Upload
cwaaijer
View
90
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Presentation by Cathelijn Waaijer at the 2014 Science and Technology Indicators conference in Leiden, on the influence of career prospects on the job choice of PhDs.
Citation preview
Career perspectives and job choice: a survey of recent PhD graduates of five Dutch universities
Cathelijn J. F. Waaijer
STI conference, 4 Sept 2014
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Numbers of PhD graduates
Source: VSNU
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Sectors of employment
Auriol, Misu & Freeman (2013)
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Career aspirations
Sauermann & Roach (2012)
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Career perspectives in academic R&D and their effects – some evidence
• 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)
Fox & Stephan (2001)
1: poor2: fair3: good4: excellent
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
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.
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.
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.
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 Rotterda
mUtrecht
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.
Perception of career perspectives
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Long-term career perspectives by sector of work
Opinion on:Academic R&D
Non-academic R&D
Non-R&D
Current sector of workAc 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
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
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
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.
Other factors in job choice
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
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 organization
19 35 24 <0.001
Benefits 21 31 17 0.002
Availability of permanent jobs within organization
21 28 21 0.049
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.
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.
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.
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.
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)
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
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Other factors that might play a rolePush 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.
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Disclaimer: preliminary results. Further analysis may change conclusions.
Positions for PhD graduates