7

I defended last month, got my PhD and am about to run out of funding. I've been applying to postdocs for close to a year and have only had one near-hire (something happened with their funding) and three interviews. One thing I've heard from a few sources is that, at least in this field, graduate and postdoc research should line up very well. My advisor even said it would be "a waste of time" to apply to postdocs that don't line up with my research extremely closely. Is this true?

I know that in other fields, like bio-med, it's actually encouraged to do something totally different. It seems ineffecient to only hire close match-ups.

Improve this question
1
  • It might depend on the subject but my experience is that positions are have many, many applicants. So they can afford to hire someone who fits the role ''perfectly'', if you apply to something and it's completely different (or quite different) to your experience, the chance of getting it (or even getting an interview) is pretty sli
    – Tom
    Commented Jul 28, 2022 at 20:00

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
14

My advisor even said it would be "a waste of time" to apply to postdocs that don't line up with my research extremely closely

I think that this statement is, in general, incorrect. As a PI, I am looking for postdocs who are skilled and motivated to contribute to the research that is going on in my group. It takes good knowledge of maths, good understanding of quantum physics (at BSc level) and excellent computational skills. As soon as these boxes are ticked, I am looking for soft skills, presentation skills, writing skills, motivation — all things which describe a good researcher, rather than an expert specialised in a specific narrow subfield of research.

So I would absolutely hire a motivated candidate from another subfield of quantum physics, if they are interested in working with me. I know colleagues who will do the same.

If you are interested in a specific PI, lab or project — do not hesitate to apply. Good luck.

Improve this answer
5
  • Fully agree, although I'm more in a position where not many people get PhDs in what I need, so I rely on folks adjusting their course...
    – Jon Custer
    Commented Jul 27, 2022 at 19:59
  • 4
    This might depend on the field and the level of background knowledge needed to do research. It seems to me that in pure mathematics, people who try to substantially change fields as postdocs are usually unsuccessful.
    – Elizabeth Henning
    Commented Jul 27, 2022 at 21:07
  • @ElizabethHenning Most people in academia are unsuccessful, only a tiny fraction is. We note this fact when it is convenient and ignore it when it is not. For instance, I am sure you observed many postdocs in pure maths who did not change field, but also did not become successful in academia (by whatever metric you applied to define success in your statement).
    – Dmitry Savostyanov
    Commented Jul 28, 2022 at 8:00
  • 1
    @DmitrySavostyanov I am familiar with survivorship bias and the problems with small samples. I mean that they seem to be much more unsuccessful at transitioning to research productivity in the new field compared with people who did not switch fields.
    – Elizabeth Henning
    Commented Jul 28, 2022 at 14:00
  • Very often, they do not have to switch field and they become successful because they are lucky to get support of a well-established Prof, who has a wide old boys network in academia (gender and sex may differ), so the PhD student/postdoc can propagate through the network easier than someone from outside. So both "not changing fields" and "be successful" have a common cause, but do not cause each other.
    – Dmitry Savostyanov
    Commented Jul 28, 2022 at 14:55
5

Hmmm… Although I think the comment of your supervisor is overly pessimistic, the odds are you will much more likely find something in your area of expertise, or at least in your broad area of expertise.

The odds of being hired by someone in - say - material science are small unless you have some expertise that is valuable to this PI, but it may very well happen that you do have this expertise, or at least part of the required expertise. Maybe the ideal candidates knows “Software A” and material science very well, but no candidates with both skills are acceptable so the PI might be interested in someone with a lot of experience with Software A.

So while not a waste of time, the onus is on you in the cover letter to highlight how your skill sets will be valuable for the advertised position.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .