- Joined
- Feb 2, 2007
- Messages
- 4,917
- Reaction score
- 5,928
Yes, for hospitals or MSG jobs, they'll tend to prefer fellowship-trained (and most of them don't even understand our fellowships or our hugely variable residency quality). The exception is if the podiatry fellow grad costs/wants significantly more... or if the non-fellowship grad did a significantly better residency (DPM screening applications, which is typically the case). Typically, the DPM(s) already working there at the org job doesn't care the salary of the new hire... they simply want less call and/or they even want new hire pay fairly high - to support their own pay rate.
However, in the real world, the vast majority of DPMs work in private practice after training. This was true, and it is true. Yes, there are more MSG/hospital/ortho DPMs then ever, but there are also just more DPMs practicing then ever - particularly "foot and ankle surgeon" types (grows every year... more grads than DPMs retiring). PP is still the significant majority.
So, the question is: would you be more or less likely to hire a DPM with a fellowship for PP employ (associate, partner) assuming residency and other personality or ties to the area or etc factors were equal? This is ideally asked to PP owners, partners (which we have more than a few of on SDN)... but of course anyone will answer. Try to think in terms of a PP owner/partner view... obviously looking for value of employee, potential longevity of employ, skill set, possible future partner.
Cycling associates is costly in terms of training, patient continuity and reputation, referral doc reputation, and potentially supplying/starting competitor DPM offices, particularly where there are not non-compete laws in place for docs.
...For me personally: I'd be less likely to hire a DPM who did a fellowship (assuming same residency/personality). A few reasons:
However, in the real world, the vast majority of DPMs work in private practice after training. This was true, and it is true. Yes, there are more MSG/hospital/ortho DPMs then ever, but there are also just more DPMs practicing then ever - particularly "foot and ankle surgeon" types (grows every year... more grads than DPMs retiring). PP is still the significant majority.
So, the question is: would you be more or less likely to hire a DPM with a fellowship for PP employ (associate, partner) assuming residency and other personality or ties to the area or etc factors were equal? This is ideally asked to PP owners, partners (which we have more than a few of on SDN)... but of course anyone will answer. Try to think in terms of a PP owner/partner view... obviously looking for value of employee, potential longevity of employ, skill set, possible future partner.
Cycling associates is costly in terms of training, patient continuity and reputation, referral doc reputation, and potentially supplying/starting competitor DPM offices, particularly where there are not non-compete laws in place for docs.
...For me personally: I'd be less likely to hire a DPM who did a fellowship (assuming same residency/personality). A few reasons:
- most good residencies give plenty of skill for most/all PP pathology (so they'd have had no need for fellowship, be realistic)
- if they did fellowship, they'll likely want more salary (when they've shown nothing, have no real added value/skill)
- if they did fellowship, decent chance their residency was fairly inadequate (fellowship adds time and opportunity cost onto student loans)
- if they did good residency AND good fellowship, they are 95% chance not a PP type (would be looking to leave from day 1)
- one of the most common reasons to do a pod fellowship is didn't find a MSG/hospital job pgy2/3 (so they'd just keep looking to leave)
- fellowship tilts needle more to "SURGEON," and most PPs simply don't need that "finding" surgery (see that even with 3yr pods, obviously)