Should you do a PhD in the midst of academic inflation?

Academic inflation

There is a clear trend in academic inflation, which can be described as the increasing demand of higher degrees for more jobs and the simultaneous devaluation of these credentials as holders of these individuals become more widely available. More formally, as described by the Educational Development Centre of Carleton University, it can be defined as the combined circumstances where a degree becomes a requirement for more jobs while, at the same time, becoming an insufficient entry requirement to others [1]. Not only does it present a problem for both educational institutions and students, ultimately it can impact on the entire economy.

Research on the direct impact of academic inflation on economy is limited. However, as the number of advanced degree graduates increases, it is conceivable that the overqualified surplus will start taking jobs requiring less educational credentials. In a U.S. study, the authors suggested that college graduates tend to have better pay with better job security by taking jobs away from high school graduates. Society will have less efficiency since many will spend extra years in college even though they will not work in occupations that require these degrees. They concluded that the U.S. is not ready for the increasing number of college graduates [2].

Education in the world is gradually turning into a PhD factory. In a study published in 2011, it was described that the number of science doctorates earned each year grew by nearly 40% between 1998 and 2008, to some 34000, in countries that are members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) [3]. Furthermore, there is clearly no signs of slowing. In 2003, 21343 science graduate students in the U.S. received a doctorate. By 2013, this had increased by almost 41% with life sciences showed the greatest growth. The same trend is mirrored in other parts of the world [4].

Is a PhD necessary?

The intricacies between academic inflation and economy is complex and beyond the scope of this post. It is, however, worth-noting as it is directly related to the ever increasing number of PhD graduates. Given the significant time investment of completing a PhD, ranging from 3-7 years depending on the country and subject area, it is only logical to wonder whether this is necessary and worthwhile. Of course, it is dependent on many factors and can be a very personal choice for some if you have a strong passion in a subject area. The process of research also challenges your critical thinking and logical mind to collect, understand, digest, analyse, synthesise and apply new information in order to answer an unknown aspect of a subject area to create new knowledge. The effort involved gives you new perspectives and hone your skills that are transferable in many aspects of lives.

With acknowledgement of the complexity, if we may simplistically evaluate this from an employment and job satisfaction perspective, does having a PhD necessarily lead you to your job of choice directly and set you up for a successful career? I think this is a question worth thinking about. My personal view is that – it depends on what you want to do. For instance, if you want to be a civil engineer, having a PhD in medieval history is not likely to be very helpful. In a similar vein, having a PhD in theoretical physics does not necessarily make you a great lawyer. While these are of course extreme examples to make the point, the concept is broadly applicable. In fact, it has been discussed in great details why, at least from a career prospect and earning perspective, doing a PhD is often a waste of time across most subject areas [5].

I want to share a number of cases in life sciences I have come across. In particular, I want to highlight the non-academic career choices. Many people I have met never really have their sight set on academia during their PhDs. Furthermore, as the number of PhD graduates continue to rise, the number of tenured and other full-time faculty positions has not seen a corresponding increase and, in some places, it is even shrinking [3]. In addition, people move outside of academia for a wide range of reasons, from better compensation and opportunities elsewhere to simply more time with family [6]. These are cases I happen to have come across over the years and demonstrate the diverse options and, maybe sometimes convoluted, career pathways of life science PhDs.

Drug development -> Clinicians

I have met several drug delivery science PhDs who decided to change their career paths as they discovered that they had a stronger interest and passion somewhere else. This former colleague of a friend, after finishing her PhD in drug delivery science, went on to start a job as a clinical research associate to support the coordination of clinical studies. After a few years, she started medical school and has since been training to become a physician. Another friend of mine, after working in a research facility supporting compound optimisation for a few years, decided to go back home to Finland and started veterinarian school shortly after that. For them, compared to the relatively slow pace of research, which can often take years to see its direct impact, if any, the professional satisfaction from clinical services and direct interaction with patients is more immediately rewarding.

Cancer and proteomics -> Regulatory affairs

This former colleague of a friend was doing a postdoc in cancer therapeutics and proteomics in Sweden at the time when we met. Shortly after that, she found a job in a pharmaceutical company in Germany supporting the bioanalysis group there. Two years later, she moved back to Sweden and joined the European Medicines Agency as an regulatory assessor supporting the review of new drug applications, and has not set foot in a lab since then. None of these opportunities or decisions were straightforward or foreseeable at the time of her PhD and postdoc. In her case, meeting a Swedish partner was likely also a major part of her decision to move back to Sweden. For people who have a clear interest in regulatory affairs though, it may not be necessary to first have a PhD before starting their career.

Researcher -> Pharmacist

As a professional degree, a pharmacy programme in Australia leads to the pharmacy profession directly. Most graduates register as practising pharmacists after finishing the programme and the required intern training. They can then work as pharmacists, mostly in community pharmacies and hospitals. The ones who are interested in research can also go on and do a PhD, usually supported by a scholarship. The broad training in the pharmacy programme allows pharmacists to tackle a wide range of research, from the more clinically oriented areas such as pharmacy interventions and quality use of medicines, to pharmaceutical development including formulation and drug delivery sciences to support the development of new medicines. These researchers can work in different places, typically in industry, universities or regulatory agencies. However, if your ambition is being a community or hospital pharmacist, spending a few extra years on a PhD might not be directly helpful.

Formulation -> Communication

In contrast to the clinically-oriented pharmacy programme, pharmaceutical sciences graduates in Australia are trained to work as scientists in pharmaceutical research and development. Some of these graduates can choose to further their expertise in pharmaceutical R&D by doing a PhD and become experts in the field of their respective projects. Many areas of pharmaceutical sciences are dependent on lab based activities and experiments, such as the development of new formulations or identification of new drug targets. However, the nature of the work is not suitable for everyone. A friend of mine, who did a PhD in formulation science, once told me that he did not like lab work when he was doing his postdoc in Sweden at the time. He then went on and found a job as a medical writer. In a similar vein, another former colleague of mine went on to become a science communicator.

Pharmacology -> Scientific advisor

While working in a multidisciplinary team for a maternal health project, I was fortunate to have met a number of people with different background. One of the colleagues there at the time was doing a postdoc after finishing her PhD in pharmaceutical biology. She was then primarily responsible for supporting bioanalytical assays and pharmacokinetic studies. She spent much of her time in sample preparation and assay development. During that time, she also started developing her interest in global health and had a chance to do some field visits in developing countries. She had since gradually shifted her focus to public health issues. After a few years working in the project, she eventually managed to move to another role as a scientific advisor in a public health institute.

Summary

Many aspects of these cases are broadly applicable to different areas of life sciences. The key is that, many of them ended up working in fields that do not necessarily require a PhD. Of course, there are plenty of transferrable skills you have to make use of during the PhD. It is, however, not always straightforward for PhD graduates to find a job directly related to their technical area of expertise given the very specific and sometimes narrow focus. In addition, the pace of R&D is by nature slow and can take years to see its impact, while the activities can be time-consuming and stressful. I have seen more than several PhD graduates then decided to change their career paths and do something entirely different outside of academia and science. After all, you have to understand your interest, know your passion and decide for yourself whether this is something for you. Most importantly, it may not be wise to pursue a PhD with the sheer idea that it will help you earn more. Talking to others can help clearing up your mind and facilitate the process. What are your thoughts on doing a PhD?

References

1. Educational Development Centre of Carleton University (2008). Thinking About Academic Inflation. Posted: 27-Mar-2008. URL: https://carleton.ca/edc/?p=2420
2. Yi G and McMurtrey ME (2013). The impact of academic inflation on the labour market: if everyone has a PhD, who will be the custodian? International Journal of Electronic Finance, Vol. 7, No. 3/4, 2013. URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJEF.2013.058605
3. Cyranoski D, et al. (2011). Education: The PhD factory. Nature 472, 276–279. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/472276a
4. Gould J (2015). How to build a better PhD. Nature 528, 22–25. Date: 03-Dec-2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/528022a
5. The disposable academic (2016). Why doing a PhD is often a waste of time. The Economist. Date: 27-Dec-2016. URL: https://medium.economist.com/why-doing-a-phd-is-often-a-waste-of-time-349206f9addb
6. Callaway E (2014). Life outside the lab: The ones who got away. Nature 513, 20–22. Date: 04-Sep-2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/513020a