I have undergone the challenge of transitioning from an academic career to an industrial one in the current job market. My experience has been particularly eye-opening regarding the juxtaposition of success in academia and the perception of academics outside the university setting.
To be clear, a PhD is not another degree; it is a full-time research job. You are project manager, data analyst, science communicator and research scientist all rolled into one. While you don’t use recognised industry buzzwords like KPIs, ROI or Quality Control, these factors are essential to the PhD project’s success. Gantt charts are a way of life, and rigorous documentation ensures that your experiments build on each other to produce your final report with complete scientific accuracy.
I and many other PhD holders have heard these comments countless times:
‘A PhD is just a waste of time’
‘You would have been better off working at Starbucks’
‘Spending 10 years at university doesn’t look good on anyone’s CV’.
On the other hand, an academic career itself is similarly misunderstood; when I talked about applying for postdoctoral positions, I was frequently asked:
‘Is that a paid position?’
‘When will you actually leave university?’
‘And what qualification will that get you?’
For bright-eyed, bushy-tailed PhD graduates, the path to industry is long, exhausting and full of misunderstanding.
After my PhD, I submitted hundreds of job applications and received few responses, except to say that I was overqualified and lacking relevant industry experience. This was not referring to the absence of applicable skills, which were demonstrated in my CV, but rather to a lack of familiarity with the terminology for standard practices in industry. I have heard this same story from countless other PhD holders- and my LinkedIn feed is full of them.
I believe this cuts to the root of the problem, highlighting the disconnect between how PhD students communicate their ‘soft skills’ outside of experimental work, and the requirements of rigidly defined roles in industry. It also speaks to a broader misalignment between the level of training PhD graduates receive and how that experience is recognised and valued in industry.
While PhD holders must learn to redefine their skillset using industry-friendly language in their applications, recruiters ought to recognise PhDs as a hugely valuable but underutilised resource for industry. A PhD is not just academic training—it is evidence of resilience, independence, and the ability to navigate complex, long-term challenges, marking PhD holders as a safe investment rather than a short-term training risk.
To be clear, a PhD is not another degree; it is a full-time research job. You are project manager, data analyst, science communicator and research scientist all rolled into one. While you don’t use recognised industry buzzwords like KPIs, ROI or Quality Control, these factors are essential to the PhD project’s success. Gantt charts are a way of life, and rigorous documentation ensures that your experiments build on each other to produce your final report with complete scientific accuracy.
I and many other PhD holders have heard these comments countless times:
‘A PhD is just a waste of time’
‘You would have been better off working at Starbucks’
‘Spending 10 years at university doesn’t look good on anyone’s CV’.
On the other hand, an academic career itself is similarly misunderstood; when I talked about applying for postdoctoral positions, I was frequently asked:
‘Is that a paid position?’
‘When will you actually leave university?’
‘And what qualification will that get you?’
For bright-eyed, bushy-tailed PhD graduates, the path to industry is long, exhausting and full of misunderstanding.
After my PhD, I submitted hundreds of job applications and received few responses, except to say that I was overqualified and lacking relevant industry experience. This was not referring to the absence of applicable skills, which were demonstrated in my CV, but rather to a lack of familiarity with the terminology for standard practices in industry. I have heard this same story from countless other PhD holders- and my LinkedIn feed is full of them.
I believe this cuts to the root of the problem, highlighting the disconnect between how PhD students communicate their ‘soft skills’ outside of experimental work, and the requirements of rigidly defined roles in industry. It also speaks to a broader misalignment between the level of training PhD graduates receive and how that experience is recognised and valued in industry.
While PhD holders must learn to redefine their skillset using industry-friendly language in their applications, recruiters ought to recognise PhDs as a hugely valuable but underutilised resource for industry. A PhD is not just academic training—it is evidence of resilience, independence, and the ability to navigate complex, long-term challenges, marking PhD holders as a safe investment rather than a short-term training risk.
One Response
Great content! Keep up the good work!