to learn more about open positions. As with any job search, I didn't hear back from some of the positions I applied to while others I made it through a first-round interview but no further. That is just part of the job application process. Fit is a tricky thing and you will often not be the right person with the right skillset for many roles. And some roles you think you might not be a good fit for or "ready" for might lead to interviews and offers. You can never really tell until you put yourself out there. 

One position I ultimately applied to I saw advertised back in December 2020. When I read the job description I thought to myself that it was a really BIG JOB. Was I prepared for such a role that involved leading the creation of a program that didn't really exist at the institution? It seemed daunting and so I put it out of my mind. A about a month later, I was chatting with a colleague from the Office of Biomedical Research Education and Training who worked with while a postdoc at Vanderbilt University. I told them a bit about some of the struggles I was encountering at NC State and they asked if I had seen that job advertisement in December. I mentioned that I had but that it seemed "too big for me". They immediately countered that I could do that job and would be great at it. They also mentioned that they were consulted by that institution about building support for their graduate student population So, she had inside information on the attributes they were looking for and could provide me with the knowledge that the employer knew they were asking for a lot in the position. She mentioned they understood that the person hired would be building toward many of the goals listed in the job description. Finally, she offered to reach out to the search committee and inquire on whether they were still taking applications and that, if so, she could put in a good word for me if I was interested. 

An important side note here, virtually all job descriptions are an employer's wish list of all the attributes of the ideal candidate. This ideal candidate rarely, if ever, exists. You don't need to meet every qualification in a job description to apply for it. 

After my Vanderbilt contact put in a good word for me and I formally applied through the application portal, I was fairly quickly offered a screening interview followed by a more formal interview with the search committee chair and key faculty leadership. The final step was an intensive, day and a half virtual visit to campus to meet with stakeholders, present a vision talk, and engage with the search committee. It was a long process but I felt I did well. A few weeks later, the search committee chair called to offer me the position...a position I originally thought was too big for me just a few months ago.

While the job title was great and I felt it would be an amazing opportunity to build programming and resources from the ground up, I have to admit it was a challenge to see myself accepting a job offer at a place I had not visited in person. I had been to the city before and it certainly had some great attributes going for it in terms of weather, the state tax structure, and overall "good vibes" associated with the area. I even started imagining my life there...I thought it would be pretty awesome. 

I also tried to keep perspective on this opportunity, though. It was a city many people were moving to during the COVID-19 pandemic and I knew housing costs would be high. Was it worth uprooting my life in the Raleigh area to make that move?

Then came the job offer...a number so below my expectations that I felt I needed to turn it down out of principle. I was shocked that they would offer someone with the responsibilities associated with this "director-level" position that salary. ​

As a result of both the final salary offered being low relative to the cost of living and a feeling that resources might be more limited than I realized when applying for the position, I ultimately turned down the role. Even if I could have imagined an amazing life at that locale, I was not going to accept a salary below what I believed to be a competitive, market-rate. ​

While the saga was going on with this employer I also interviewed and received an offer from another employer at a very well resourced "prestigious" institution. It certainly would have been a place others would have been impressed you worked at. You could name drop: "I work at X", and everyone would think "Wow" or "Impressive" or something along those lines. Despite the strong employer "brand", I had some reservations about the role I interviewed for.

First, I would be inheriting a team that would have reported to me and that made me pretty nervous for a lot of reasons. Managing people is no easy task and I debated with myself whether I was ready to take on that type of role. In addition, the structure of the office included a faculty director and an administrative director, which was the role I applied to. It became clear to me that the faculty director was the individual really in charge. That wasn't necessarily a problem, though, as I felt the faculty director and I got along well during the interview. I think my nagging worry was that I would be stuck carrying out someone else's vision for the office. 

That "prestigious" institution gave me a very strong initial offer, though,...so strong that I didn't see the need to counter it. I was most interested in negotiating some flexibility around when I would start and initial remote work options, which seemed like a possibility. I told them I need to think about it for a week.

With such a strong job offer from "prestigious" institution in hand, I realized now was the time to try to obtain more resources and support from my current employer. While NC State University had a salary action "freeze" in place (as a result of COVID), it was not a "hard" freeze. Retention counter offers were still allowed to take place if the Dean of the unit signed off on them. So, I figured it was worth asking for a retention offer and, following my supervisor's advice to me, additional resources to assist me in my work leading the Office of Postdoctoral Affairs there.

It wasn't just about making more money. We had been asking for an open line on our team to be filled since January 2020 (this was now June 2021) and had received very little traction on that request. Our team recently had presented the position as an administrative support role as we all were feeling underwater with our administrative tasks. We presented the idea to the Dean and he seemed supportive of it. So, I figured now was the time as part of my counter offer to ask for the administrative position to be posted. In addition, I asked for a dedicated office budget (I hadn't had one previously) and the creation of a working group of leaders from across campus to assess support for postdocs and the office in an attempt to ultimately increase resources for myself and the office.

First, it is critical to research what is the procedure or standard practice, if any, at your institution. At NC State University, there were pretty clear classification and compensation guidelines that outlined the types of salary adjustments that were possible. While many of these areas, including market and equity adjustments were on hold during the pandemic, the university was still authorized to allow retention adjustments to salary, not to exceed 20% of one's current salary or $15,000, whichever was larger. I had done my homework and knew this was possible.

So, when we had our meeting between the Dean, my supervisor, and our unit's finance officer, I clearly articulated that I knew that the retention salary adjustment was possible, should the Dean be willing to sign-off. This request was met with some pushback that the unit "could only do" an amount smaller than the 20%. Since my offer in hand was a good bit higher than even my retention ask, I felt confident in standing my ground but in the moment did not want to respond in a rash way. Frankly, I found the initial counter offer around my retention salary insulting but instead of saying that, I simply reiterated that I felt I was doing good work and wanted to keep the momentum going with my office but would need the full retention offer and other contingencies to be able to stay and feel confident in that decision. 

I left the Zoom call with the rest of the leadership planning to continue the conversation. From what I have heard, my supervisor really advocated for me and the work I was doing after I signed off the call. Despite what I and others on the team may have thought of her ability to lead (which, as I mentioned in last month's post, was probably due to a variety of environmental challenges), I have to say she was a strong advocate for me that day. 

Long story short, I did receive the full retention offer (20% salary increase) plus most of my other asks: dedicated budget for the office, the creation of a working group to examine how to improve the postdoc experience and support for the office at NC State, and promises that the administrative position for our team would be posted. Given all of this, I was determined to try to make things work for me at NC State.

​I conveyed this information to the "prestigious" institution who had offered me the administrative director role and told them that I felt I needed to continue in my role at NC State given their increased commitment to both me and my work there. They were disappointed but understood. I think I showed some character and loyalty in my exchange with them that could be helpful in future interactions with that group and employer. I offered to be of assistance on relevant topics, should they be interested in the future, and even shared a copy of my NC State Postdoc Climate Survey with them.
​On the whole, I think I exited the situation as gracefully and amicably as possible. 

There were several reasons why I decided to try to make things work at NC State. First, moving is a pain and the grass is not always greener on the other side. Despite many of the challenges I encountered in my role there, I did have a great deal of autonomy and felt like the work I was doing was making an impact. I also believed this newly-formed Reimagining the Postdoc Experience at NC State working group of campus leaders I assembled could lead to greater institutional buy-in for what we were trying to do to support postdocs at NC State. 

Also, to be candid, I was half-way to my 5-year service requirement to vest in the state pension plan and that was a pretty larger incentive to stay. The state benefits are excellent in North Carolina and their pension plan and retirement benefits (including subsidized retiree health care insurance with 10 years of service) provide a large incentive to stay employed with them long-term. This plus the knowledge that I could get a job offer if needed (I had received two offers in the past few months) gave me the confidence that I was not sacrificing too much by staying. I would give myself time to see if my situation would improve before abandoning the progress I was making. 

We hired the administrative support person for our team in October and I began training her to support me in postdoc human resources functions. I was happy about this as I knew we really needed coverage of these functions beyond myself. Had I taken one of the job offers I received in the summer of 2021, I don't know what the unit would have done to cover postdoc HR. They may have been able to make it work but part of me felt like I owed it to my coworkers to ensure someone could carry on the tasks I was performing should I leave. In a way, this assuaged my guilt in keeping my options open. You can't perfectly plan for or anticipate opportunities, after all. 

In fact, during the retention offer saga, I was also interviewing for another position which, in my eyes at the time was my dream role.... 

In April of 2021, I learned from a colleague that she was moving into a new leadership role at a different institution and vacating her postdoc office director-level position at her current institution. From prior interactions with her, I knew she was setting her former office up for success with a new staff member being onboarded and increased financial support from her institution. In addition, the postdoc community at that institution was vibrant, engaged, and, in my view, very well-treated and supported (paid parental leave, salaries tied to the NIH NRSA stipend level, etc...). As an outside observer, I viewed the position she was leaving as one of the best opportunities available for an individual wanting to work in postdoctoral affairs. It seemed like whomever occupied that position was going to be setup to succeed given the strong foundation there. I scheduled a time to chat with her about the institution and role and, after her confirming my understanding of the situation there, she said she would let the recruiter know I was applying. 

I felt pretty good after the first-round, online interview for that position, which was occurring in the midst of me turning down prior offers and negotiating my retention offer at NC State. It was all very awkward and uncomfortable. I felt like I was cheating on my current employer in spite of the retention offer but, to be fair, I had applied to the position before that came through and thought it would be an excellent move for me, should I be their top candidate. I think it is important to not close yourself off to opportunities or be too loyal to an employer, especially one that has not been the most supportive of you. I don't think there is ever a perfect way to navigate these types of situations but in the end you have to lookout for what is in your best interests. 

I had my on-site interview at my "dream" employer in August 2021 and I thought it went really well. I met with a lot of stakeholders at the institution from faculty to postdocs and thought I conveyed my past experience and ideas on making continued progress in postdoc support there effectively. To be frank, I expected to get a job offer from them. Wasn't this what I was building toward? I had done good work at NC State...I knew it and other potential employers could see it. It had led to prior job offers earlier that summer that, while not perfectly ideal for me, gave me confidence that I was a hot commodity. But it wasn't meant to be...

One thing I remind the postdocs and graduate students I advise when it comes to a job search is that it is more subjective than anyone would like to admit. You can be an ideal candidate but that does not mean you will get the job for a whole hosts of reasons. It is best as a candidate to try not to overly analyze a rejection as you will never really know why you weren't selected and, furthermore, there may not be much you could have done to change the outcome even if you knew what was really wanted by the employer. For example, you can't change who you are. If an employer prefers a candidate with a different background from you, that was their preference but not your fault. ​

Quick coda to my dream employer story: I later learned who was hired for that position and think they are an amazing choice for that institution. So, in the end, it is hard to hold any bad feelings there. ​

In Bill Burnett and Dave Evans' Designing Your Work Life book, they make a point that it is worth tryin to redesign and shape one's role at a current employer before deciding to leave. With my retention offer in hand, I attempted to do this at NC State University.  

I pushed on with my Reimagining the Postdoc Experience working group and thought we had a good initial meeting to discuss compensation and benefits for postdocs at NC State. I also think leadership in our Office of Research and Innovation was taking notice. I was even encouraged to draft a strategic plan for postdoctoral affairs at the university. While this was occurring, our new team member was getting up to speed on learning the various postdoc HR processes, which I was pushed to document more extensively for her. I felt like that burden would soon be lifted from me and that the documentation would ensure postdoc HR would be able to operate without me.

​Doing all this assuaged my gilt of having flirted with other employment opportunities. I believed I was leaving things better than I found them, which I think is about all one can ask of an employee. The big unknown lingering in the back of my mind was: was change possible at NC State?...would these efforts lead to increased institutional support and resources for me and the Office of Postdoctoral Affairs? I knew change would be slow and difficult and part of me thought I just needed to see some movement in the right direction to be convinced to stay. Another part of me thought things would never change. That is the thing about the future, it is hard to predict. So, making decisions about the future state of things in one's life is challenging if not impossible. We must act and decide with incomplete information and come to grips with our decision. Living in the what ifs or what could have beens is not healthy of productive...we must sometimes act and move forward. And I was approaching one of those pivotal moments in the fall of 2021. 

I didn't know it at the time but I was establishing a relationship with my now current employer nearly two years before accepting a job with them. 

Back in late 2019, I received an email from the head of Human Resources in the Research and Innovation Office at Virginia Tech inquiring about postdoc benefits and salaries at NC State. At the time, I was compiling my own list of peer institutions' postdoc benefits and happily shared not only my information but that from my peer institution sheet with the HR lead. That one act showed a lot...that I was collaborative and helpful and also knowledgeable about this area. It planted a seed of goodwill that led to other opportunities to provide value and demonstrate my expertise. I am generally a helpful person and so engaged in this information sharing with no sense of what I would personally get out of it.

​I also generally want to see recognition and support for postdocs improve at a national an international level. So, when Virginia Tech reached out in late 2020 to ask me to speak over Zoom with a working group they had established on improving support for postdocs there, I happily said yes. I shared with those on the call some of the things we were doing at NC State and my general thoughts on what ideal postdoctoral support would look like. Many of the individuals I interacted with on that call would sit on the search committee for my current position. Obviously, it was difficult to predict this at the time but it goes to show you that anytime you have a professional interaction with others it can set the stage for future interactions where the stakes can be much higher. It pays to say yes to opportunities to engage with those in professional areas you are interested in as you never know where those engagements will lead.  

Flashforward to my 2021 summer of job searching and I received a message from one of the members of the Virginia Tech working group asking for a sample postdoc office budget as they were planning to stand up a postdoc office there. I kept that info in the back of my mind and happily shared a budget I proposed to NC State but was never awarded. Again, I showed value and expertise in this area and also gained knowledge about a future position that might be worth pursuing.

​Indeed, Virginia Tech did post their Postdoctoral Affairs Program Administrator position in Fall 2021 and I reached out to my HR contact there about it before applying. Again, this was the same individual who reached out to me about data over a year ago and now I was reaching out to her to learn more about the position, expected salary range, and more. After talking with her, I realized I had to apply for the Virginia Tech position despite trying to make it work at NC State. First off, they were compensating this individual at what I believed to be an appropriate level which was substantially higher than what I was making at NC State even with the 20% retention increase (wow was I underpaid my first few years there!). Second, the Virginia Tech position would involve helping to establish a new Office of Postdoctoral Affairs there. I saw it as an amazing opportunity to grow professionally and make an impact. I also knew there would be latitude to build the office with intention and that I would not be inheriting preconceived notions of what the office did (which was the case at NC State where I believe many saw OPA as a purely administrative unit). Long story short, I had a series of video and in-person interviews at Virginia Tech and was extended the job offer in late Fall. It was now decision time.  

As I mentioned earlier, my work with the GCC allowed me to benchmark what a director-level salary level should be. When I applied for my "dream" job back in Spring 2021 I had bracketed by expected salary range around the median director-level salary from the GCC's benchmarking survey. I realized throughout the search process, however, that one has to value oneself appropriately. Emboldened by my retention offer and past string of offers, I made sure in my initial screening interview with Virginia Tech HR to bracket my expected salary higher than the director-level median. Not wildly higher but higher. I realized I needed to know my worth and ask for more than "average". If an employer wants you and your salary expectations are based in reality (ie, benchmarked), they will probably meet you at a higher level than you might think. This may be especially true in the hot labor market we are experiencing as I write this in Spring 2022. Now, all this said, you need to be a reasonable person when you negotiate your salary. Perhaps unsurprisedly, Virginia Tech initially offered a salary at the lower end of my desired range. To be fair, it was a good salary and they offered to pay for my moving expenses. I also knew their benefits were quite good. While some might advocate for pushing toward the top of the salary range, I thought it prudent to meet them in the middle of the range I proposed. You don't want to start off a professional relationship with an employer be being seen as inflexible and unreasonable. I was satisfied with where we ended up and felt well compensated and supported in the new role.   

So, after spending several months in 2021 navigating interviews and job offers and retention negotiations and generally trying to make things work at my current employer, the year was winding down with a final choice I had to make. Stick it out at NC State or take on a new opportunity at Virginia Tech? You would think this decision would have been an easy one, right? Virginia Tech was going to pay me more, I would have more responsibility there, I would be removed from day-to-day HR administrative tasks, able to think big picture, grow my leadership skills, and make a difference. And while the leadership environment and interpersonal conflicts above me in the Graduate School at NC State were certainly not great, I knew the lay of the land there. I had made a lot of progress in supporting postdocs at NC State and believed we might be turning a corner in better supporting them and my office. It came down to a decision of whether I wanted to stay at NC State with the hope things would get better or make the move to Virginia Tech to take on new challenges (and opportunities) and have to, in a sense, capture momentum and support all over again. 

Over my three years at NC State I was also a member of the Graduate Career Consortium (GCC)'s mentoring program. Each year, I was paired with another more senior professional in the graduate-level career and professional development space. These mentors and other individuals I grew close with as part of my service with GCC became important sounding boards as I navigated my situation at NC State and decision on whether to move on to a new position. While a big life decision like changing jobs is ultimately a personal one, it is often valuable to talk through things with individuals outside your working environment to gain their perspectives. I had often complained to my original GCC mentor about my frustration in my current role and he would tell me as our conversations progressed over the years that he could tell I was not in a good place and needed to leave. He was also a helpful confident to discuss negotiations and the pros and cons of the various offers I obtained in 2021.

I also relied on my National Postdoctoral Association (NPA) and GCC network to serve as references for me during my job search, demonstrating the importance of developing professional relationships outside one's coworkers. My leadership within NPA and GCC and the willingness of these individuals to speak to it certainly were helpful in my job search. Reminder: you must build professional relationships before you need them. They often will come in handy later on. 

Reflecting on other career conversations I had with my mentors and other professional colleagues, many encouraged me to aim high in my job search and not sell myself short. Also, when I told my current GCC mentor about my Virginia Tech offer he encouraged me to take it, seeing it as a great career advancement opportunity for me. While I also saw this, it was helpful to hear another person confirming my belief that this was a great opportunity. And my original GCC mentor encouraged me to write about this career search journey in the hopes of helping others see there are opportunities beyond the struggles you may be encountering in your current role.
Thanks, Dinuka Gunaratne, for pushing me to share my job search journey in this post! ​

After accepting the Virginia Tech position, I was determined to document as much as I could from my role at NC State. I did not want to leave them in a bad spot as I generally want to see the Professional Development Team and Office of Postdoctoral Affairs there succeed. I also met with many stakeholders and leaders on campus to explain why I made the decision to leave. I really hope they reflect on some of the challenges I and others in the Graduate School encountered and find ways to better support people doing good work there. As I said in last month's post, I don't harbor any bad feelings. They gave me the chance and latitude to grow as a professional in a new career area for me, post-postdoc, and my work there allowed me to demonstrate the expertise needed to move into a new position with more leadership opportunities and upside. 

I think I left on good terms. I hear from a colleague there now that my name is routinely mentioned around the office with an air of appreciation. It is good to know I made a difference there and hopefully began to change people's perceptions of what could be done to support postdoctoral scholars at NC State. 

So, what should you take from this rambling account of my 2021 year of reflection and job searching? I hope a few things:

• Applying to positions, getting interviews, and hopefully an offer or two can give you the confidence to know you have skills and experience employers value, even if there are times when you think your current employer doesn't see or recognize them
• A strong network is crucial to your job search
  • Colleagues from the NPA and GCC served as key references for me
  • Colleagues made referrals to recruiters and hiring managers on my behalf
• Be of value, expecting nothing in return. It can buy you goodwill in the future.
  • As mentioned, I provided value and engaged with Virginia Tech years before taking this position. Doing this made me more of a "known quantity" with them, which probably helped my chances when interviewing for this job.
• Know your worth
  • I think I undersold myself early in the job search when asked my desired salary range. As I become more confident during the job search process, I realized I could and should ask for more. I ultimately got it.
• Don't get caught up in the moment...carefully weigh the pros and cons of a new role.
  • It would have been easy to focus on the role at the "prestigious" institution as some sort of status symbol or the fun-in-the-sun lifestyle of the other role I was offered in the summer of 2021. However, carefully considering whether those roles truly aligned with my career goals and needs allowed me to decline each. Eventually, I found a role more in alignment with my strengths and other priorities (proximity to family, autonomy, ability to build something). If you can, consider waiting for the "right" opportunity to materialize and try not to jump at the first offer, unless you feel pretty confident it is the right role and environment for you.
• Give real effort to try to make it work with your current employer
  • It is so easy to bolt when things aren't working out. However, if you don't articulate your challenges and then make a concerted effort to improve things, if only for the rest of your team or next person in the role, are you showing true commitment to your craft? People will respect you more for not giving up right away and doing your best to improve the situation...it takes character to do that.  
• Know when to leave
  • At some point, though, you must objectively assess your options and make difficult decisions. It is never easy to leave a place and move into a new role, with all its unknowns. Talking it out with family, friends, and trusted mentors and colleagues can help.
• Things can work out, in the end.
  • While I didn't take the role at the "prestigious" institution or land my perceived "dream job", I found something better, something I was not expecting.

This role at Virginia Tech checks so many boxes for me from professional growth opportunities to the ability to make an impact through building a dedicated office to support postdoctoral scholars.
I also learned during my interview process that Virginia Tech postdocs have access to the same employee benefits as faculty and staff, something I can feel good about as I promote the value of postdoctoral training here.
​
In addition, the pay and benefits here are great, I am able to focus more on the things I love (building programs, interacting with postdocs, and helping faculty recruit and support postdocs), and am close to family and friends in North Carolina and Tennessee. It would have been impossible to imagine in early 2021 this is where I would be now and, little did I know, I may have been laying the groundwork for my own success by answering that initial email about postdoc benefits and salary from Virginia Tech in 2020. I engaged with them in 2020 because I wanted to be helpful and assist them in thinking about what effective support of their postdoctoral population could look like. Now, I am working toward that goal with them while also growing as a leader and strategic thinker.

​I hope to build a positive legacy for both myself and postdoctoral support here at Virginia Tech in the years to come. Our aspirations and goals are ambitious, in a good way. We are striving towards building something impactful and innovative for our postdoctoral population, including the recent launch of a Presidential Postdoctoral Fellowship program this Spring.
Stay tuned for additional exciting announcements and developments in the months ahead!

​In closing, I truly believe that if you put yourself out there (ie, apply for positions you think may be a stretch for you), volunteer for causes you care about, build your credibility and network (which I did through leadership roles and involvement with NPA and GCC), and know what you are looking for in a role (turning down good but not great opportunities), you can land at a place that meets most if not nearly all of your needs.
​It might take a year or it might take longer but all good things, as they say, are worth the wait.  

North Carolina State University’s athletic teams have a wolf pack as a mascot. “Wolfpack” is obviously not a singular character (which makes creating a mascot tricky but I digress…) but a group of wolves who live and hunt together.

All over campus you see the quote from Rudyard Kipling:
“The strength of the pack is the wolf and the strength of the wolf is the pack.”

Reflecting on my transition into my first post-postdoc role as Postdoc Program Manager at NC State and now in a new role leading the creation of an Office of Postdoctoral Affairs at Virginia Tech, I am appreciative of the supportive group of advocates, colleagues, friends, and mentors I have assembled over the years from my postdoctoral training time at Vanderbilt, professional associations (the Graduate Career Consortium in particular), and work. They helped me land my position at NC State and gave me the confidence to pursue this new opportunity at Virginia Tech. 

When I received my first job offer to join NC State, I turned to colleagues in the BRET Office of Career Development (especially Ashley Brady) and Office of Postdoctoral Affairs (OPA, Irene McKirgan) at Vanderbilt University, where I worked as a postdoctoral researcher from August 2014 to January 2019. They encouraged me to negotiate for a more competitive salary (which you can read more about here). They were also instrumental in serving as references for me as I applied for the Postdoc Program Manager position. It was important to have advocates for me who knew more intimately about the work I did with the Vanderbilt Postdoctoral Association (VPA) and the National Postdoctoral Association. Ashley and Irene saw me assist in a variety of career development and other programming offered at Vanderbilt through BRET, OPA, and the VPA. They could convey to the hiring manager my passion and commitment to postdoc support and career development. I had established relationships with the two of them over a 2-3 year period before they ultimately served as references. So, I believe their recommendations were genuine and from a place of truly knowing me and seeing what I could contribute in the postdoc development area.
​
The key point here for current graduate students and postdoctoral scholars is that you should establish relationships with individuals outside your main research advisor, especially if those individuals are in areas you might be interested in pursuing as a career. But, regardless of whether you go in a particular career direction, just get involved with organizations on your campus, in your community, and/or nationally. You will need broad advocates for you who can speak to your commitment, teamwork, organization, and ability to get things done and those you work with in these non-work/lab capacities will be able to do that. They may also be able to emphasize the soft skills of people management better than your research advisor can because they see you function in a different capacity. Critically, you should be cultivating these relationships before you need them.

Hopefully, the lab you are training in as a graduate student or postdoc is also supportive of you and your career, even if it is not a faculty career path. I was initially hesitant to discuss my interest in a non-faculty career with my postdoc advisor, David Zald (now at Rutgers). When I did bring up the subject to him, though, he was very supportive. I think most Principal Investigators (PIs) understand the competitiveness of the faculty job market necessitates the need for their trainees to explore non-faculty careers. Most, I think, want to see their trainees succeed in whatever endeavor they undertake after their time in the lab. That being said, many PIs have limited knowledge of how to best position oneself for a career in industry, the government, etc.,  but that doesn’t mean they can’t connect you to people in their network that may be able to help or allow you time to take part in activities that will assist you in learning more about your career options. My postdoc advisor was supportive of me taking part in professional development activities while at Vanderbilt as well as participating and taking on leadership opportunities in the VPA, which, as mentioned above, was critical in leading me to my current career path.

Transitioning to a new work environment is always a challenge, especially if it is in an area that is outside your previous one. In early 2019 I went from a research-focused position as a postdoc to an administrative position as a program manager. My new role required interacting with a variety of individuals at NC State: postdocs, faculty, department administrators, college/university administrators (in HR, international services, ombuds office), colleagues in the Graduate School, potential outside speakers, etc… Communication and building relationships was key in this new role. Thankfully, my colleagues in the Graduate School worked to introduce me to key individuals at the University. I also was proactive in establishing these relationships: emailing individuals suggested by my colleagues to meet up for coffee, lunch, etc… Establishing personal relationships with the people you work or interact with professionally is critical to building trust and respect, which will be vital when complex or difficult situations inevitably arise. You don’t want your first ask to be coming from someone that the person has never met and/or heard from previously. People are more likely to help you if they know you.

Another key component of a positive work environment is a supervisor that gives you autonomy as well as support. They also need to provide direction and leadership to ensure a team is working together toward a common set of goals and objectives. In my role at NC State, the first attribute was excellent (autonomy in my work) while the later (leadership) left much to be desired. Being a leader is different than being a boss or supervisor. It isn't easy to lead, though, especially if the environment prevents one from driving projects and initiatives forward either via bureaucratic roadblocks, resource limitations/inaccessibility, or lack of transparency. Acknowledging all of that, regardless of the cause of a situation where one does not feel supported by leadership, at some point one must decide if they think the situation can improve or if they must improve their situation either through pushing for change or searching for other opportunities. I tried both. ​

Throughout my time in the role at NC State, I felt I went "above and beyond" my job description as I sought ways to add value to the team and unit. For example, during my first year on the job, I worked with a graduate student assistant to launch a new blog on the Graduate School's website - ImPACKful - to better highlight campus resources, career and professional development tips, and spotlight current and past graduate students and postdocs. I felt it important to provide another outlet to reach our constituents and tell stories around the impact our career and professional development programming was having as I didn't think the broader campus community knew enough about us and our work. By my last count, our ImPACKful Blog had received 41,000+ unique page views since we launched it in August 2019. It is something I am very proud I developed and supported even if there was very little acknowledgement from Graduate School leadership of its value.

​In short, this experience epitomized a recurrent feeling I had during my time at State: I felt I went above and beyond and no one in leadership really cared. There was certainly a "nice job" comment but I don't think leadership saw the potential of what we could do with the platform. I envisioned it as a way to have current trainees learn about informational interviews and then tell alumni stories via the blog. It seemed like it could be a great platform for student/postdoc learning, networking, and brand building but it was never a unit priority. In the end, we produced less frequent pieces as I failed to see any future where leadership would support these efforts (ie, give me the bandwidth to pursue organizing content with more intention). And the COVID-19 pandemic certainly made any attempt at asking for more resources and support even more challenging. ​