What do I want to be with my PhD? The roles of personal values and structural dynamics in shaping the career interests of recent biomedical science PhD graduates

Abstract

Interest in faculty careers decreases as graduate training progresses; however, the process underlying career-interest formation remains poorly defined. To better understand this process and whether/how it differs across social identity (i.e., race/ethnicity, gender), we conducted focus groups with 38 biomedical scientists who received PhDs between 2006 and 2011, including 23 women and 18 individuals from underrepresented minority (URM) backgrounds. Objective performance and quality of advisor relationships were not significantly different between scientists with high versus low interest in faculty careers. Career interests were fluid and formed in environments that generally lacked structured career development. Vicarious learning shaped similar outcome expectations about academic careers for all scientists; however, women and URMs recounted additional, distinct experiences and expectations. Scientists pursuing faculty careers described personal values, which differed by social identity, as their primary driver. For scientists with low interest in faculty careers, a combination of values, shared across social identity, and structural dynamics of the biomedical workforce (e.g., job market, grant funding, postdoc pay, etc.) played determinative roles. These findings illuminate the complexity of career choice and suggest attracting the best, most diverse academic workforce requires institutional leaders and policy makers go beyond developing individual skill, attending to individuals' values and promoting institutional and systemic reforms.

Figure 1.

Training decisions often not linked to clearly defined career goals. Pie chart showing the top codes emerging from analysis of participants’ narratives with respect to their career goals at entry into (A) PhD training or (B) postdoctoral training. Scientists who indicated that they did not have a clearly defined career goal are labeled as “undefined” and shown in blue; those who indicated interest in faculty careers are shown in red; those who indicated interest in either an academic or industry career are shown in green; and those who indicated they had an interest in a research career outside of academia (e.g., industry, government, etc.) are shown in purple. Participants who did not clearly describe their career interests are shown in gray. Ten scientists in the sample did not complete postdoctoral training and are not included in (B).

Figure 2.

Typical career pathway for early-career PhD biomedical scientists. The career pathway for a typical biomedical scientist consists of a number of decision points and training pathways. 1) Trainees enter PhD training and then 2) complete graduate training. After completing a PhD, 3) trainees decide whether or not to pursue postdoctoral training. 4) After completing postdoctoral training, scientists decide 5) whether to pursue faculty careers at research institutions, faculty careers at teaching institutions, research careers outside of academia, or nonresearch careers. Scientists forgoing postdoctoral training typically pursue nonresearch careers.