More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (18)
Similar to 140904 presentation cathelijn waaijer sti 2014 slideshare
Similar to 140904 presentation cathelijn waaijer sti 2014 slideshare (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
140904 presentation cathelijn waaijer sti 2014 slideshare
- 1. Career perspectives and job choice: a survey of recent PhD graduates of five Dutch universities Cathelijn J. F. Waaijer STI conference, 4 Sept 2014
- 2. Numbers of PhD graduates Source: VSNU Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 3. Sectors of employment Auriol, Misu & Freeman (2013) Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 4. Career aspirations Sauermann & Roach (2012) Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 5. Career perspectives in academic R&D and their effects – some evidence Fox & Stephan (2001) 1: poor 2: fair 3: good 4: excellent • Uncertain prospects and long spells on temporary contracts decrease attractiveness of scientific career according to leading scientists (Waaijer 2014) • Insecurity about career affects well-being of postdocs (Höge, Brucculeri & Iwanova 2012) Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 6. Research questions • How do PhD graduates perceive their career perspectives in different sectors of work? – Academic R&D – Non-academic R&D – Non-R&D • Do career perspectives influence the choice of sector of work? – Measured effect on sector of work – Opinion of PhD graduates Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 7. Main variables – Career perspectives: rated very good – good – neutral – bad – very bad • Long-term career perspectives (in general) • Availability of permanent positions • Usual length of period holding temporary positions • Quality of human resource management and career policy – Employment sector: academic R&D, non-academic R&D, non-R&D • Constructed from variables “involved in basic research”, “involved in applied research” and “involved in experimental development”, and description of employer Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 8. Survey • Follow-up to 2008 Netherlands Survey of Doctorate Recipients among PhD graduates (April 2008 – March 2009) of: – Delft University of Technology (engineering and technology) – Erasmus University Rotterdam (focused on social sciences, medicine) – Utrecht University (all scientific fields) – Wageningen University (agricultural sciences, natural sciences) • New: PhD graduates from Leiden University (January 2008 – April 2012): all scientific fields except economics, and engineering and technology • Total: 2,430 PhD graduates (half of them from Leiden) • Surveyed sample: 2,207 PhDs; through email or LinkedIn • Survey open for 91 days Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 9. Descriptive statistics • 51.5% (partial) response rate • 43.6% progressed to the final question – Respondents were allowed to leave questions unanswered, except if a response was required for routing • Females: 45% • 96.3% had paid work at time of survey • Scientific field of PhD by university (in %) Delft Leiden Rotterdam Utrecht Wageningen Total Medical and health sciences 0 38 61 36 9 34 Natural sciences 17 23 5 33 70 26 Social sciences 7 18 31 16 9 17 Humanities 4 19 3 9 1 13 Engineering and technology 73 3 1 7 11 11 Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 10. Perception of career perspectives Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 11. Long-term career perspectives by sector of work Opinion on: Academic R&D Non-academic R&D Non-R&D Current sector of work Ac R&D N-Ac R&D Non-R&D Ac R&D N-Ac R&D Non-R&D Ac R&D N-Ac R&D Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions. Non-R&D Very good 11 6 5 6 14 6 8 15 14 Good 31 17 10 36 50 30 34 49 47 Neutral 22 28 30 39 30 49 44 32 31 Bad 26 37 40 16 4 14 12 2 7 Very bad 10 12 16 3 2 1 3 2 1 p-value <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
- 12. Self-reported influence of perspectives in academic R&D on job choice by sector Current sector of work Ac R&D Non-ac R&D Non-R&D Total p Long-term career perspectives 53 57 50 54 0.443 Availability of permanent positions 35 49 45 40 0.001 Usual length of period holding a temporary position 23 35 35 27 0.001 Quality of HRM/career policy 12 25 23 17 <0.001 % who agree “strongly” or “very strongly”, in % Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 13. Other factors in job choice Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 14. Factors important for job choice – by sector of work Ac R&D N-ac R&D Non-R&D p-value Intellectual challenge 87 78 68 <0.001 Degree of independence 76 58 57 <0.001 Possibility to develop new skills 69 77 62 0.008 Creativeness 66 60 39 <0.001 Job security 28 41 43 <0.001 Salary 24 45 38 <0.001 Job opportunities within 19 35 24 <0.001 organization Benefits 21 31 17 0.002 Availability of permanent jobs within 21 28 21 0.049 organization Personal and family-related circumstances 25 16 17 0.006 Organization's career policy and HRM 8 21 11 <0.001 Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 15. Multinomial logistic regression – several factors included • Perception of career perspectives in academic R&D • Perception of own scientific oeuvre • Availability of sufficient job opportunities • Years since PhD • Field of PhD • Which job characteristics play a role in job choice • Personal characteristics (nationality, gender, age) • Pseudo R2: Cox and Snell 0.369; Nagelkerke 0.449 Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 16. Non-academic R&D cf. academic R&D • Career perspectives in academic R&D: – More positive about long-term career perspectives -> less likely to work in non-academic R&D – More positive about HRM -> more likely • Other factors: – More positive about sufficient number of positions in preferred sector of work -> more likely – Medical sciences, social sciences, humanities -> less likely than engineering – Value intellectual challenge, degree of independence and personal circumstances -> less likely – Value contribution to society, salary and job opportunities within organization -> more likely – Dutch nationals -> more likely Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 17. Non-R&D cf. academic R&D • Career perspectives in academic R&D – More positive about availability of permanent positions -> less likely to work in non-R&D – More positive about HRM -> more likely • Other factors: – More positive about own scientific oeuvre -> less likely – Value creativeness, intellectual challenge, and personal and family-related circumstances -> less likely – Value job opportunities within organization -> more likely Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 18. Conclusions • Career perspectives perceived as much worse in academic R&D than non-academic R&D and non-R&D • Difference in career perspectives between sectors perceived as larger by those working in non-academic R&D and non-R&D • Self-reported influence of different career aspects in academic R&D quite large, even more so for PhDs in non-academic R&D and non-R&D • Aspects of personal development and job content main factors influencing job choice, but less so for people outside academic R&D • Perception of career perspectives plays a small but significant role in job choice (controlled for other variables) Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 19. Acknowledgements • Cornelis van Bochove • Rosalie Belder • Inge van der Weijden • Rens van de Schoot • Hans Sonneveld • Moniek de Boer • Danique van den Hanenberg • Malu Kuhlmann • Lisa van Leeuwen • Lisette van Leeuwen • Suze van der Luijt-Jansen • Laura de Ruiter • Bert van der Wurff
- 20. Other factors that might play a role Push factors • (Own perception) of academic quality (e.g., Sanz-Menendez et al.) • Preference for current job • Field of PhD • Year of PhD Pull factors • Job characteristics job satisfaction is acquired from (personal development vs. terms of employment: “taste for science” cf. Sauermann & Roach) • Personal characteristics: gender, age, nationality Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 21. Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 22. Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
- 23. Positions for PhD graduates Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Editor's Notes
- Academic: university, academic hospital, research institute, or university of applied sciences/college
- Conclusion: PhD graduates rate the long-term career perspectives of their own sector of work better than people not working in that sector. The same pattern for the availability of permanent positions. But only relatively: those working in academic R&D are still quite pessimistic about opportunities in academic R&D, just a little bit less so than people working elsewhere. With regards to the usual length of the period holding a temporary position and quality of HRM: only graduates working in non-academic R&D think these aspects are better in their own sector than other PhDs. Howev
- From these figures it seems that the career perspectives in academic R&D influence PhDs’ job choice to a considerable extent, more so when they chose to work in non-academic R&D and non-R&D. However, also other factors might have played a role. Not only the perception of career perspectives play a role in job choice, also other factors are important. One of these is which job characteristics PhD graduates value when choosing their job (cf. Sauermann & Roach).
- Conclusions from this slide: PhD graduates say they are more guided by factors relating to personal development and job content than to terms of employment. Of the former, intellectual challenge, degree of independence and the possibility to develop new skills are the factors most often ticked. Of the latter, these are the degree to which a job provides opportunities for career advancement, job security and salary. Next, we’ll investigate whether there are differences between PhDs working in different sectors as to how often they ticked the factors
- Conclusion: for PhDs working in academic R&D factors relating to personal development are more important in job choice than for persons working in non-academic R&D and non-R&D. On the other hand, some terms of employment are more important for those working in non-academic R&D. Exceptions are the possibility to develop new skills, which are more important for those working in non-academic R&D, and personal and family-related circumstances, which play a role more often for those in academic R&D.
- Variables (t < -2 or t>2) and p < 0.05 Findings: main factors influencing job choice are whether sufficient positions in the preferred sector were available, the field of PhD, and a “taste for science”, i.e., PhDs working in non-academic R&D value intellectual challenge and degree of independence less. However, they value their contribution to society, salary and the job opportunities within the organization more. They are less influenced by personal and family-related circumstances than those working in academic R&D, and more often have the Dutch nationality. However, there is some influence of the perception of career perspectives (although the effect is significant, it isn’t very large): the more positive a PhD graduate is about the long-term career perspectives in academic R&D, the less likely they are to be working in non-academic R&D. Furthermore, PhDs working in non-academic R&D are more likely to be positive about the quality of HRM in academic R&D.
- Main influencing factors here: the availability of permanent positions in academic R&D; the more positive, the less likely to be working in non-R&D. It is the other way around for the quality of HRM. Here, the perception of the own scientific oeuvre plays a role: the more positive, the less likely to be working in non-R&D. Important job characteristics playing a role in job choice are creativeness, intellectual challenge, the job opportunities within the organization, and personal and family-related circumstances.