The Twitter discussion about postdoc searches was informative & very eye-opening.Coming from a particular R1 environment I was surprised at the diversity of thoughts on this. Before I exit this discussion I wanted to summarize my own thoughts-warning, its a long thread
—they are specific to the US, my field and institutions like mine (@UNC)
First, what am I looking for in a postdoc. Three things. 1. a solid record of productivity and at least one 1st author pub. It doesn’t have to be a flash journal but pubs are our fields currency and a prerequisite for having a chance at getting your own funding.
Someone also need to be able to tell us about their work and its importance clearly is writing and in their talk.
2. A clear desire to work in the field and on the sort of science we do. I am not looking for someone who is simply searching for a job, but someone who is going to bring shared excitement about our science to work each day
3. A personality that matches that of our lab, and someone who was excited to learn about the work of our current students and postdocs My lab collectively have veto power over applicants, as we’re a team
What am I not looking for? 1. Any particular expertise. People take on postdocs to learn new things—that is the training aspect NIH and other postdoc funding agencies will evaluate. 2. A prima donna who is technically superb, perhaps brilliant but won’t mesh with the lab.
Each applicant over the first bar—solid pub (or set of work that clearly will be one if they're applying >6 months in advance) + a solid recommendation from advisor/committee members—gets invited for a day-long in person interview.
They give a talk AND talk to everyone in the lab. We discuss my training philosophy, training record, funding and possible projects. I pay plane and hotel.
Essentially all of my past and current applicants first contacted me via an email. In my entire career (>20 postdocs) only one was someone I had met before the initial contact about a possible PD (she was in a lab in the same city and field).
I have never advertised in a journal and am not sure that would sensible in the modern world. I do use my student and postdoc talks/posters and my own talks as recruiting tools, along with time spent talking to students at meetings and recently advertising on Twitter
Much of the discussion centered around “advertising” a position. I understand & appreciate the need to be open & welcoming to all applicants. However, I do not think advertising is the solution.
I am trying to imagine applicants trying to find positions via the dozens to hundreds of HR systems at Universities around the nation. I have trouble with our own HR system after 25 years.
Where else would I advertise where I’d reach students in my field. And I’d reiterate I want applicants who are excited about OUR science. If they find me, that suggests they did that much homework.
Do we need to better train our PhD students to help them search effectively—absolutely! I do this with my students, those whose committees I am on, & my science neighbors. Our grad committee’s always focus on this in the last year during their meetings.
Our training programs should also provide this information to ALL students. However, it’s a two way street-- you can lead a horse to water.
If you don’t get this at home @ASCBiology and @GeneticsGSA are great places to look for guidance on this and other professional issues, both at their meetings and in their pubs. @ASCBiology offers members CV review—I am working with a PhD student on this and his cover letter now
How should you apply? 1 Identify field(s) that excite you & papers you like. Make a medium list of folks with help from faculty colleagues. 2 Look at websites—think about pubs, training record if senior, & factor in pubs/dollar. 3 Show your list to folks. These days ID 5-10 labs.
Craft the approach. 1 CV, done professionally & with referees —have people look at it. Pubs up front. 2. Good cover letter. 1st Paragraph Intro. 2nd Paragraph Abstract of your current work 3rd Paragraph What excites you about prospective lab including recent papers
3. PDF of paper or manuscript in progress—biorxiv is also good.
Send the emails. Send a hard copy by mail. In two weeks followup and if you are really interested have your PI email. We’re all super busy and emails from promising candidates sometimes get lost.
When on interviews be excited about your science and theirs. It actually is fun to interview. Talk frankly with PI about your goals and their mentoring approach. Talk to lab members, current and past. Don’t think “I’ll be different”
In a given year I only get between 1 and 5 serious inquiries from folks and I have a pretty solid training record. I'd love to get more qualified applicants. if someone can tell me a successful strategy I'd love to give it a try.
