Starting a tenure-track job?

[futureapppsy2]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I'll be starting a TT position at an R1 in August (2/2 load). I'm three years post-PhD (two years research, one year at a teaching-heavy masters institution). I have a decent publication record and have taught a good number of courses.

Any advice?

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I don't have any advice to offer, unless you just want to discuss the generalities of navigating large swaths of bureaucracy. But I did want to say congrats on the position.

 

[Justanothergrad]

I'll be starting a TT position at an R1 in August (2/2 load). I'm three years post-PhD (two years research, one year at a teaching-heavy masters institution). I have a decent publication record and have taught a good number of courses.

Any advice?

Excuse the mostly rambling advice. Take what fits, ignore the rest. Assume that any advice you give may be wrong. What works for one person may not work for others. Don't assume because it didn't work for someone that it won't work for you.

Expectations will vary by institution (in terms of research productivity, service, and what 'role' the assistant should take within the department). My perspective is to advocate for your needs clearly and avoid service where possible in cases where it doesn't directly translate into helping you further your career. You can say no to students asking you to be on every committee, you don't need to design new courses immediately, and not everything can be part of your time. I'm not a good role model for this. This may mean different boundaries and expectations depending on institutional requirements and field service opportunities. In my eyes, the former aren't the ones which promote your career- the later can be (keyword: can) At the end of the day, productivity is king and deans read down when it comes to TNP. Aim to be average on teaching evaluations - you don't have to be a rockstar at an R1. Better than that? Great, but make sure that doing so doesn't compromise productivity. Ignore what people tell you they want you to do for TNP. Listen to what the university demonstrates in those who gain TNP. The workload and future of institutions always rests on new faculty so there is a vested interested in the administration to encourage higher and higher bars.

Congrats on the position!

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

1. Learn to say no.Use this skill often, but judiciously.

2. Actively seek out multiple mentors. I’d rec. at least one being in a different department (if possible) and senior level bc they can help you navigate the larger politics and culture of the Uni.

3. Most Unis should have a mentorship program....join it. Go to any mentoring seminars, lunch talks, etc. Always have at least an outline of expectations that you and your mentor can agree upon. Meet at least quarterly, any less is rarely worth it. It’s okay to have a mentoring situation not work out, just be honest and you could still have a solid colleague for years. I could go on, suffice to say this is an area many junior faculty miss.

@futureapppsy2 PM me if you want some mentorship materials to get yourself started. I think I still have some materials saved somewhere I can send you from my last Uni.

4. You may not like to get involved in the politics of the Uni/dept, but you need to at least be aware of the issues and navigate accordingly, even if you want to stay out of the fray.

5. Network outside of your dept. When networking, always look to help someone first. It is an investment in time, but trust me...it can pay off.

6. If you want advice, ask for funding. If you want funding, have a solid idea and ask for advice. (Adapted from the biz world, but it still applies).

7. Have a 1, 3, and 5yr plan/set of goals. Revisit said goals at least quarterly. It is a living document, so don’t be afraid to change it.

8. Have I mentioned mentorship and networking? Seriously, they are two of the most important things starting out as junior faculty.

9. Learn to under promise and over deliver.

10. Know your strengths and weaknesses. Don’t be afraid to ask for help, whether it be with a stats consult, design, how to navigate Uni resources, etc.

11. Keep an updated CV; I used to do it quarterly when I reviewed my 1/3/5 yr plans. You’ll want s “master” CV and a pared down CV. Write a short bio and a longer bio, as you’ll need them for talks and other activities. You should also keep an unofficial list of activities/committees/contributions. This could be things you’d add to a CV, but more likely they are a rung below, but it’s super helpful for end of year reviews and when you are up for promotion.

ps. Congrats!!

 

[PsyDr]

1) identify potential enemies
2) find their weak points before they recognize you as competition.
3) monte cristo those people
4) remember that human subjects training bs. It sneaks up on you.

 

[ClinicalABA]

3) monte cristo those people

Or, alternatively, invite them over and make them some Monte Christos. Delicious sandwiches can go a long way to undercutting potential conflicts and power plays. Be sure to provide a nice little cup of real maple syrup to dip them in. If you give them that fake colored corn syrup junk, you deserve to never get tenure.

In all seriousness, congrats! Will you get to do some ABA stuff?

 

[PsyDr]

Or, alternatively, invite them over and make them some Monte Christos. Delicious sandwiches can go a long way to undercutting potential conflicts and power plays. Be sure to provide a nice little cup of real maple syrup to dip them in. If you give them that fake colored corn syrup junk, you deserve to never get tenure.

In all seriousness, congrats! Will you get to do some ABA stuff?

Opinions of Dunkin’ Donut Americans confirmed.

 

[Pragma]

Congrats! @futureapppsy2 !

Happy to talk over PM about some of this. But good advice above.

I have tenure at a different type of institution, but many core issues are similar. Think strategically about your productivity, but generally speaking, if you are a productive person, you should check most of the boxes without having to worry about it much. Just learn who you can say no to and how to spin it when it comes to getting bombarded with too much service. Try to say yes to things you are interested in and would enjoy and could hep you with those political relationships.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

one year at a teaching-heavy masters institution

Congrats on making the jump up. I went from a teaching-heavy masters institution to a 3/3 undergrad-only. Those 4/4 (or sometimes even more) institutions with masters grad classes are a killer .

 

[calimich]

Congrats on the position! I'm at a different type of university, but up for promotion this year and tenure the next and agree with the great advice already given. One of my biggest challenges has been growing more comfortable saying "no" to more things. As Justanothergrad says, new faculty are presented with lots of new opportunities -- most of which may sound very interesting. Early in my 2nd year, a campus mentor told me something like, "you already got the job, you don't need to still be trying to impress us." I was so accustomed to the process of making myself increasingly more competitive for practicums-internship-postdoc-job that when I finally did get a job I love, it was hard to break out of the "ok what's next" mindset. While it's certainly not a time to cruise, finding balance was/is important for me, and I'm still working on it.

I imagine you've done a ton of work and put in lots of hours to land this position. Give yourself the credit you've earned. Celebrate. Enjoy. Reflect. A mentor suggested I view the academic position in at least 5 year chunks, to give a year or two to settle in, and to start planning my sabbatical in year one. Congrats again!

 

[MCParent]

Read organizational psych and business books. I mean like entrepreneur books. Running a lab is AMAZINGLY like running a business. You have projects and deliverables (teaching and research can be thought of like this), you hire (undergrads and grad students) and fire (mostly undergrads but sometimes grad students), you manage performance, you deliver performance reviews, you seek out funders (NIH and foundations, but also industry and NPO/NGO collaborations). Doing this has been a huge benefit to me. My experience has been, for example, that many faculty base grad student decisions on very poor metrics such as "feel" in interview, over performance data. As JS said, you need to organize relationships and sometimes manage people.

 

[flerfmcgerf]

Read organizational psych and business books. I mean like entrepreneur books.

Do you or any other academics have recommendations here?

 

[MCParent]

Do you or any other academics have recommendations here?

Start with How to Win Friends and Influence People. Most of the Amazon bestsellers say most of the same things other than that. I’d avoid the more new-agey ones and use ones written by entrepreneurs.

 

[ClinicalABA]

Do you or any other academics have recommendations here?

I'd recommend:
L.J. Hayes, J. Austin, R. Houmanfar, & M.C. Clayton (Eds.), Organizational Change. Reno: Context Press.
(Amazon product)

It's a good overview of important concepts in OBM- including systems design and analysis, as well as performance management. I'd also recommend anything by Aubrey Daniels and his group (Books).

This stuff has good empirical support.

 

[Ollie123]

Will reply with more later, but second the org books x1000. AMC paid for me to go through a few months of executive coaching and they were the first ones to suggest this to me. The hardcore empiricist in me was a little suspicious at first, but now I'm hooked. Some (not all) do actually have a strong empirical backing even if they are completely devoid of any hints of it in the book given their target audience. You do have to read between the lines a bit to apply it to what we do, but if you can do that - it works.

Sinek's "Start with why" might be the best book on grant writing I've ever read...and certainly the best book on grant writing that has literally nothing to do with grant writing.

Jim Collins "Good to great" has lots of great implications for running/managing a lab and how to align/direct your efforts. My division head recommended it and we have a junior faculty mentoring group that stepped through it.

Other big picture advice will really depend on setting, so I'd take a lot of what you hear with a grain of salt and get a feel for your department's expectations. I know several of the responses you've gotten so far have been from folks in AMCs. I'm not even eligible to go UP for tenure until I have two R01s and its by no means a guarantee with that. Even the top R1 psychology departments don't typically have requirements like that. Don't think I know what type of department you are in, but it makes a profound difference. Some its purely by the numbers. Others would rather see you have a handful of publications in extremely high-impact journals and don't really care about quantity.

Hiring is everything. Its also incredibly hard. A lot depends on role. Intelligence and curiosity are great in a grad student but fundamentally unnecessary in an RA or coordinator. Ideal is both, but someone who works hard, stays organized, works efficiently, is detail-oriented, can follow a protocol to a T and knows how to ask for help is 10x better than someone who lacks those qualities but can discuss theory with you. Even if the latter is more fun to have around. Don't get me wrong - the ideal is obviously both. They've got to be able to get the work done though...because otherwise you will have to pick up the slack or 2x check everything they do. Not that I'm speaking from experience here...

 

[Justanothergrad]

I'll be starting a TT position at an R1 in August (2/2 load). I'm three years post-PhD (two years research, one year at a teaching-heavy masters institution). I have a decent publication record and have taught a good number of courses.

Any advice?

Another practical thing: Get everything in writing from department chairs or deans. If there are expectations or agreements, they should be clearly explicated. Follow up emails to clarify conversations are important. This is not just for the moment to protect yourself, if the chair / dean / etc changes then you need to be able to talk to the new chair about the expectations and agreements.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Emotional Intelligence is still a popular topic in biz and while we should have a better grasp than most on EI, it’s still worth brushing up on, particularly when it comes to hiring and building a cohesive staff.

 

[Ollie123]

Other recommendations now that I have a (brief) moment to breathe:

Decisive - Chip and Dan Heath

The Lean Startup - Eric Ries

and....believe it or not....Type Talk (Thuesen and Kroeger).

Why on earth is Ollie recommendation an MBTI book? Doesn't he hate that measure? Yes - the test is garbage. The book actually provides a decent framework for thinking about how my staff operate. Don't take it as gospel, but it did get me thinking about ways to more effectively work with individuals.

My other big recommendation is to network-network-network. Talk to everyone. The biggest and most creative work comes from diverse/interdisciplinary teams. I'm far from fully convinced it actually leads to better outputs at this point - I think the jury is still out and most of the mega-projects haven't been particularly fruitful (in my opinion). That said - its "hot" and reviewers eat it up. My experience as PI has been that it is (at best) 25% scientist, 50% administrator and 25% marketing/sales <for those who look on the bright side>/prostituting yourself for funding <for those with a darker sense of humor>. I'm being snarky, but don't discount it - especially at an R1. I have projects going with computer science/engineering looking at computer vision. I just missed on a contract from a sock company (yes, socks). I have a grant under review in collaboration with a ecologist who exclusively studies whales. These may or may not hit given the level of competition, but people get excited about "out there" ideas if they genuinely think you can pull them off.

Oh...and do everything you can to know stats. Doesn't matter if you know how to run the analyses yourself or not as a PI....you can always find someone who can. For better or worse, stats is the language of science. You just need to know what different techniques exist and what they can do....ranging from computational modeling (i.e. which has taught me that not only is virtually everything we do in psychology wrong....it is incredibly rock-stupid wrong), geospatial techniques, machine learning, bayesian approaches. Again, you don't need details - you just need to know what these things can do. It can and will open doors and give you ideas for things that would not otherwise be possible. At R1s, its then just a matter of assembling the team. Because someone there inevitably knows how to do it.